博客

  • Rubio plays down Trump attacks on pope before Vatican trip

    Rubio plays down Trump attacks on pope before Vatican trip

    As U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio prepares for a high-stakes scheduled meeting with Pope Leo XIV at the Vatican this Thursday, the devout Catholic has sought to downplay escalating public criticism of the first American-born pope by President Donald Trump. The diplomatic visit, arranged long before the recent verbal clash between the White House and the Holy See, remains on track despite sharp rhetoric from the commander-in-chief that has put a bilateral religious-diplomatic relationship under unprecedented strain.

    Speaking to reporters at the White House on the eve of his departure Tuesday, Rubio acknowledged the public tension but framed the encounter as a necessary opportunity to address shared priorities between the Trump administration and the Vatican. “It’s a trip we had planned from before, and obviously we had some stuff that happened,” Rubio told assembled media. “There’s a lot to talk about with the Vatican.” He pointed to religious freedom as a key area of alignment between the two sides, a policy issue that has long united conservative U.S. leaders and Catholic Church authorities.

    The conflict erupted last month after Pope Leo XIV took firm public stances that directly challenged the Trump administration’s foreign policy: he called for an immediate ceasefire to the ongoing Israel- and U.S.-led war in the Middle East, defended the rights of global migrants, and publicly rejected Trump’s inflammatory call to permanently destroy Iranian civilization, labeling the rhetoric “unacceptable.” In response, Trump launched an extraordinary public attack on the leader of the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics, posting on social media that the pope was “WEAK on crime, and terrible for foreign policy.”

    The president doubled down on his criticism in an interview with conservative talk show host Hugh Hewitt late Monday, falsely claiming that Pope Leo XIV supports Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon. “I think he’s endangering a lot of Catholics and a lot of people,” Trump told Hewitt. “But I guess if it’s up to the Pope, he thinks it’s just fine for Iran to have a nuclear weapon.”

    Pope Leo XIV pushed back on the allegations when speaking to reporters Tuesday, reaffirming the Catholic Church’s longstanding, unambiguous opposition to all nuclear weapons and framing his public calls for peace as a core part of the Church’s mission. “The Church’s mission is to preach the Gospel and to preach peace,” the pope said. “If anyone wishes to criticize me for proclaiming the Gospel, let them do so truthfully. The Church has spoken out against all nuclear weapons for years, so there is no doubt about that, and I simply hope to be heard for the sake of the value of God’s word.”

    The growing rift between Trump and the pope carries notable political risks for the president ahead of any future electoral contests. Polling conducted in March and April already shows sliding approval for Trump among American Catholic voters, a key demographic that delivered a majority to Trump in his 2024 presidential election victory.

    Beyond religious freedom and the current diplomatic clash, another core topic on Rubio’s agenda for the Vatican talks will be Cuba. The Holy See has long maintained an active diplomatic role on the island, and Rubio, a Cuban-American who has spearheaded the Trump administration’s hardline pressure campaign against the Cuban communist government, is expected to press Vatican leaders for alignment on that front.

  • Apple to pay $250m to iPhone buyers over AI features lawsuit

    Apple to pay $250m to iPhone buyers over AI features lawsuit

    Technology giant Apple has agreed to pay out $250 million (£184 million) to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by iPhone customers, who accused the company of deceptive marketing around its promised Apple Intelligence artificial intelligence capabilities. The legal dispute, which was resolved in a settlement filed with a California federal court on Tuesday, closes out consolidated claims that were first filed last year. Notably, Apple has not admitted to any wrongdoing as part of the agreement.

    The suit centers on allegations that Apple misled consumers through false advertising for its Apple Intelligence suite, a lineup of AI-powered upgrades that includes a heavily promoted overhaul of its Siri voice assistant. Plaintiffs claim the company marketed advanced AI features that were not available at the time of purchase, have not launched to date, and may not roll out for at least two years — if they ever arrive at all.

    Under the terms of the settlement, eligible consumers who purchased either an iPhone 15 or iPhone 16 between June 2024 and March 2025 will receive payouts ranging from $25 to $95 per device.

    An Apple spokesperson addressed the litigation, noting that the claims only targeted the availability of two specific features out of the full slate of Apple Intelligence tools the company has already rolled out. “We resolved this matter to stay focused on doing what we do best, delivering the most innovative products and services to our users,” the spokesperson said.

    In a revised complaint submitted last week for the consolidated class action, legal representatives for the iPhone buyers argued that Apple’s AI marketing campaign constituted deceptive commercial practice. “Apple promoted AI capabilities that did not exist at the time, do not exist now, and will not exist for two or more years, if ever, all while marketing them as the breakthrough innovation,” the legal team wrote.

    The complaint further alleges that Apple rushed this aggressive AI marketing push specifically to keep pace in the high-stakes global AI race currently being led by newer players like OpenAI and Anthropic. Outgoing Apple CEO Tim Cook has faced repeated public criticism over recent years from analysts and consumers who argue the company has lagged behind competitors in rolling out breakthrough innovative products.

    A core part of the plaintiffs’ argument centers on the promised upgraded Siri, which Apple marketed as a transformative update that would turn the tool from a “limited voice interface into a full-fledged personal AI assistant.” According to the legal team, this reimagined Siri never materialized for consumers, and the recently launched iPhone 16 shipped to customers without any trace of the full Apple Intelligence platform Apple had promoted.

  • Vivek Ramaswamy wins Republican nomination for Ohio governor

    Vivek Ramaswamy wins Republican nomination for Ohio governor

    On Tuesday, a seismic shift in Ohio Republican politics took place, as former presidential candidate and loyal Donald Trump ally Vivek Ramaswamy locked up the GOP nomination for governor, clearing a path for him to lead the traditionally manufacturing-heavy Rust Belt state in what is already shaping up to be one of the most watched general election races of 2026.

    Unconfirmed preliminary results from the Ohio primary confirm Ramaswamy, a 38-year-old health tech entrepreneur, easily defeated his only remaining primary challenger Casey Putsch – a car designer best known for his automotive-focused YouTube channel – to advance to the November general election, multiple U.S. media outlets reported Wednesday.

    Ramaswamy first catapulted onto the national political stage in 2023, when he launched a long-shot bid for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination opposite Trump. Though his rapid-fire speaking style and unapologetically conservative tone made him a viral favorite during primary debates and earned him a nationwide social media following, he dropped out of the presidential race early after failing to gain traction with Republican voters. Immediately after exiting the race, he threw his full support behind Trump, quickly rising to become one of the former president’s most prominent and visible surrogates during the 2024 general election. He also played a key early role in developing Trump’s proposed Department of Government Efficiency initiative before handing off leadership of the project to billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk.

    When he announced his candidacy for Ohio governor, Ramaswamy cleared the field of most high-profile Republican contenders. To fuel his campaign, he has drawn heavily from his personal wealth, loaning his campaign committee $25 million, according to a report from The Columbus Dispatch. On Tuesday, he benefited from both his pre-existing national name recognition and a reshuffling of Ohio’s Republican Party leadership triggered when former U.S. Senator JD Vance of Ohio ascended to the vice presidency. Vance, a fellow Trump-aligned Republican, traveled to Cincinnati on Tuesday to cast his ballot for Ramaswamy and other GOP candidates.

    Trump publicly celebrated Ramaswamy’s primary victory in a post to his Truth Social platform Tuesday, writing: “I know Vivek well, competed against him, and he is something SPECIAL. He is Young, Strong, and Smart!” Current Ohio Republican Governor Mike DeWine, who is barred from seeking re-election this year due to strict state term limits, has also endorsed Ramaswamy.

    The general election will pit Ramaswamy against Democratic nominee Amy Acton, Ohio’s former state public health director who rose to prominence for guiding the state’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Acton ran unopposed for the Democratic nomination, and the contest is already shaping up to center heavily on the ongoing political fallout of pandemic-era public health policies.

    In 2020, under DeWine’s leadership, Ohio adopted a more moderate approach to pandemic restrictions than many other Republican-led states, implementing measures including temporary bans on in-person dining at restaurants and a last-minute postponement of the state’s 2020 presidential primary to slow virus spread. Six years later, widespread conservative backlash to those policies – including mask mandates and school closures – has given Ramaswamy a opening to attack Acton, who was the public face of Ohio’s pandemic response.

    Ramaswamy recently released a campaign ad accusing Acton of abusing her power by unilaterally postponing the 2020 primary in defiance of a court order. In an unusual rebuke that upended expectations, DeWine, who has endorsed Ramaswamy, stepped forward to defend Acton from the claims. “I told her to issue the health order,” DeWine told local NBC affiliate NBC4. “The decision was mine.”

    Ohio has trended sharply toward the Republican Party in recent election cycles, but political analysts expect the general election race to be highly competitive, with spending projected to skyrocket as both parties pour resources into the contest ahead of the November vote.

    In adjacent Indiana, another high-stakes Republican primary drama unfolded Tuesday, as seven incumbent GOP state senators who defied Trump’s demands to pass a partisan pro-Republican redistricting map last December faced primary challengers backed by the former president. Last year, 21 Senate Republicans joined all 10 Democratic lawmakers to block Trump’s preferred redistricting plan, defying intense public pressure from the former president, who warned that any Republican who voted against the plan would risk losing their seat in a primary challenge.

  • What do a teenager’s clothes tell us about North Korea’s future?

    What do a teenager’s clothes tell us about North Korea’s future?

    For decades, outside observers have pored over every small clue emerging from North Korea’s closed political system to unpack the country’s long-term leadership plans. Today, a new focal point of speculation has emerged: the public presentation of Kim Jong Un’s daughter, and what subtle clues in her public appearances and wardrobe reveal about a potential coming succession.

    In recent months, the teenage daughter of North Korea’s supreme leader has made increasingly frequent high-profile public appearances alongside her father, joining him at military parades, state events, and on-site inspections of key national facilities. What has drawn particular attention from regional security analysts and Korea watchers is not just her growing visibility, but the careful curation of her public image – from the formal, authoritative clothing choices she has worn at state occasions to the measured, poised demeanor she displays in front of state media cameras.

    These analysts argue that the intentional styling of Kim Jong Un’s daughter is far more than a matter of personal taste. Rather, they frame it as a deliberate, gradual process of political grooming, laying the groundwork for a eventual transfer of power that would continue the Kim family’s three-generation grip on North Korean governance. Where previous generations of the Kim leadership maintained strict secrecy around family members until late in the succession process, the gradual, incremental public rollout of the leader’s daughter marks a noticeable shift in how the North Korean regime is preparing for its next chapter.

    While no official confirmation of a succession plan has been released by Pyongyang, the pattern of public appearances and curated image has led many experts to conclude that North Korea’s elite is already laying the institutional groundwork for a transition. This slow, visible preparation is being read as a signal that the regime is focused on ensuring stability and continuity of the ruling family’s control, even as it faces mounting international pressure over its nuclear program and ongoing economic challenges.

    For regional powers and global observers, these subtle shifts in North Korea’s public political landscape carry significant implications. Any long-term leadership transition in the reclusive nuclear state carries the potential to reshape regional security dynamics on the Korean Peninsula and across Northeast Asia more broadly. As such, every new public appearance, every detail of presentation, continues to be scrutinized for insight into what comes next for one of the world’s most isolated nations.

  • US intel says war on Iran has not set back Iran’s nuclear programme: Report

    US intel says war on Iran has not set back Iran’s nuclear programme: Report

    More than two months of coordinated military strikes by the United States and Israel against Iranian nuclear infrastructure have failed to meaningfully slow Tehran’s nuclear development, leaving the timeline for Iran to build a nuclear weapon unchanged from last summer, according to a declassified US intelligence assessment cited in reporting from Reuters.

    Per Reuters’ Tuesday reporting, which drew on two anonymous sources familiar with the intelligence, US agencies previously estimated that prior to Washington’s June 2025 pre-war airstrikes, Iran could produce enough weapons-grade uranium and assemble a functional nuclear device in a window of three to six months. Following those initial June attacks on key Iranian nuclear sites at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan, intelligence analysts adjusted that timeline to between nine months and one year. Despite the full-scale air campaign that began in late February, that projection has not shifted, indicating the sustained bombing has not delivered the strategic outcome US and Israeli leaders promised.

    The conflict itself kicked off on February 28 while the Trump administration was still in nuclear negotiations with Tehran. From the moment of the June 2025 preemptive strikes, the impact of the attacks has been a subject of sharp public dispute. Then-President Trump claimed the operation, codenamed “Midnight Hammer”, had completely “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, declaring the issue effectively resolved ahead of his planned post-strike policy shift.

    When asked about prospects for restarting nuclear negotiations in mid-2025, Trump downplayed the need for a new diplomatic deal, telling reporters: “We may sign an agreement…I don’t care if I have an agreement or not…We destroyed the nuclear… It’s blown up to kingdom come. I don’t care very strongly about it.”

    Even within the Trump administration, his sweeping claims faced immediate pushback. The Pentagon contradicted his assertion that the entire program had been destroyed, instead stating the June strikes had set Iran’s nuclear progress back by up to two years — double the timeline adjustment confirmed by the latest intelligence reviewed by Reuters. This new assessment confirms what independent analysts have argued since the start of the campaign: that repeated US and Israeli airstrikes have failed to deliver a lasting, substantive setback to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

    Speaking with Middle East Eye, regional security experts note that any path to a diplomatic resolution will require Washington to offer substantial sanctions relief to Tehran in exchange for new limits on its nuclear activities. The US has offered a shifting set of justifications for launching the full-scale war, from protecting anti-government protesters inside Iran to eliminating Tehran’s ballistic missile arsenal and disabling its nuclear program. But in a Tuesday interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, Trump centered the conflict on the nuclear issue, downplaying the urgency of the ballistic missile threat.

    “Look, missiles are bad, but yeah, and they do have to cap it, but this is about they cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said, adding that any end-of-war deal would require Iran to completely remove its stockpile of highly enriched uranium from the country.

    While the air campaign launched February 28 has targeted a broad range of Iranian assets including conventional military units, state government institutions, and core industrial infrastructure, Israel has prioritized additional strikes on dispersed nuclear-related sites. The current crisis traces its roots back to 2018, when Trump unilaterally withdrew the US from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the multilateral nuclear agreement reached with Iran three years earlier. Under the terms of the JCPOA, Iran had agreed to cap uranium enrichment at 3.67 percent — a level suitable for civilian energy production — and open all its nuclear facilities to rigorous international inspections from the United Nations, in exchange for broad relief from crippling economic sanctions.

    After withdrawing from the deal, the Trump administration reimposed and tightened sweeping sanctions on Iran. In response, Tehran gradually abandoned its JCPOA-enforced limits, building up a stockpile of uranium enriched to 60 percent, just a short technical step away from weapons-grade material. Iran has repeatedly stated that its entire nuclear program is intended for peaceful civilian purposes, including energy production and medical isotope manufacturing. The late Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also issued a formal religious fatwa prohibiting the development and possession of nuclear weapons. Many independent analysts, however, argue Iran has deliberately positioned itself as a nuclear threshold state, maintaining the technical capacity to rapidly develop a nuclear weapon should it choose to do so.

    This reporting comes from Middle East Eye, an independent outlet covering global affairs focused on the Middle East and North Africa region.

  • India’s fiercest female politician faces a fight for survival

    India’s fiercest female politician faces a fight for survival

    For 15 consecutive years, Mamata Banerjee and her regional Trinamool Congress (TMC) party held unbroken control over India’s West Bengal state, defying every political challenge to reinforce their grip on power. That long streak of political survival came to an abrupt end on Monday, when Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) handed Banerjee a decisive defeat, ending her bid for a fourth straight term as chief minister. A fourth term would have positioned the 71-year-old firebrand populist alongside India’s most long-serving regional political heavyweights, such as Jyoti Basu and Naveen Patnaik. Instead, her loss throws one of contemporary India’s most extraordinary political careers into profound uncertainty, closing a chapter that began as a grassroots street protest movement and culminated in the collapse of the political stronghold she built from scratch.

    Few would have predicted Banerjee’s path to power when she first entered the political scene. A diminutive figure often seen in plain cotton saris and rubber sandals, she did not fit the mold of the elite politicians who had long dominated West Bengal. Yet in 2011, she pulled off one of the most shocking upsets in Indian electoral history: she ended the 34-year uninterrupted rule of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), overturning a political order that had defined the state for generations. Once India’s intellectual and commercial heart, West Bengal had spent decades mired in industrial stagnation and widespread public weariness of Communist rule. At the time, The New York Times famously described Banerjee as “the blunt instrument knocking down their own Berlin Wall”, and Time magazine included her on its list of the world’s 100 most influential people.

    Banerjee’s rise was forged in West Bengal’s notoriously combative political culture, where elections often play out like prolonged street-level conflicts. Her supporters affectionately dubbed her the “fire goddess”, and later “Didi” — the Bengali term for elder sister — a name that encapsulated the fiercely protective maternal persona she cultivated for decades. Born into a lower-middle-class Kolkata family, she cut her political teeth in the student wing of the Indian National Congress, emerging as one of the state’s most prominent anti-Communist voices by the 1980s before splitting from Congress to found the TMC.

    Decades of street-level conflict shaped her political identity permanently. In 1990, during a protest march, she was allegedly assaulted by Communist cadres, suffering a fractured skull that required hospitalization. The incident solidified the public image she would maintain for decades: that of a street fighter and political martyr, a perpetual insurgent even after she took power. Her political ascent accelerated sharply in the mid-2000s, when she led mass opposition to the Communist government’s plan to acquire farmland for a Tata Motors car factory in Singur and a chemical hub in Nandigram in 2007. Casting herself as a champion of smallholder farmers against forced industrialization, she earned fierce loyalty among rural and low-income voters. But the movement also alienated much of the state’s urban middle class and business elite, who accused her of driving away much-needed private investment from West Bengal.

    Unlike most high-profile women in Indian politics, Banerjee built her political career without dynastic backing or a powerful patron. “No-one set up their own party, took on an invincible force like the Communists, ousted them after 34 years and then held power for three terms,” explains Mukulika Banerjee, an anthropologist at the London School of Economics. The LSE scholar notes that the state’s ruling elite, upper-caste, educated bhadralok Communist men, long dismissed Banerjee for her dark skin and rejection of upper-class social norms, which only deepened her commitment to advocating for working-class and marginalized Bengalis. “Those early battles made her fearless, realising she could make others feel the same, if she stood by them,” Mukulika Banerjee says. She also actively elevated other women in politics; her party fielded 52 women candidates in the 2026 election, a marked departure from the male-dominated status quo of regional Indian politics.

    For years, Banerjee’s unique personal charisma, targeted welfare programs for women and rural poor, and fierce defense of Bengali regional identity blunted the impact of anti-incumbency sentiment, widespread corruption allegations, and the gradual rise of the BJP across the state. Political analysts note her success rested on a carefully crafted balance: she positioned herself as both an uncompromising street fighter and an austere, maternal figure delivering lifelines to economically vulnerable Bengalis. Even critics acknowledged her innate ability to connect with the emotional needs of her electorate. But charisma alone cannot sustain a political machine indefinitely.

    Political scientist Dwaipayan Bhattacharyya once described Communist-ruled Bengal as a “party society”, where the organization became deeply embedded in everyday rural life and livelihoods. Banerjee’s TMC inherited this structure but reorganized it around a new model: unlike the Communists’ disciplined, hierarchical cadre system, the TMC revolved almost entirely around Banerjee’s personal charisma and authority. Bhattacharyya labeled the system a political “franchisee model”: local strongmen and grassroots leaders were allowed to expand their personal influence and often their private business interests in exchange for unwavering loyalty to Banerjee. As early as 2023, Bhattacharyya presciently warned that this model left the TMC deeply vulnerable. “Its leaders’ voracious appetite for material gains has made transactional interests undermine even a pretence of ethical politics, straining the party’s bonding with the people,” he wrote.

    During Banerjee’s third term, the state also grappled with a growing fiscal crisis. West Bengal’s public debt ballooned, with the central bank estimating that just four of Banerjee’s flagship women’s welfare schemes consumed nearly a quarter of the state’s own-source revenue. Widespread anger over thousands of vacant government posts, a massive corruption scandal in teacher recruitment, and growing public concern over rising violence against women further eroded public trust in her government.

    Now, in the wake of defeat, Banerjee faces an existential challenge: securing her own political survival, and holding the TMC together. West Bengal’s political history has long been unforgiving to ousted ruling parties, with local leaders and power brokers quickly shifting their allegiance to the new incumbent. Political analyst Sayantan Ghosh warns that many sitting TMC leaders may drift to the BJP — some voluntarily, others under mounting pressure — raising the real prospect of a full split within the party. Proma Raychaudhury of Krea University adds that the TMC’s apparent lack of strong ideological cohesion leaves the party and its leader particularly vulnerable after a defeat of this scale. For Banerjee personally, the shift will be jarring: she has held public office since the late 1980s, and a life without executive power is almost unprecedented in her decades-long career.

    Writing off the 71-year-old leader entirely, however, may be premature. Even so, this defeat marks a far more fundamental rupture than the many crises she weathered during her time in power. Mukulika Banerjee argues that leaders like Mamata thrived in an era of relatively level political competition, a condition that no longer exists amid the growing national dominance of Modi’s BJP. Monday’s election result, she suggests, reflects not just voter discontent, but a systemic imbalance that has reshaped Indian electoral politics.

    The question now hangs over Indian politics: can Mamata Banerjee reinvent herself once again, returning to her roots as a fiery grassroots outsider that first captured the imagination of Bengal’s voters? Or will she slowly fade into the same status she spent her career fighting against: a remnant of an outdated old political order?

    As Mukulika Banerjee puts it: “Where will she go next? She knows no other life other than politics.”

    Raychaudhury suggests one likely path is a return to the oppositional street politics that first made Banerjee a force to be reckoned with. That transition appears to already be underway. Just one day after her defeat, Banerjee told reporters she was now a “free bird, a commoner” without the trappings of office, and vowed to work to strengthen the national opposition INDIA alliance against the BJP. She has levied allegations of favoritism against the Election Commission, warned against the danger of one-party rule, and claimed the election mandate was effectively stolen from her party. “We didn’t lose the election. They forcefully took it from us,” she said, a charge the state’s Chief Electoral Officer has said he will examine in context. When asked what comes next, she gave an answer that echoed the fiery leader Bengal first met decades ago: “I can be anywhere, I can fight anywhere. So I’ll be on the streets.”

  • Trump says pausing Hormuz operation in push for Iran deal

    Trump says pausing Hormuz operation in push for Iran deal

    Just 24 hours after launching a new U.S. military escort mission through the strategic Strait of Hormuz, former President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that the operation will be put on hold, as international mediators push to finalize a comprehensive peace agreement with Iran to end the ongoing Middle East conflict.

  • Finding soldier Tom: Solving family mystery of WW2 Soviet prisoner of war

    Finding soldier Tom: Solving family mystery of WW2 Soviet prisoner of war

    Eighty decades after the end of World War Two, a long-buried wartime mystery has finally been unraveled, connecting two families separated by thousands of miles across continents. The story centers on a Soviet prisoner of war who escaped Nazi captivity on the British Channel Island of Jersey, found refuge with a local farming family, and then vanished without a trace after the war – until a team of BBC journalists uncovered his roots in Central Asia.

    Known only to his rescuers by the simple name “Tom”, or Bokejon in his native language, he was among an estimated 2,000 Soviet prisoners of war and forced laborers transported to Jersey by Nazi occupying forces to construct coastal fortifications. In 1943, after enduring brutal conditions in the labor camp, Tom made a daring escape. Weak from starvation, exhaustion and relentless abuse, he stumbled to the door of John and Phyllis Le Breton, a local farming couple. Fully aware that hiding an escaped prisoner carried the death penalty at the hands of the German occupiers, the couple still chose to take him in, sparing his life.

    In a personal diary Tom wrote later, he described the unthinkable cruelty of the Nazi camp system. “We quarried stone from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. every day, with only a small bowl of soup at midday and a meagre slice of bread with butter for tea – no breakfast at all,” he recorded. “For the smallest infraction, we were beaten brutally. If we were too sick to work, they would never believe us, they just starved us and beat us again.”

    For more than two years, the Le Bretons hid Tom from German patrols, even growing to trust him enough to let him play with and read to their young children, including their daughter Dulcie, who is now 90 years old and still resides on Jersey. “Our dear Uncle Tom – we loved him so much,” Dulcie shared in an interview. “He is my clearest memory of the entire war, and his photograph has sat by my bedside my whole life. I never stopped wondering what became of him after he left.”

    The danger the Le Bretons faced was not abstract. Just a short distance away, another Jersey resident named Louisa Gould was arrested after being reported by a neighbor for sheltering a different escaped Soviet POW. She was deported to the Ravensbrück concentration camp and ultimately murdered in a gas chamber, a stark reminder of what could have happened to the Le Breton family if their secret was exposed.

    When Jersey was finally liberated from Nazi occupation in May 1945, Tom and all other surviving Soviet prisoners were repatriated to the Soviet Union. Three letters from Tom reached the Le Bretons as he traveled across Europe back to his homeland, then all communication stopped abruptly.

    For returned Soviet prisoners of war, silence after repatriation was often the only option possible. Under Soviet policy at the time, all former captives were sent to NKVD filtration camps for extensive screening and interrogation. Soviet authorities viewed capture by the enemy as inherent evidence of potential disloyalty or collaboration. While some prisoners eventually rejoined civilian life, many were labeled politically unreliable, barred from good jobs and social advancement, and lived under constant suspicion for decades. Others were sentenced to multi-year terms in Soviet labor camps, and the stigma attached to former POWs persisted long after the death of Joseph Stalin in 1953.

    The Le Bretons kept Tom’s photo and his few signed letters, but they only knew his name as the English transliteration “Bokijon Akram” – they had no way of knowing his full original name or his place of birth, and neither did local Jersey historians. Decades later, a team of BBC Russian journalists took up the cold case, facing a unique set of challenges. Because Tom had signed his name in Latin script for his Jersey hosts, researchers had no clear way to map it to the Cyrillic spelling that would have appeared on all official Soviet documents.

    Over months of work, the team combed through dozens of archival records and tested hundreds of spelling variations, narrowing the search using biographical details Tom had jotted down in his diary. He wrote that he was around 30 years old when he was drafted into the Red Army in 1941, captured while fighting in what is now modern Ukraine, and likely had Central Asian heritage. This information led researchers to a promising match: Bokejon Akramov, born in 1910, drafted from the city of Namangan in what is today eastern Uzbekistan, thousands of miles from Jersey.

    Further archival searches uncovered a record that Akramov had been awarded the Order of the Patriotic War late in life, and that entry included a registered home address in Namangan. BBC Uzbek journalists traveled to the address to investigate, bringing with them the well-preserved photograph the Le Breton family had held for 80 years. When they knocked on the door, a man named Shamsiddin Ahunbayev answered – and immediately recognized the man in the photo as his grandfather.

    “How did you get my grandfather’s picture?” Ahunbayev asked the team, before breaking down in tears as he heard the full story of Akramov’s years hiding on Jersey. Akramov’s family told the BBC that he rarely spoke about his World War II experiences. They had long wondered why, despite being clearly intelligent and skilled, he was repeatedly turned down for professional or skilled jobs, and spent most of his working life as a gardener at a local Namangan factory. Researchers now say it is almost certain that the stigma of his wartime captivity followed him for the rest of his life, blocking his career. Akramov died in 1996, after what his family described as a peaceful, happy later life.

    The BBC arranged a historic video call between Akramov’s Uzbek family and 90-year-old Dulcie Le Breton in Jersey. “Dear Dulcie, we thank your parents from the bottom of our hearts for their courage and kindness,” Ahunbayev told her. “Our grandfather survived the war, and we exist today only because of what your family did. We are so overjoyed to have found you, and we invite you to come to Uzbekistan – our home will always be open for you.”

    Dulcie responded humbly, saying her parents had only done what they saw as the right thing. “They were far from the only people on Jersey who helped escaped Soviet soldiers,” she said. “There are dozens of these untold stories, and I hope more people will learn and remember them.”

    After learning of the full story, the government of Uzbekistan has announced it will posthumously award John and Phyllis Le Breton the Order of Friendship, one of the country’s highest state honors, in recognition of their extraordinary courage and compassion. Dulcie Le Breton will accept the award on her parents’ behalf at a ceremony this Wednesday.

  • Iran strikes UAE for second day in a row, says Emirati defence ministry

    Iran strikes UAE for second day in a row, says Emirati defence ministry

    For the second straight day, Iran has carried out coordinated missile and drone attacks across the United Arab Emirates, the Emirati Ministry of Defence confirmed in an official statement released Tuesday. According to the announcement, the country’s integrated air defense networks are actively engaging incoming threats launched directly from Iranian territory, with loud explosions echoing across multiple emirates as defensive systems intercept a mix of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles.

    In a public advisory, the defense ministry urged UAE residents to remain calm and adhere strictly to guidance from national emergency authorities. It also issued a critical safety warning, advising the public against approaching, handling, or photographing any intercepted debris that has fallen to the ground, requesting that civilians allow specialized response teams to secure and evaluate the impacted sites.

    This second wave of attacks comes just 24 hours after the UAE formally accused Iran of an extensive first-day barrage that caused visible damage and casualties. On Monday, a strike targeting the Fujairah oil refinery ignited a large fire, leaving three Indian nationals injured. Emirati defense officials confirmed their systems successfully intercepted and neutralized a total of 12 ballistic missiles, three cruise missiles, and four drones launched by Iran during Monday’s assault.

    The Emirati Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a harsh condemnation of the renewed attacks, describing the unprovoked strikes targeting civilian infrastructure as acts of terrorism. The statement emphasized that the UAE will not accept any violation of its national sovereignty and retains the full, legitimate right to launch a reciprocal response to the aggression.

    Tehran has not issued an official formal response to the UAE’s accusations, but a senior unnamed Iranian military source told the country’s state-run broadcaster Irib that Iran had no premeditated plans to strike the Fujairah energy facility. The source instead shifted blame for the escalating violence to what it called “U.S. military adventurism,” claiming Washington is orchestrating tensions to open a corridor for illegal ship traffic through the restricted waterways of the Strait of Hormuz.

    In the wake of Monday’s initial attacks, UAE civil aviation authorities implemented sweeping temporary restrictions on the country’s airspace, extending the regulatory changes through May 11. The updated rules limit all incoming, outgoing, and overflight traffic to a small set of approved designated routes. Authorities also announced they are tightening operational protocols for all aviation activity and have issued repeated warnings to flight crews about ongoing navigation disruptions across the country’s airspace.

    The two days of attacks mark the first major strikes on Emirati territory since a fragile bilateral ceasefire took effect on April 8. Prior to that truce, between late February and early April, Iran launched near-daily air strikes across Gulf states in response to what it said were coordinated U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iranian interests. The UAE bore the brunt of that earlier offensive: by the end of March, Iranian forces had launched 398 ballistic missiles, 1,872 drones, and 15 cruise missiles at targets across the Emirates, according to Emirati tallies.

    The renewed violence has pushed the UAE into its most severe economic crisis in decades, as the country’s economy depends heavily on four key stable sectors: international tourism, commercial and residential real estate, global logistics, and cross-border finance. Early market data shows that more than $120 billion in market capitalization has already been erased from the Dubai and Abu Dhabi stock exchanges over the past several weeks of escalating conflict. Airlines operating out of the UAE have also canceled more than 18,400 scheduled flights as airspace disruptions and traveler uncertainty cut into demand.

  • Trump advisers step up their calls on China to help open Strait of Hormuz ahead of Beijing summit

    Trump advisers step up their calls on China to help open Strait of Hormuz ahead of Beijing summit

    As U.S. President Donald Trump prepares for his highly anticipated summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing, the White House has launched an urgent push for China to leverage its considerable economic and political sway over Iran to reopen the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, a key global energy chokepoint whose closure has shaken global energy markets over two months of ongoing conflict.

    Speaking at a White House press briefing on Tuesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio made a direct public appeal, noting that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi was scheduled to travel to Beijing for talks the following day. Rubio called on Chinese leaders to deliver a clear, uncompromising message to Tehran: its actions to restrict traffic through the strait have left Iran globally isolated, casting the country as the primary aggressor in the unfolding crisis. “I hope the Chinese tell him what he needs to be told,” Rubio stated.

    Rubio emphasized that opening the strait aligns directly with Beijing’s own core economic interests. Official data from China’s General Administration of Customs shows that roughly half of China’s total crude oil imports and one-third of its liquefied natural gas supplies originate from the Middle East, nearly all of which pass through the Strait of Hormuz. Unlike the United States, which has reduced its dependence on Middle East energy supplies in recent years, China’s export-driven economy is far more exposed to the disruptions caused by the closure, Rubio argued.

    Beyond direct appeals to Beijing over the strait, a senior anonymous diplomat confirmed to the Associated Press that U.S. diplomatic teams have also been engaged in intensive negotiations to convince China not to veto a new U.S.-backed United Nations Security Council resolution that would condemn Iran’s actions and demand the immediate reopening of the waterway. Last month, China and Russia — Iran’s closest allies on the 15-member council — blocked an earlier draft resolution, arguing that it failed to address the U.S. and Israeli strikes that triggered the current two-month conflict and unfairly targeted only Tehran.

    Rubio’s public push follows remarks from Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who confirmed on Monday that the Strait of Hormuz dispute and Iran policy would feature prominently on the summit agenda, marking the first meeting between the two leaders during this U.S. administration and the first official presidential visit to China from the U.S. since 2017.

    The closure of the strait has sent shockwaves across Asian energy and trade markets, prompting Beijing to already pursue behind-the-scenes diplomatic outreach: Chinese officials have worked with Pakistan to help broker a fragile two-week ceasefire between warring parties, and multiple anonymous diplomatic sources have confirmed that Beijing — the world’s largest purchaser of Iranian crude oil — used its economic leverage to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table last month when talks faltered. President Trump himself has previously acknowledged China’s role in encouraging Iran to agree to that temporary ceasefire.

    Despite these existing diplomatic efforts, the Republican U.S. administration argues Beijing can and should do more to secure the permanent reopening of the strait. “The threat of attacks from Iran has closed the strait — we are reopening it,” Bessent said during an interview on Fox News. “So I would urge the Chinese to join us in supporting this international operation.”

    Trump struck a more measured tone when discussing China’s role during remarks to reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday, noting that Beijing has not directly challenged U.S. policy even as Washington continues to press Tehran to abandon its nuclear program and reopen the waterway. Still, China has repeatedly criticized U.S. military action against Iran, one of its longest-standing economic partners in the Middle East. Trump also noted that China relies heavily on the Strait of Hormuz for energy supplies, slightly exaggerating the share of China’s oil that transits the waterway at 60%.

    Tensions over Iran-China ties have already strained bilateral relations in recent weeks. The U.S. government has long accused Beijing of supporting Iran’s ballistic missile program by supplying dual-use industrial components that can be diverted to weapons production. Last month, Trump said Xi had given assurances that China would not send weapons to Iran, amid circulating reports that Beijing was considering arms transfers. Just days after Trump confirmed receiving the assurance, he claimed U.S. forces had intercepted a vessel carrying a “gift” of military supplies from China to Iran, though he offered no additional evidence or details to back up the claim.

    The U.S. has also moved to ramp up economic pressure on Beijing over its trade ties with Tehran. On April 24, the Treasury Department announced sweeping new sanctions targeting a major Chinese oil refinery, as well as roughly 40 shipping companies and tankers involved in transporting Iranian crude. The sanctions cut all of the targeted entities off from the U.S. financial system and impose secondary penalties on any third-party business that engages with the sanctioned firms.

    Beyond the Iran dispute, the summit will also address longstanding tensions over Taiwan, the self-governing island that Beijing claims as an inalienable part of its territory. Rubio confirmed Tuesday that the issue will be on the agenda, noting that Beijing has already signaled it will push the U.S. to roll back recent arms sales to Taipei. “I think both countries understand that it is neither one of our interests to see anything destabilizing happen in that part of the world,” Rubio said. “We don’t need any destabilizing events to occur with regards to Taiwan or anywhere in the Indo-Pacific. And I think that’s to the mutual benefit of both the United States and the Chinese.”

    In December, the Trump administration announced a record $11.1 billion arms sale package to Taiwan, a move that drew fierce condemnation from Beijing. Trump later suggested he would open discussion of the arms sales with Xi during the summit, a shift that has sparked alarm among Taiwanese government officials. Last week, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi emphasized in a call with Rubio that the U.S. must “make the right choices” on Taiwan to preserve bilateral stability, according to an official statement from the Chinese Foreign Ministry.