标签： Asia

Less than seven weeks before the November 3 midterm elections, U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson has scrapped the final scheduled voting day of the current congressional term, triggering fierce backlash from lawmakers across party lines who accuse the Republican leadership of dodging contentious votes on impeachment and the Trump administration’s war policy in Iran.

Johnson’s decision to cut the session short comes on the heels of two high-profile challenges to the White House’s agenda: Kentucky Republican Congressman Thomas Massie introduced eight articles of impeachment against Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth over his handling of the seven-month-long U.S. war in Iran, and seven House Republicans joined all 213 Democrats to approve a War Powers Resolution that would force President Donald Trump to end military hostilities in Iran. The adjournment also follows a separate move by top House Foreign Affairs Committee Democrat Gregory Meeks, who placed a hold on a proposed $2.8 billion sale of 40,000 2,000-pound bombs to Israel, citing concerns over potential violations of U.S. and international law in densely populated areas of Gaza and Lebanon.

Speaking to reporters Wednesday, Johnson framed the early adjournment as an opportunity for all 435 House members, who face re-election every two years, to return to their home districts and campaign on the legislative record of the Republican-led chamber. “We’re going to modify the House schedule by a day, and let me explain to you why the House has done its work… This House has been the second most productive in terms of legislation in the history of the institution,” Johnson said. “We passed over 900 pieces of legislation. Right now, about 700 of those bills are sitting in the Senate, awaiting action.” He added that he was confident Republican lawmakers would be able to explain their policy work to voters back home.

But critics quickly pushed back on the speaker’s justification, noting that the House has already canceled at least 23 voting days in 2026 alone, a figure that doubles when counting all canceled session days across the full congressional term that began in January 2025. Outgoing South Carolina Republican Congressman Ralph Norman called the move “unacceptable” in a post on X, writing, “The Founders did not envision taking this much time off and still getting paid. If Members of Congress want to go home and campaign instead of doing the job taxpayers sent us here to do, then their campaigns ought to be paying them, NOT the American taxpayer. We still have work to do.”

New Mexico Democratic Representative Melanie Stansbury put forward a more pointed explanation for the early adjournment, arguing Republican leadership is trying to avoid votes that could split the party ahead of the midterms. “They are sending us home even earlier than expected. And there’s really only one explanation for this, and that is that Thomas Massie … filed articles of impeachment against the Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth,” she said in a widely shared online video. “And last night we took a vote on a war powers resolution that passed to end the illegal war in Iran, and we had multiple Republicans join us because they understand the writing is on the wall.”

Massie, who is leaving Congress in January after losing his Republican primary election, confirmed that the impeachment vote against Hegseth had been scheduled for Thursday, the day that was ultimately canceled. He wrote on X, “And there it is. Just as I predicted. They’re canceling Congress tomorrow to avoid the vote on IMPEACHING @SecWar. It will also make it harder for us to reach 218 signatures on the Epstein Discharge Petition before the election. We were at 190+ signatures last night.” That petition seeks to force the Department of Justice to release three million additional pages of documents related to deceased child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, who is alleged to have had close ties to members of Trump’s inner circle. No current administration official has been formally accused of any misconduct connected to Epstein.

Massie’s impeachment articles accuse Hegseth, a former Fox News host who has drawn controversy for his hawkish and unorthodox approach to the Defense Department, of “high crimes and misdemeanors” stemming from his leadership of the Iran war. In a nearly hour-long floor speech Wednesday, Massie argued that Hegseth was personally culpable for the bombing of Iranian schoolchildren on the first day of the war, which began in February after a year of planning. “I can understand in the heat of war, in the fog of war, [but] in the first day of a war that you’ve been planning for a year, you bomb a school? I’m not saying they did it on purpose. I’m saying Peter Hegseth himself personally is culpable for that because he doesn’t care about rules of engagement. He has deprecated the rules of engagement. He has degraded the ability to discriminate between civilian targets and valid military targets. He needs to be impeached for that.”

While the impeachment effort was always a long shot in the Republican-controlled House, its backers aimed to force members of Trump’s party to go on the record with their positions on Hegseth’s conduct. When reached for comment, the White House directed inquiries to Attorney General Todd Blanche, who defended Hegseth Tuesday, saying, “Secretary Hegseth is doing a phenomenal job. The Secretary of War doesn’t just go off and do things, so he follows the law.”

Along with the impeachment and war powers votes, the early adjournment comes as the Trump administration faces growing bipartisan backlash over its military and foreign policy in the Middle East. The War Powers Resolution approved Tuesday marked the fifth congressional attempt to end the Iran war, but it was the first time a majority of the House backed the measure. The seven Republican defection signals growing unease within the president’s own party over the duration and financial cost of the war, which has pushed domestic gas prices higher – a key issue for voters ahead of the midterms. To date, the conflict has killed more than 3,500 Iranians and 18 Americans. While the White House has claimed hostilities ended with an April 2026 ceasefire, U.S. forces have continued carrying out large-scale bombing raids across southern Iran, including a deadly strike on a wedding late last month.

The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) issued a statement Wednesday calling on lawmakers to go beyond non-binding resolutions and use all congressional authority to end the unauthorized war. “After months of war and mounting costs, Congress cannot continue to rely on resolutions alone,” NIAC Policy Director Ryan Costello said. “The question now is whether Congress will use the full scope of its authority to stop an unauthorized war before more lives are lost and more resources are spent. We urge them to match their words with decisive action, in both Congress and the courts.”

On the Israel weapons sale front, Meeks announced Wednesday he would place a legislative hold on the proposed bomb transfer, which was first revealed by conservative talk show host Tucker Carlson Tuesday. Meeks emphasized his continued commitment to Israel’s security, but said the massive sale of one of the U.S. arsenal’s most destructive munitions raised serious concerns about their use in crowded civilian areas. “I remain firmly committed to Israel’s security and its ability to defend itself against serious regional threats. But the Trump administration’s proposed sale … raises grave, unresolved concerns about how these munitions could be used in densely populated areas of Gaza and Lebanon,” Meeks said in a statement. “I will not clear this sale at this time. This decision does not diminish Congressional support for Israel’s legitimate defense needs; it reflects Congress’s responsibility to ensure that US-funded weapons are used lawfully, responsibly, and with meaningful safeguards for human life.”

While the hold is only a temporary procedural measure, it signals a clear shift from congressional Democrats ahead of the midterms, as progressive candidates who have centered their campaigns on fierce criticism of Israeli tactics have won key primary races. Polling shows the Iran war is becoming increasingly unpopular among voters of all parties, as economic costs trickle down to working American households. Analysts widely expect Democrats to take control of the House from Republicans when the new congressional term begins in January, with the midterm results widely seen as a referendum on Trump’s first-term policy agenda.

A high-stakes diplomatic push by Somaliland to secure formal United States recognition has been derailed by a viral, widely panned interview performance by the breakaway region’s president that has drawn sharp criticism both online and from regional affairs experts. Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi, president of the self-declared independent state that remains unrecognized by most of the international community except Israel, faced widespread backlash after a recent on-stage discussion at the Hudson Institute, a Washington DC-based think tank long seen as open to Somaliland’s sovereignty bid.

Footage of the conversation, shared to the social platform X on Monday, captured Abdullahi appearing unprepared and flustered through most of the event, with visible moments of nervous giggling, incoherent mumbling, and long awkward pauses. The interview took place at the center of a planned visit to the US that regional and international media have framed as a make-or-break moment: Abdullahi arrived in Washington ready to present a sweeping offer of trade and strategic access to the Trump administration, including opening access to Somaliland’s ports and untapped mineral reserves for American investors, all in exchange for formal US recognition of the territory’s independence. For years, backers of Somaliland’s sovereignty have framed the region as a stable, reliable partner for Western and Gulf powers seeking to shore up security around the strategic Red Sea shipping lane.

Yet when pressed by the moderator to name what specific critical minerals Somaliland could offer the US as part of this proposed deal, a cornerstone of the region’s offer, Abdullahi laughed off the question, admitting he had no expertise in the area. “I don’t know… maybe everything,” he chuckled. He stumbled even more noticeably when the discussion turned to the ongoing devastating civil war in Sudan, a conflict that has increasingly drawn in competing regional powers. The Sudanese regular army receives backing from Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, while the rival Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary group is supported by the United Arab Emirates – Somaliland’s closest patron in the Gulf.

Rather than offering any comment on the conflict, which has killed hundreds of thousands and displaced millions, or clarifying his administration’s position amid the regional power dynamics at play, Abdullahi attempted to dismiss the conflict as too distant from his territory. He even compared Sudan’s distance from Somaliland to that of Venezuela – a comment that carried notable awkwardness, given Sudan’s northern border sits less than 750 kilometers from Somaliland. An visibly uncomfortable moderator quickly moved on from the topic after noting the discrepancy.

Cameron Hudson, a former United States intelligence official focused exclusively on African affairs, summarized the broad reaction to the interview in a viral post on X: “This was a frail and ageing leader not fully able to deliver the brief that he came here to deliver to a skeptical Washington audience. It was like watching an African Biden.” Abdullahi’s inconsistent answers extended to the core question driving his entire visit: when asked why the United States should formally recognize Somaliland’s independence, he gave a meandering, contradictory reply. “Practically [Somaliland] is not part of Somalia,” he said with a laugh, before adding, “Somaliland theoretically is part of Somalia.”

To understand the context of this sovereignty push, it is important to trace Somaliland’s modern political history. The territory gained independence from British colonial rule in 1960, just five days before neighboring Somalia secured its own independence from Italian colonial control. The two newly independent states quickly united to form the Somali Republic, but tensions between the two former colonial territories simmered almost from the start. These tensions boiled over into open conflict in the late 1980s, when then-Somali dictator Mohamed Siad Barre launched a brutal military crackdown on Somaliland. After a decade of armed conflict, Somaliland declared full independence in 1991, a move that allowed it to escape the widespread civil war and persistent instability that has plagued the rest of Somalia in the decades since. It has operated as a de facto independent state ever since, but has failed to secure recognition from most of the international community.

Recently, Somaliland has reemerged as a focal point for great power competition in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, thanks to its long, strategically valuable coastline across from Yemen. In January 2026, Israel became only the second United Nations member state to formally recognize Somaliland’s independence, and Israeli officials have publicly explored establishing a military base at the key port of Berbera, where the UAE already maintains an active military presence. When asked about the diplomatic agreement with Israel during the think tank interview, Abdullahi again offered no substantive strategic context, framing the recognition as nothing more than a routine diplomatic exchange. He added only that Israel was the only country that responded to his requests for recognition sent to nearly every head of state around the world, before breaking into nervous giggles.

In a Monday announcement that has sparked significant controversy, former U.S. President and 2024 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has named Wesley Hunt, a hardline anti-Islam Republican and close personal ally, as his nominee for the next U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia. The nomination arrives at an extraordinarily tense juncture for U.S. relations with Gulf nations, coming months after the outbreak of ongoing U.S.-Israeli military operations against Iran that have sent shockwaves through the Middle East, disrupting regional stability and sending ripples through global energy and economic markets.

Hunt brings a background deeply tied to the region through his U.S. military service. In 2006, he served as an Apache helicopter pilot in Baghdad, Iraq, completing 55 combat missions, before going on to two diplomatic liaison deployment postings in Saudi Arabia. He has repeatedly drawn on his time in the Middle East to justify his sweeping anti-Islam rhetoric.

Speaking last November, Hunt argued that he had direct experience living under Islamic legal systems, saying, “I’ve lived in Saudi Arabia for two years. I’ve deployed to Iraq. I have seen firsthand what it looks like to live in countries governed under systems like Sharia law.” He doubled down on these incendiary claims in January, pushing back against critics who label his comments fearmongering by saying they “have never lived under it.” During his time stationed in the kingdom, Hunt claimed, “Public beheadings happened there not long ago. Women couldn’t even drive when I was there.”

In a January 2026 appearance on the conservative program *Stakelbeck Tonight*, Hunt escalated his rhetoric further, claiming Americans should be “extremely concerned” about Islamic influence in the U.S., asserting that “the mandate that’s been given to Islam is to basically go to other countries and infiltrate them.” He went on to peddle the conspiracy theory that Muslim communities would grow their populations in Western countries and eventually “take over” governing control.

Media coverage of Hunt’s past electoral campaigns in Texas has repeatedly called out his anti-Muslim framing. A *New Yorker* report on Texas congressional elections noted that Hunt and his fellow Republican opponents centered anti-Muslim rhetoric in their campaigning. Houston Chronicle opinion writer Chris Tomlinson has accused Hunt and other state-level Texas Republicans of deliberately “stoking fears of Islam” to mobilize conservative voters. Edward Ahmed Mitchell, a representative of the Council on American-Islamic Relations Action (CAIR Action), echoed this criticism, noting that Republican candidates in the state have openly competed “who can be more anti-Muslim” to drum up anti-Muslim anxiety among Texas voters ahead of elections. Hunt has also framed immigration to the U.S. as a risk, warning that new arrivals could “import systems that destroy communities.”

Beyond his anti-Islam views, Hunt is a well-documented staunch supporter of Israel, with deep ties to leading pro-Israel lobbying groups in the U.S. Speaking at a 2022 event hosted by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Hunt claimed the U.S. only has “really one true ally” in the Middle East, “and it’s Israel,” tying this exclusive loyalty to what he called Israel’s shared “Judeo” cultural background with the U.S.

While Hunt has expressed public support for the Abraham Accords normalization agreements between Israel and Arab states and has called for additional regional normalization deals, he has also warned that Washington should maintain a posture of suspicion even toward partners that have signed the accords. “Just because we have something set up like the Abraham Accords – which I think is good for the entire world, especially for the region – we cannot let our guard down,” he told the AIPAC audience.

Data from TrackAIPAC, a non-profit organization that tracks the political influence of the pro-Israel lobby in U.S. politics, shows Hunt has received a total of $139,862 in campaign contributions from leading pro-Israel lobbying groups, including AIPAC, Americans for Prosperity (AMP), the Republican Jewish Coalition, and the United States Israel Political Action Committee (USI). As recently as May 2024, Hunt reaffirmed his unwavering support for Israel during an interview on Fox News, arguing, “Keep in mind, Israel put the Judeo in the Judeo-Christian.”

As of publication, Saudi Arabian government officials have not issued any public response to the announcement of Hunt’s nomination. The appointment will also require a formal confirmation hearing and vote by the U.S. Senate before it can take effect.

A recent bombshell interview with U.S. Vice President JD Vance has pulled back the curtain on a deeply troubling convergence of apocalyptic religious ideology, tech elite power, and anti-democratic political ambition that is reshaping the global political landscape.

In comments to a Christian podcaster, Vance displayed chilling indifference to the prospect that his political actions could trigger an apocalyptic end of the world. “I’m trying to focus on doing as much of God’s work as possible. And if that leads to the end times, okay,” he stated plainly, with no trace of irony.

Vance’s rapid rise in politics is not an organic success story: it is almost entirely a product of patronage from Peter Thiel, the reclusive tech billionaire and co-founder of Palantir. Thiel, who identifies as a small-o orthodox Christian, is notorious for his obsessive fixation on the idea of an Antichrist that he claims will bring about the apocalypse. The pair first connected in 2011, when Vance, then a Yale Law School student, attended a lecture by Thiel – an encounter Vance later described as the most transformative moment of his time at the university, pushing him to pursue a career in technology. Vance went on to join Thiel’s venture capital firm Mithril Capital in 2015, before securing Thiel’s financial backing to co-found his own VC firm, Narya Capital. Like Palantir and Mithril, Narya draws its name from J.R.R. Tolkien’s *The Lord of the Rings*, a common cultural touchstone for Thiel’s ideological circle. When Vance shifted into electoral politics, Thiel poured $15 million into his 2022 Senate campaign and is widely reported to have helped secure a coveted endorsement from former President Donald Trump.

Thiel first amassed his fortune as a co-founder of PayPal alongside Elon Musk, the owner of X (formerly Twitter). In private, off-the-record lectures, Thiel has claimed the Antichrist will emerge as a luddite opposing scientific progress – and he has infamously named 23-year-old climate and pro-Palestine activist Greta Thunberg as an example of this figure. Journalist Gil Duran traces Thiel’s core ideological beliefs to the controversial book *The Sovereign Individual: How to Survive and Thrive During the Collapse of the Welfare State*, which argues that democracy has become obsolete in the digital age, and that this collapse should be welcomed, accelerated, and exploited by a select class of elite investors. This worldview is a form of accelerationism, a white supremacist ideology that frames violence as a necessary tool to trigger inevitable societal collapse, clearing the way for a new global order rooted in apocalyptic eugenics: a utopia for the “strong, deserving” few who survive, and a dystopia for everyone else.

Thiel has long stated that he sees technology as an “incredible alternative to politics,” and has openly declared, “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.” Today, billionaire elites who share this accelerationist, apocalyptic worldview are actively preparing for a coming collapse, pouring billions into underground survival bunkers and funding far-right political movements pushing to create segregated, fortressed ethnostates. Musk, for example, has collaborated with far-right movements across 18 countries, amplifying harmful “great replacement” conspiracy theories at rallies from Germany to the United Kingdom, and has used his control of X to elevate extreme right-wing voices and marginalize opposing perspectives. Thiel’s Palantir already provides surveillance technology used by U.S. authorities to track migrants for deportation, facilitates mass surveillance and targeting of Palestinians by Israel, and has embedded its systems into core public services including the UK’s National Health Service.

Across the Atlantic, the UK’s far-right Reform Party recently received a record-breaking £7 million donation from just two crypto billionaires, and has pushed to create an American ICE-style domestic agency to oversee mass deportations of undocumented migrants. Reform’s former head of policy James Orr, who was forced to resign after an undercover investigation caught him apparently attempting to circumvent UK electoral law, has longstanding ties to Thiel and hosted Thiel’s Antichrist-themed lectures at the University of Cambridge.

Beyond political meddling, these elites are pouring resources into outlandish tech-driven escape plans: Musk funds fantastical projects to colonize Mars and push for a transhumanist AI takeover of global society. Other billionaires are investing in private artificial island communities or so-called “freedom cities” – unregulated, tax-free havens run by AI robots and funded by cryptocurrency, designed to shelter the elite as climate change and perpetual conflict drive mass displacement and widespread deprivation across the globe. Thiel himself has relocated to Argentina, where libertarian pro-Israel President Javier Milei has taken office promising to “destroy” the Argentine state from within. A leaked website cache also revealed that Thiel has invited dozens of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful figures to secret closed-door retreats for his “Dialog” society, where discussions have ranged from cult building to prepping for World War III.

The most alarming dynamic? As these powerful figures plan their escapes to a private tech-driven utopia, they continue to profit massively from the fossil fuel and arms industries that are actively accelerating the very climate breakdown and global conflict they claim to be preparing for.

Vance’s public comments have thrown a clear spotlight on the overlapping ideological project that unites two seemingly disparate groups: Christian alt-right nationalists and Silicon Valley libertarian billionaires. Both groups share a core apocalyptic vision that divides the world into a “saved” elite and a “damned” mass that will be left behind when collapse comes. Academic research confirms the dangerous political implications of this worldview: a study by political scientist James Piazza found that Christian nationalists with apocalyptic beliefs are far more likely to hold hostile attitudes toward marginalized social outgroups, reject democratic norms and civil discourse, and normalize political violence against political opponents.

While apocalyptic religious ideas have long circulated as an undercurrent in American society among Evangelicals, Christian nationalists, and Christian Zionists, Piazza notes these voices have grown dramatically in influence in recent years, and now constitute a mainstream political force, counting among their ranks senior U.S. officials including U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Christian Zionists like Huckabee and Hegseth argue that Jews must return to what they call the Holy Land – encompassing modern Israel, the occupied West Bank, and parts of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan – to fulfill biblical prophecy and trigger the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. At the same time, they view Israel as a model for the high-tech theocracy they hope to implement in the United States. Huckabee has publicly called Israel the “land that God gave…to a people that he chose” and stated he would be unbothered by Israeli expansion across nearly the entire Middle East. In his first worship service at the Pentagon following the outbreak of conflict with Iran, Hegseth publicly prayed for “overwhelming violence” against U.S. enemies, while senior U.S. military commanders have reportedly told troops that the war with Iran is “all part of God’s divine plan”, aligned with biblical prophecies of the end times. For Christian nationalists, the apocalypse is pre-ordained and inevitable, Piazza explains – so it must be ushered in, not resisted.

This same apocalyptic framework has permeated Silicon Valley’s approach to artificial intelligence, argues tech journalist Karen Hao in her book *Empire of AI*. Hao writes that a quasi-religious cult has formed around the myth of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), the hypothetical idea of an AI system that can outperform humans at nearly every cognitive task. As far back as 2014, Musk told MIT students that developing AI was “summoning the demon” and represented humanity’s “biggest existential threat.” OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has described AI as a “genie that can grant any wish”, while acknowledging it “will probably most likely lead to the end of the world, but in the meantime, there will be great companies created.” Thiel once infamously paused for an extended period when asked if he believed humanity should survive, offering no clear answer.

In a recent high-profile move, Altman, Musk, and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei agreed to an industry-wide AI development slowdown, after multiple whistleblowers raised alarms that unregulated AI development could lead to human extinction within a decade. OpenAI has also asked U.S. Congress to bypass antitrust laws that would regulate the company’s market power, and has ruled out going public in 2025, citing unaddressed safety concerns.

But critics argue the push for an AI slowdown and focus on existential risk is a convenient PR move for an industry facing deep economic troubles. Virginia Tech professor Lee Vinsel, who coined the term “criti-hype” to describe how overstating technology’s risks can actually validate the industry’s own claims of transformative power and inflate stock prices, notes that nearly all AI firms are currently losing massive amounts of money – with the sole exception of Nvidia, which sells AI infrastructure and finances unprofitable AI firms through a web of circular deals that have inflated the so-called AI bubble. The technology has also failed to deliver on its promised productivity gains, with many companies rehiring laid-off workers after AI failed to meet performance expectations.

Vinsel explains that apocalyptic doomerism about AI is an effective marketing tool because it taps into deep cultural narratives from science fiction and religious end-times prophecy. Today, it is not just outside critics spreading these doomsday claims – AI companies themselves are actively broadcasting the idea that AI poses existential apocalyptic risk, turning the technology into a kind of messianic force for true believers in the industry.

“Silicon Valley has absorbed a techno-religion that brings together science fiction, century-old transhumanist aspirations…and American apocalyptic brands of Christianity,” explains Robert Geraci, a professor of religion, science, and technology. While superintelligent AI may not be technically impossible, Geraci notes that the vision advanced by the industry is profoundly religious and not rooted in rigorous logic or economics, relying on unproven assumptions of exponential growth that ignore the hard reality that all systems have natural limits.

Eryk Salvaggio, a fellow at Tech Policy Press, points out that AGI lacks any concrete, agreed-upon definition or clear success criteria, leaving space for believers to fantasize about either monstrous or messianic outcomes lurking in the technology. In a 2025 academic paper, Salvaggio and a cross-disciplinary group of experts found that while massive amounts of investment are flowing into AI based on promises of machine superintelligence, current AI systems have little ability to deliver on those lofty claims.

Mona Sloane, an assistant professor of data science and media studies at the University of Virginia, agrees that while unregulated AI poses very real near-term harms, the idea of “existential AI risk” is a deliberately moving target that distracts from current harms. “When there is this level of uncertainty, we latch onto narrative structures we are familiar with – in the case of machines and automation, that is the utopia-dystopia or boomer-doomer nexus,” Sloane explains. “Many powerful actors in the AI world believe in technology being deterministic,” she adds, revealing “their bleak and narrow understanding of humans as not having any agency”, while conveniently letting AI industry leaders avoid responsibility for the harms their technology already causes. “Having this threat always in the future keeps those who built AI systems in their powerful position, even when these systems become mundane and lose their magical aura – as is happening with AI.”

The risks of this inflated AI bubble are already on the radar: one major U.S. credit rating agency recently warned that if global markets lose faith in the AI industry’s ability to deliver returns on investment, a major market crash could follow, likely triggering a U.S. recession that would ripple across the entire global economy. While claims that AI will imminently eliminate all human jobs are widely overhyped, a market crash driven by inflated AI valuations could easily trigger mass unemployment. Beyond economic risk, unregulated AI poses immediate tangible harms: massive carbon emissions from energy-intensive data centers that worsen climate change, a range of social harms from cognitive decline to rising rates of mental health issues, and growing risks from autonomous weapons and widespread cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

“The reality is that U.S. tech giants are causing real harm, right now to people and planet,” says Donald Campbell, director of advocacy at digital rights organization Foxglove Legal. “What is clear about the tech billionaires is their staggering indifference to the human suffering their companies and platforms are causing – and their determination to ensure that there are no laws or regulations which could stand in their way.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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