Chinese President Xi Jinping will pay a state visit to North Korea next week at the invitation of the country’s leader, Kim Jong Un, Chinese and North Korean state media reported on Friday.

Xi, who is also general secretary of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, will visit the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea on June 8-9, Xinhua said. KCNA carried a similar announcement, saying Xi will visit at the invitation of Kim, general secretary of the Workers’ Party of Korea and president of the State Affairs of the DPRK.

Neither Xinhua nor KCNA immediately provided details on the agenda of the visit.

Xi last visited Pyongyang in 2019, while Kim was in Beijing last September – joining Russian President Vladimir Putin at a military parade commemorating the 80th anniversary of Imperial Japan’s defeat in World War II.

During Putin’s visit, Moscow and Beijing signed more than 40 cooperation agreements in areas including trade, technology and media exchanges. Xi said China-Russia ties had reached “the highest level in history,” while the two sides also agreed to extend a friendship treaty first signed in 2001.

China and North Korea have maintained close party and state ties since the Korean War. Beijing remains Pyongyang’s main economic partner and has repeatedly called for dialogue on the Korean Peninsula, while opposing unilateral sanctions and military pressure.

Israeli strikes in southern and eastern Lebanon have injured and killed dozens of civilians, less than 24 hours after West Jerusalem and Beirut agreed to a US-mediated ceasefire proposal.

At least eight people were killed and 15 others wounded on Thursday in a series of strikes targeting the towns of Sohmor, Masaken and Arab Al-Jalil, according to Lebanon’s Health Ministry.

Meanwhile, the IDF said an anti-tank missile fired by Hezbollah killed an Israeli soldier in southern Lebanon. Israel also blamed Hezbollah for the death of a UN peacekeeper wounded in a mortar shell attack the night before.

Hezbollah was not a party to the Washington talks and has said any arrangement that demands its withdrawal while Israel keeps troops in southern Lebanon would reward occupation rather than end the conflict.

US President Donald Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday that he had spoken to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and “actually spoke to Hezbollah about it,” dismissing the notion that the group was rejecting the initiative.

“They wouldn’t reject me, they didn’t reject,” he said, insisting that “progress” was being made between Israel and Lebanon. “It would be really nice if Lebanon could have some peace. Lebanon’s been under attack for so many years.”

A German court has ruled that calling Chancellor Friedrich Merz a “lying Fritz” should be criminally prosecuted because of “particular public interest,” slapping the offender with a fine amounting to an average monthly salary, or more than €2,000 ($2,322).

The case is just one of dozens of similar investigations launched by German police over critical comments posted on Facebook last year, the public prosecutor’s office in the southwestern city of Heilbronn confirmed to Die Welt.

The prosecution dates back to October 25, when a local police department issued a drone no-fly zone warning ahead of Merz’s visit to the area. What followed was a string of angry statements calling Merz anything from a liar to a “lying clown,” a “loose talker,” and a “lackey,” according to reports.

People who called Merz “Pinocchio” and a “lying clown” can rest assured that no law enforcement officials will be knocking on their doors any time soon, according to Tagesspiegel.

However, in the case of “lying Fritz,” the court decided in March that the words were “likely to incite further negative prejudices or aggression among like-minded individuals.”

When asked about the cases at this week’s press conference, a government spokesman said he would not comment on the issue “out of respect for the judiciary,” adding that Merz himself had not filed any charges. When pressed further, the official said these were “normal legal procedures” that “must be protected.”

The development has further fueled concerns about free speech in Germany. German regulators are reportedly planning to force social media platforms to boost government-approved media outlets in their algorithms, according to media reports citing leaked government documents. Even the EU stated in April that the German government had misused hate-speech laws to restrict freedom of expression.

For the first time in at least 50 years more people have moved out of the United States then moved in. Is politics and Donald Trump mostly to blame or is some other dynamic at play?

Last year, the US witnessed something that hasn’t occurred since before the Second World War – more people have left the country than moved in. And the bulk of the departures are not merely illegal migrants being politely shown the exit. Despite the high cost and emotional toll of digging up roots and leaving the country, an increasing number of homegrown Americans – for a wide variety of reasons – are making such a radical decision.

An estimated four to nine million Americans live abroad, with recent data showing a surge in voluntary emigration and an estimated 180,000+ US citizens relocating overseas in 2025 – a trend that is continuing to rise. For the first time in decades, the US experienced net negative migration. This recent wave of outward migration is driven by a mix of economic pressures, the rise of remote work, and shifting social and political climates. Some of the popular destinations include: Mexico, Spain, Germany and Thailand.

According to an interview with Expatsi co-founder Jen Barnett by CNBC Make It, “[A] majority of Americans, 89%, said they want to leave the US for political reasons. Others point to an opportunity for adventure and growth (73%), as well as a chance to save money (57%). Roughly two-thirds of respondents hope to move within two years, they have an average monthly budget of $3,856 to work with, and hopeful movers are split among 44% individuals, 39% couples and 17% families with kids.”

Ellen DeGeneres & Portia de Rossi: The former talk show host and her wife relocated to a farmhouse in the Cotswolds, England, stating on Deadline that Trump’s re-election cemented their permanent move out of the country.

Rosie O’Donnell: A longtime critic of Trump, O’Donnell relocated her family to Ireland, citing the need to prioritize her children’s safety and her own mental health.

Sophie Turner: The Game of Thrones actress returned to West London from Miami, citing rising gun violence and the overturning of Roe v. Wade. “America is a s-show,” she told Deadline, without delving into specifics about president Donald Trump.

James Cameron: The Avatar director, who has long been based in New Zealand, actively pursued New Zealand citizenship, citing political shifts that have “hollowed out” the US.

Meanwhile, many Americans have opted not only to live abroad, but to surrender their American citizenship altogether. The State Department cut the renunciation fee significantly from $2,350 to $450, prompting thousands of expatriates to queue at US consulates globally to finalize their exit plans.

I spoke with Mark Riley, an American from North Carolina who recently moved to Moscow together with his four children and wife, for his reasons in making the big jump abroad.

“I am a graphic designer and I can do my job practically anywhere,” Riley told me over drinks in the heart of Moscow. “One day I was watching a television program about the rise of transgender lifestyles in the United States and that’s when the idea first popped into my head. I asked my wife why we were staying in a country that no longer shares our political and religious views. Six months later my family and I were boarding a one-way airplane to Russia.”

When I asked him if he ever regrets his decision Riley laughed and said yes, but “only in the wintertime.”

In the end, what has Americans on the run is not just the current president and his politics – that’s basically just a bad news cycle at this point. They are fleeing a deeper sense of national exhaustion – rising costs, social fragmentation, cultural alienation, and yes, all the political hysteria. All of these combine into a feeling that the country no longer offers either stability or a shared moral center.

For some, the move abroad is an economic decision; for others, it is ideological or spiritual. But taken together, this outward flow is a clear message: millions of Americans are no longer asking how to fix their country, but how to escape it. That may be the clearest sign yet that the American crisis has moved beyond politics – it has grown to be civilizational.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul has blamed Berlin’s failure to secure a seat at the UN Security Council on his country’s superior moral positions. If only there were a German word for that…

Having won every round it has entered since the mid-twentieth century, this time around, Germany could only manage to secure 104 votes, while Portugal won 134 and Austria – a non-NATO member – took 131. Despite Berlin’s long-held insistence that it deserves a permanent seat on the UNSC, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul was forced to listen as the results were read out by none other than Annalena Baerbock.

Schadenfreude: the feeling of joy in an opponent’s misfortune

As president of the UN assembly, the notoriously gaffe-prone former German foreign minister Baerbock’s smile cracked into a grimace as she read the result of the secret ballot. 

While the room roundly applauded Austria, Portugal, and the other successful countries, the pushback began. Free Democratic Party MEP Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann described the result as a repudiation of Baerbock’s nagging “politics of the raised index finger,” while human rights lawyer Craig Mokhiber gloated over how neither Baerbock nor Wadephul could could “save Germany from this well-deserved humiliation.” 

In a rare moment of justice at the UN General Assembly today, Germany lost its bid for a UN Security Council seat. Germany’s scandalous support for genocide in Palestine and aggression against Iran, and its repression of human rights defenders inside Germany, were all on display…

— Craig Mokhiber (@CraigMokhiber) June 3, 2026

“[German Chancellor Friedrich] Merz wanted to bring our country ‘back onto the international stage’ at the start of his chancellorship, but now Germany is left without a seat on the UN Security Council,” Alternative for Germany (AfD) leader Alice Weidel wrote on X, adding that Merz has led Germany from “one embarrassment to the next.” 

The governments of Christian Democrat Friedrich Merz and Social Democrat Olaf Scholz (the latter of whom Baerbock served under) shared identical foreign policies. Both professed slavish devotion to the American-led “rules-based international order” when it came to Ukraine, and a moral relativism when it came to Israel’s wars in the Middle East. 

Baerbock declared the EU to be “fighting a war against Russia” in 2023, called Xi Jinping a “dictator,” and scolded the Chinese president for “taking the side of the aggressor” by refusing to join the West’s proxy war in Ukraine. The following year, she referred to Israeli strikes on Palestinian schools as “self-defense,” and argued that civilian sites lose their protection when “ terrorists” operate in their vicinity. 

#BREAKING: #Germany “won’t shy away” from helping #Israel attack civilians, German FM Annalena #Baerbock says. Baerbock says protected places of refuge can lose their protection status due to Hamas hiding in between citizens. #News #GermanyNews #IsraelHamasWar #annalenabaerbock pic.twitter.com/UD0WlorbDA

— 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔇𝔞𝔦𝔩𝔶 𝔇𝔦𝔰𝔰𝔦𝔡𝔢𝔫𝔱 (@DailyD1ss1dent) October 15, 2024

“When it comes to Russia, international law counts, but when it comes to the USA and Israel, it doesn’t,” left-wing politician Sahra Wagenknecht told the Berliner Zeitung. “This double standard was voted out by the international community yesterday.”

The German dictionary has another take to offer.

Schuldverschiebung: blame shifting

Having overseen Germany’s lowest diplomatic moment in 70 years, Wadephul told reporters that he “did not personally blame himself” for the loss. Russia, he insisted, saw Germany’s “rock-solid support for Ukraine” and “campaigned against us.” He rejected any idea of a double standard on Israel, claiming that “Germany must always assume a special responsibility for Israel with regard to the Middle East conflict.” 

Germany’s Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul on why Germany lost UN seat:

There's our rock-solid support for Ukraine. It is no secret that Russia does not want such a voice at the table — and campaigned against us.

It also may have cost us votes that Germany must always assume a… pic.twitter.com/80oFDEbA77

— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 3, 2026

There is no evidence that Russia orchestrated a backroom campaign against Germany’s candidacy. Instead, analysts in Germany and abroad have pointed to Berlin’s support for Israel as the key factor behind its loss. “Let’s be clear: Germany’s support for Ukraine had nothing to do with it. Portugal and Austria – who beat Germany – are no less supportive of Ukraine,” Trita Parsi, of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft wrote on X. “It has everything to do with Germany’s support for Israel’s genocide and the manner in which the German government has been willing to undermine international law and the UN Charter on behalf of Israel.” 

Germany, Wadephul argued, essentially fell victim to its own superior moral obligations, which require the country to take seemingly contradictory – but ultimately correct – positions on world affairs. 

There does not seem to be a compound German word for this mindset, so we plugged the above sentence into a generator and marveled at the Teutonic masterpiece it spat out: 

Moralüberlegenheitsopfermentalität is the impulse that drives the foreign policy of Baerbock and Wadephul, and the domestic policies that have dragged Europe’s former economic powerhouse into recession and de-industrialization.

Germany’s iron-clad support for Israel may have alienated many at the UN, but according to Wadephul, the sacrifice was worth it because Germany lived up to “our historical responsibility” to atone for the Holocaust. And, while Germany’s ongoing rearmament and aid to Ukraine may be pushing the country’s budget deficit far above the 3% limit set in place by the EU, the economic pain is worth it to, in the words of Merz, “protect our free democratic order.” 

At home, Germany’s decision to cut itself off from Russian energy was economically ruinous, but justified by the country’s leaders as morally correct. Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision to throw open Germany’s borders to a million Middle-Eastern migrants in 2015 may have facilitated a rise in crime, social unrest, and unemployment, but Germany was declared a “moral superpower” by liberal journalists and Merkel was crowned Time Magazine’s Person of the Year.

Endpunkt

Germany may attempt to deflect blame and portray its contradictory positions as moral duties, but to the rest of the world, its preaching smacks of hypocrisy. The UN vote was a repudiation of Berlin’s double standards, but also an acknowledgement of its declining influence on the global stage. 

The situation in Lebanon has pushed Iran out of the negotiating process with the US and has once again shown that Middle Eastern diplomacy today depends less on formal negotiations than on what is happening on the ground.

Tehran has suspended its indirect exchange of messages with Washington through intermediaries against the backdrop of Israel’s expanding operation against Lebanon and Hezbollah. This decision was a reaction to a broader crisis in which the Lebanese front has become intertwined with US-Iranian negotiations, Israel’s security calculations, Lebanon’s domestic politics, Hezbollah’s position, Tehran’s regional strategy, and the Trump administration’s attempt to impose at least a temporary formula for de-escalation.

The offensive

At first glance, the crisis appears to follow the familiar pattern of Israeli-Lebanese confrontation. Israel says it is acting to protect the country’s northern areas, from which residents were evacuated after Hezbollah attacks. Hezbollah presents its actions as resistance to Israeli strikes and links the Lebanese front to the broader struggle against Israel. The Lebanese state calls for an end to the attacks and for respect for its sovereignty, yet it lacks the power either to control Hezbollah’s decisions or to stop the Israeli military. The US is trying to keep negotiations alive because a wider regional war would threaten its interests, energy markets, and the positions of its allies. Iran, meanwhile, sees the developments in Lebanon not as a local episode, but as a blow to the entire architecture of its regional influence.

As long as the war remained limited to exchanges of fire along the border, it could still be presented as a controlled conflict. Yet the expansion of Israel’s ground operation, its advance deeper into southern Lebanon, its strikes on areas linked to Hezbollah, and its attacks on Beirut’s southern suburbs have changed the politics around the conflict. Rather than simply responding to threats, as Israel claims to be, it is trying to forcefully alter the security landscape of the region.

Israel’s advance in the area of Beaufort Castle has been especially symbolic. For military planners, it is an important height and a point of control. For the Lebanese, however, it is a place associated with the memory of earlier wars and resistance against Israeli presence. The seizure or occupation of such an area would be a signal that Israel’s goal is deep intervention in southern Lebanon. This is why France requested an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council. For Paris, which has historical ties to Lebanon and a strong interest in preserving Lebanese statehood, Israel’s advance represents a threat not only to security, but also to the very principle of Lebanese sovereignty.

Israel’s traditional partners in Europe have criticized particular Israeli actions before, but they have usually tried to maintain a balance between recognizing Israel’s right to security and calling for restraint. However, Israel’s actions on the ground have not helped maintain that balance. After the war in Gaza, European public opinion had already become far more critical of Israel. With the new operation in Lebanon, the risk of a long-term occupation of the south, and the collapse of talks with Iran, even Israel’s customary allies begin to distance themselves. They may not be taking the side of Iran or Hezbollah, but they are increasingly unwilling to offer unconditional political cover for the policies of the Israeli cabinet.

Israel’s strength has always rested not only on its military capabilities and its alliance with the US, but also on its ability to remain part of the Western political system. If France, Germany, the UK, and other European partners increasingly come to see Israel’s actions as a source of further escalation, international support will begin to shrink. This does not mean an immediate rupture in relations, but it does mean a gradual erosion of political patience. We may see colder official statements, followed by pressure at the United Nations, and eventually debates will emerge over arms supplies, trade agreements, legal accountability, and recognition of new political realities on the Palestinian and Lebanese tracks.

Why is Israel doing this?

Why does Israel need this escalation? Military necessity is only part of the answer. Israel’s leadership wants to bring residents of the north back home, restore deterrence after Hezbollah’s attacks, and show Israeli society that the state is capable of defending its borders. Since October 7, 2023, security has become a test of public trust in the state itself. For Netanyahu and his cabinet, the northern front has become a measure of whether the government can restore control in places where citizens have felt abandoned.

There is, however, a second layer. Israel views Hezbollah not merely as a key component of Iran’s military system on Israel’s borders. Striking Hezbollah means striking Iran. Israel wants to dismantle the infrastructure that allows Tehran to maintain pressure on Israel through Lebanon. The operation against Hezbollah is therefore directed simultaneously at Beirut, Tehran, and Washington. Israel is making clear that it does not intend to wait for the outcome of US-Iranian negotiations if those talks might preserve a situation in which Hezbollah retains an armed presence in southern Lebanon.

A third layer has to do with Israeli domestic politics. Netanyahu’s government depends on right-wing and religious-nationalist forces for which security means territorial control rather than compromise. In this political environment, temporary security zones can easily turn into demands for long-term military presence. In Gaza, this has manifested itself in discussions about displacement, military administration, and the possible return of settlements. In relation to Lebanon, this means to control the south of the country, push Hezbollah back toward the Litani River, and create a reality in which Israel itself defines the perimeter of its security.

This is where one must speak carefully about the idea of ‘Greater Israel.’ It is not the official doctrine of the Israeli state toward Lebanon, yet it does exist within the worldview of certain radical right-wing and settler circles. These groups see neighboring territories as part of a broader historical and biblical map. Even when this ideology does not translate into an explicit decision to annex southern Lebanon, it still creates a political atmosphere in which the occupation of other people’s territory can be justified as a historical right as well as a strategic necessity.

The danger lies in the fact that temporary military solutions in the Middle East often become long-term facts on the ground. Military action, initially aimed at eliminating a threat, morphs into observation posts, supply routes, exclusion zones, and special access regimes. Then the argument is made that withdrawal is impossible because the enemy will return, and you end up with an occupation, even if it is not formally called one. Lebanon has already lived through such a scenario. Israel’s earlier presence in the south was also justified by the security needs of the northern Israeli communities, yet for the Lebanese it became a symbol of occupation and one of the factors that strengthened Hezbollah.

The Hezbollah paradox and the Lebanese state

Israel wants to weaken Hezbollah, but it may end up giving it a new political resource. Inside Lebanon, attitudes toward Hezbollah are far from uniform. Part of society believes that the movement, because of its ties to Iran, drags the country into war without the consent of all Lebanese. For many Christians, Sunnis, and segments of the secular public, Hezbollah is a state within a state, one that limits Lebanese sovereignty and subordinates the country to Tehran’s external strategy. Yet when Israel attacks, criticizing Hezbollah becomes politically more difficult – because it is defending the country against external aggression.

The Lebanese state is in the weakest position of all. It cannot disarm Hezbollah, because doing so would risk an internal confrontation – but neither can it stop Israel without Hezbollah’s military strength. It depends on international assistance, but international mechanisms cannot quickly change the situation on the ground. As a result, Lebanon once again becomes the arena for other actors’ strategies. Israel is trying to solve the problem of its northern security, Iran is defending its regional network of allies, the US is trying to preserve the negotiations, Europe fears a new destabilization on the Mediterranean, and Lebanese civilians pay the price.

For Hezbollah, the current crisis is also a test. On the one hand, it is suffering military and infrastructural losses, but on the other, the Israeli offensive itself helps its political narrative. Before this escalation, internal Lebanese voices had been asking why the country should remain hostage to Iran’s strategy, Hezbollah can now legitimately ask “Would you rather Israel dictate its terms?”

For Iran, Hezbollah is one of the most important elements of its deterrence system against Israel. If Israel can destroy Hezbollah’s positions in Lebanon without paying a serious price, Iran’s entire regional strategy is put under pressure. Tehran’s withdrawal from the negotiating process with Washington was an attempt to restore leverage as much as it was a gesture of solidarity towards an ally. Iran will not discuss de-escalation with Washington while Israel expands its operation on the Lebanese front.

This is especially important because the Trump administration has been trying to negotiate on several fronts at once, seeking to maintain a channel with Iran, secure an extension of the ceasefire, reduce risks in the Strait of Hormuz, and at the same time support a process of settlement between Israel and Lebanon. American officials described contacts on the Lebanese track as productive and positive. Netanyahu, for his part, spoke of the need for negotiations that would address Hezbollah’s disarmament and the establishment of peaceful relations between Israel and Lebanon. On paper, this looked like an opportunity to tie together Israel’s security, Lebanon’s stabilization, and dialogue with Iran.

In reality, while the US was trying to persuade the parties of the need for a deal, Israel intensified its offensive, and Tehran saw this as proof that Washington was either unable or unwilling to restrain its ally. As a result, the talks that were supposed to reduce tensions became hostage to military action.

The US now finds itself in a contradictory position. It wants to support its key ally Israel, but also prevent a wider war that would threaten American bases and trade routes, and avoid a dangerous direct war with Iran. It also wants to stabilize Lebanon because another war there could destroy what remains of state governance and trigger a regional explosion. Yet these objectives do not fit together well if Israel continues to act as though the diplomatic process does not constrain it.

Netanyahu’s gambit

Has Israel once again undermined an attempt at negotiations between Iran and the US? Formally, it can argue that its actions are driven solely by security considerations. Formally, Tehran can say that it is suspending exchanges with Washington because of violations and mistrust. Formally, the US can insist that negotiations remain possible. But the political sequence of events is clear enough.

At the same time, Israeli policy itself has become hostage to domestic dynamics. Netanyahu, under pressure from right-wing allies and amid distrust from a significant part of society, feels the constant need to demonstrate strength. Any halt to the operation in Lebanon without a visible result would be seen as weakness, and any pressure from the US could be used as evidence that only a hardline cabinet can protect the country from external diktat.

The long term

Israel’s decision to turn up the heat and jettison diplomacy comes at a strategic cost. It can win battles against Hezbollah, destroy its command centers and infrastructure, and push it away from the border. But if the end result is another occupation, it not solve any of Israel’s problems in the long term. On the contrary, it could again turn Hezbollah into a symbol of resistance, weaken the Lebanese critics of the movement, and return the region to a cycle it has already experienced. All the while Israel’s European partners will continue to lose patience and see ever more reasons to restrain Israel. The main conclusion is that Israel may achieve a tactical advantage in Lebanon while losing the strategic environment around it.

The bigger question arising from Israel’s actions in Lebanon is whether diplomacy can survive in a region where every military operation immediately becomes part of a larger bargain. The situation in Lebanon has already pushed Iran out of the negotiating process with the US. It may now determine whether Washington retains any room for mediation, whether Trump can impose even a temporary deal on the parties, whether Lebanon can avoid another collapse, and whether Israel will turn yet another security operation into a new cycle of occupation, resistance, and international isolation.

The EU may expand its existing Red Sea naval mission to the Strait of Hormuz, taking the lead role in mine-clearing operations in the strategic shipping route, according to media reports citing an internal document.

The bloc’s ‘Operation Aspides,’ launched in February 2024, patrols the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden and northwest Indian Ocean, escorting commercial vessels and helping to protect shipping from attacks by Yemen’s Houthi militants.

The proposal would see Aspides assume the “primary role” in mine-clearing operations in the Strait of Hormuz, complementing efforts by an ad hoc French-British coalition, according to a document circulated by the EU’s diplomatic service under foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas. Any expansion of the mission would require unanimous backing from all 27 member states.

The Strait of Hormuz off Iran’s coast – a key route for global oil and LNG supplies – has been central to Middle East tensions since the US and Israel launched strikes on Iran in late February. Maritime traffic through the waterway has been heavily disrupted, with Washington and Tehran accusing each other of violating a fragile ceasefire reached in April.

Trump has for weeks slammed his European NATO allies for not joining the war and hinted that the US could leave the military bloc as a result. The UK and France later announced that they would launch a “multi-national mission to protect freedom of navigation as soon as conditions allow.”

The US and Iran exchanged missile strikes again this week after threatening to undermine the ceasefire. Negotiations over Tehran’s nuclear program and the status of Hormuz remain stalled.

US traditionalists are suing and lobbying with the support of the Donald Trump administration to resurrect memorials which were removed during the 2020 Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.

Dozens of monuments to European and American historical figures were taken down after the nationwide protests and riots which followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, in what WSJ dubbed the “statue wars.”

Ohio’s capital Columbus, named after the famed Italian explorer, took down a 22-foot-high statue of him from City Hall in 2020. At the time, the city’s Democrat Mayor Andrew Ginther called it a representation of the country’s “ugly past.”

“The silent majority is becoming vocal,” WSJ cited the lawsuit’s organizer Jack Conte as saying. “You reach a point where this stuff is shoved down your throat, and you can only take so much of it.”

The Trump administration has supported the effort. Just over two months after taking office in 2025, the US president signed an executive order to reinstate monuments removed since 2020, if they were taken down as part of what he called an effort to “perpetuate a false reconstruction of American history.”

Ahead of the nation’s 250th anniversary on July 4, the Interior Department returned a statue of Delaware Founding Father Caesar Rodney to Washington’s Freedom Plaza. The monument was removed in 2020 amid criticism that Rodney, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, was also a slaveholder.

A total of 261 US historical monuments were removed, vandalized or toppled during the BLM protests, according to World Heritage USA data. More than half were related to Confederate figures.

The family of a young Palestinian man who was shot dead by Israeli forces near the concrete barrier separating the occupied West Bank from Jerusalem, has told RT that his determination to find work drove him to his death.

Imad Ishtayeh’s death was confirmed by the Palestinian Health Ministry on Sunday.

His father told RT that he had been trying to cross into Israel in search of work amid deepening economic hardship in the Palestinian territory.

Israeli police have said that Imad was attempting to enter Israel illegally by crossing the barrier.

”My son went out looking for a livelihood,” Haroun Ishtayeh said. “He had opened a chicken slaughterhouse business here, but people could not afford to buy chicken, they could barely afford to buy water […] And he closed down his business here.”

“I told him, my son, the situation is dangerous; he told me, father, if I am destined to die, I will die here or I will die there,” he added.

RT correspondent Charlotte Dubenskij reports.

A family from Israel was told, “sorry, there are no Jews allowed in our hotel” when attempting to book a room in a town in southern Germany. The incendiary rejection triggered uproar, with the hotel offering an apology and citing a wave of fake reservations.

The message sent by Hotel Zum Hirschen, Bavaria, was shared by Talya Lador, Israel’s Consul General in southern Germany, who wondered on X on Tuesday, “Are we back in the 1930s?” The diplomat was referring to the infamous Nazi party’s policies that had stripped Jews of civil rights and property before later resorting to genocide.

The family also filed a complaint with Booking.com, which removed the property from its platform, and lodged a formal petition with the Bavarian Justice Ministry’s commissioner for combating antisemitism, according to several media reports.

Sind wir wieder in den 1930er Jahren? Ein Hotel hat einem Israeli folgendes geantwortet: „sorry, there are no Jews allowed in our hotel“.
Ich bin froh darüber, dass @bookingcom dieses Hotel von seiner Homepage verbannt hat. pic.twitter.com/3hiBEK1dse

— Talya Lador (@TalyaLador) June 2, 2026

Hotel Zum Hirschen – an establishment with more than 100 years of history – issued an apology, writing on its front page that it “would like to make it unequivocally clear that we condemn all forms of discrimination,” stressing that “the claim that certain groups are not welcome here is incorrect and does not reflect the facts.”

According to several media reports, local prosecutors are investigating the case on suspicion of incitement to hatred. Germany’s criminal code bans incitement against people based on their religious or ethnic background and carries a sentence of up to five years in prison. It is not yet clear whether the matter will go to trial.

Antisemitic incidents have been on the rise in Europe and elsewhere in recent years amid Israel’s war in Gaza. While Berlin has remained highly supportive of Israel, a 2025 YouGov poll indicated that 62% of German voters believe that Israeli actions in the Palestinian enclave constituted genocide.

Germany’s stance on Israel and the Middle East contributed to a diplomatic setback this week when Berlin failed to win a rotating seat on the UN Security Council in a secret ballot.

The Palestinian Football Association (PFA) has slammed Israel over the “unjust arrest” of two players from its women’s national team and called on the sport’s governing body, FIFA, to intervene.

Israeli authorities on Wednesday extended the detention of Rand Halawani, 20, who was arrested a day earlier on suspicion of “throwing objects” at people in Jerusalem.

Another national team player, Natalie Abu Diyeh, 21, a student at Birzeit University, was detained along with three other young Palestinian women in the occupied West Bank on Tuesday. The four are suspected of “promoting terrorist activities and additional terrorist-related activities,” Israeli police said.

The PFA issued a statement demanding the release of Halawani and Abu Diyeh, whom it described as “young international players who have proudly represented Palestine at both youth and senior levels.”

“Their arrest is not an isolated incident, it is part of a well-documented pattern of systematic targeting of Palestinian athletes, which continues without accountability,” the statement read.

The Palestinian Football Association said that it “calls on FIFA… and the wider international sporting community to move beyond statements and take concrete action” against Israel.

FIFA banned the Russian national football team and clubs from international events following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Moscow described the move as illegal.

However, FIFA has refrained from applying similar restrictions against Israel, despite repeated calls by the Palestinian Authority and some legal experts to do so over the aggressive military campaign launched by West Jerusalem in the Gaza Strip in response to a deadly incursion by Palestinian armed group Hamas on October 7, 2023.

Conservative US commentator Candace Owens would back journalist Tucker Carlson if he ran for US president, but would only run herself if voters accepted her as “dictator.”

Speaking exclusively to RT’s Rick Sanchez at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), Owens was asked about speculation in the US that she could one day run for the White House.

“I always tell my listeners I’d never run for president. I’d only run for dictator,” Owens said. “I’m not dealing with Congress, I’m not dealing with lobbying, I’m not dealing with Lindsey Graham calling for another war.”

She joked that if voters wanted her, they would have to accept the terms that she will be “dictator of the United States,” adding that she has no short-term interest in political office because of the “inauthenticity” of Washington.

The former Daily Wire host said she would instead be willing to campaign for someone like Tucker Carlson if he chose to run. She added that she would be ready to travel the country on Carlson’s behalf, comparing the idea to her previous political partnership with Charlie Kirk.

Owens initially rose to prominence in the late 2010s by urging black voters to stop supporting the Democrats. She later became one of the most prominent voices in conservative media before splitting with the Daily Wire following a public dispute over Israel’s war in Gaza.

Catch the full interview with Owens when it airs exclusively on RT later today.

A ceasefire in the Middle East does not always mean that shooting stops entirely, US President Donald Trump has said, after reporters pressed him on the latest military exchanges involving Iran.

US forces this week reportedly targeted a tanker destined for Iran’s Kharg Island, triggering an Iranian missile and drone barrage targeting US bases in Kuwait. One projectile devastated the Gulf state’s international airport terminal. Additionally, over the weekend, the US carried out what it described as “self-defense” airstrikes on Iran’s Qeshm Island.

Speaking at a White House press conference on Wednesday, Trump downplayed the latest Iranian attacks, arguing that Tehran was simply responding to previous US military action. He maintained that the armistice between the US and Iran remains in force.

“It’s a different part of the world,” Trump said. “I’d say in that part of the world, ceasefire is when you’re shooting in a more moderate manner.”

US President Trump, speaking about Iran, commented on the different meanings of the term "ceasefire" depending on the region of the world:

"In this part of the world, a ceasefire means that you're shooting more moderately..." pic.twitter.com/EWGvRFIV23

— S p r i n t e r (@SprinterPress) June 4, 2026

Before an initial truce was announced on April 7, more than 3,400 people had been reported killed in Iran by American and Israeli strikes. The US said 13 military service members died, with more than 300 others injured in the line of duty. Military personnel and civilians were also killed in Arab states hosting US bases, which Tehran targeted during the conflict.

Lebanon and “ceasefire”

Lebanon’s Health Ministry has said that Israeli attacks on the country have killed at least 3,516 civilians since March 2, and over 1,100 since April 7. Israel has also injured over 10,000 others while ordering the expulsion of the Muslim population from southern Lebanon.

Hostilities were meant to be halted under a separate ceasefire, which the US, Israel, and the government in Beirut reaffirmed this week, demanding that Hezbollah stop attacks on Israeli-occupied southern Lebanon and withdraw its forces.

Hezbollah, however, the active combatant against Israel, was neither party to the talks nor answers to Lebanon’s national government and cites multiple previous truce violations by Israel.

“It is clear that Israel will not stop, that this is a one-sided ceasefire,” Beirut-based reporter Mohammed Shamsedeen told RT. “If it was a two-sided ceasefire this war would be over right now.”

While the reality across the Middle East is stretching the definition of “truce” and “ceasefire” – where hundreds are being killed and warring parties are not even at the table – Trump’s quip, like all gallows humor, carries in it a grain of truth.

The BBC has been forced to issue an apology after one of its presenters sparked an uproar by misquoting Reform UK leader Nigel Farage as calling for “white cold rage” in response to the murder of 18-year-old student Henry Nowak.

Nowak was stabbed to death in Southampton in December by Vickrum Singh Digwa, a 23-year-old Sikh man. When police arrived at the scene, Digwa falsely claimed that he had been the victim of a racist attack.

Bodycam footage from the incident showed that officers believed Digwa’s account, treated the dying student as the suspect, dragged him across gravel and handcuffed him as he repeatedly told officers he had been stabbed and could not breathe. Nowak later lost consciousness and drowned in his own blood.

Digwa was later convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison with a minimum term of 21 years.

Farage responded to the footage by saying the case showed Britain was living in a “two-tier culture,” where “a false accusation of racism counted higher at that moment than someone that was dying.”

The Reform UK leader urged the British public to respond to the case with “pure, cold rage.”

However, during Tuesday’s edition of Newsnight, BBC presenter Matt Chorley repeatedly claimed Farage had called for “white cold rage,” using the phrase a total of three times during the broadcast.

In a legal letter cited by British media, Reform UK argued that the misquote was “seriously defamatory” and completely changed the meaning of Farage’s remarks, suggesting he was “invoking race as a basis for public anger” rather than condemning racially skewed treatment by authorities.

Chorley apologized directly to Farage on X on Wednesday, claiming he had “misremembered” the quote.

The misquote comes amid growing anger over government and media attempts to frame outrage over Nowak’s treatment as far-right agitation rather than as criticism of police and government failures.

Critics have accused British authorities of repeatedly dismissing anger over immigration, crime, and two-tier policing as extremism, while using those labels to justify arrests, prosecutions and prison sentences for protesters and online commentators.

The US House of Representatives has passed a resolution aimed at making it impossible for US President Donald Trump to take further military action against Iran without the approval of Congress.

The Trump administration did not consult with lawmakers when it launched ‘Operation Epic Fury’ and attacked Iran together with Israel in late February. Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, the president is required to withdraw American forces from a war after two months if it has not been approved by Congress. The 60-day deadline passed on May 1, but US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth argued that the announcement of a ceasefire with Tehran in early April had reset the clock.

House Democrats, who have made several attempts to pass a resolution to limit Trump’s war powers since the start of the conflict, succeeded in doing so on Wednesday. However, it still requires backing from the Senate, which remains under Republican control.

New York Democratic Representative Gregory Meeks, who introduced the resolution, said that he was thrilled “that we’ve had the opportunity to have some members from the Republican side stand up.” 

The House will remain “a check and a balance when the administration doesn’t follow the Constitution,” he stressed.

Barrett explained that he voted together with the Democrats because the American people are “tired of this war… they’re tired of $5 gallon gas and $6 gallon diesel, and fertilizer we can’t afford to put on our fields.” 

Before the vote, House Speaker Mike Johnson warned his colleagues against passing the resolution, arguing that it could have a “very negative” impact on the talks with Iran.

“It weakens us, our position, and our leverage in negotiation on the peace in that situation. ‘Operation Epic Fury’ is concluded,” Johnson told CNN.

A woman has sued Airbnb and an Atlanta-area host after allegedly being denied a rental booking when the host learned she was black, The Independent has reported.

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Georgia last week, the outlet said on Wednesday. Plaintiff Sharona Stewart alleges that Airbnb host George Yu Shihfang and unnamed property managers discriminated against her during the booking process and that the service had failed to act after she reported the incident.

According to the complaint, Stewart exchanged what were described as “cordial” messages with Shihfang after requesting to rent the six-bedroom property. The lawsuit says that after the host asked “racially based questions” and determined Stewart was a black woman, he stopped responding to her inquiries and the reservation request was ultimately rejected.

Stewart later reviewed the listing and found language describing the area as a “peaceful white neighborhood” under the property’s neighborhood highlights section. According to the lawsuit, she reported the wording and the rejected booking to Airbnb but the company closed her complaint and allowed the advertisement to remain on the platform.

Stewart's complaint argues that Airbnb had failed to stop discriminatory conduct on its platform and allowed minority applicants to face unequal treatment.

Questions about racial discrimination on Airbnb have surfaced repeatedly over the past decade. A 2015 Harvard Business School study found that guests with African-American-sounding names were nearly 10% more likely to have booking requests rejected than otherwise identical guests, findings that contributed to calls for stronger safeguards.

The US is mulling the deployment of its nuclear weapons to more NATO states in Europe, the Financial Times has reported, citing sources familiar with the discussions. Russia has already said that any NATO nuclear moves toward its borders would not go unanswered.

The potential move comes as Washington seeks to reassure allies unsettled by plans to reduce US troop numbers and critical weapons systems in Europe and redirect some resources to Asia and other regions, the FT said on Tuesday.

The US is broadly scaling back its military presence in Europe, where more than 80,000 US troops were stationed in 2025 under a system of combined territorial defense and deterrence dating back to the end of World War II.

The FT paper described the talks as “highly confidential” and said they may not lead to any changes in existing nuclear-sharing arrangements. Currently six NATO countries host US nuclear weapons and dual-capable aircraft (DCA) certified to deliver them – Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Türkiye, and the UK.

Several NATO members on the bloc’s eastern flank, including Poland and some Baltic states, have expressed interest in hosting US nuclear weapons and DCA, people familiar with the matter told the FT.

Moscow has repeatedly voiced concern over NATO’s buildup in Europe, condemning the region’s militarization and the bloc’s intensified military activity near its western borders.

Russia argues that Western governments are using “ostentatious Russophobia” to justify turning the EU into a military bloc and to divert attention away from domestic issues.

The Kremlin has stated that it has no intention of attacking any NATO nation, but has warned that it would aim its nuclear arsenal at countries hosting weapons directed at Russia.

Israel and Lebanon have agreed to implement a renewed ceasefire that requires the militant group Hezbollah to stop firing and withdraw from southern Lebanon, according to a joint statement released after US-mediated talks at the State Department on Wednesday.

The talks followed weeks of Israeli strikes and ground operations in Lebanon, as well as Hezbollah rocket and drone attacks on northern Israel. Washington has said previous ceasefire efforts were undermined by Hezbollah attacks carried out without the approval of the Lebanese government.

“The ceasefire is contingent on a complete cessation of Hizbollah fire and the evacuation of all Hizbollah operatives from the South Litani Sector,” the joint statement read.

“The two sides agreed with the guidance of the United States to swiftly advance the creation of pilot zones in which the Lebanese Armed Forces will take exclusive control of the territory to the exclusion of all non-state actors.”

Lebanon previously demanded that Israel withdraw from its territory as part of any lasting arrangement, while Israel has insisted that Hezbollah must be removed from the border area before it ends its operations.

Israel sent troops across the border after Hezbollah supported Iran in the face of the US-Israeli attack in February, and renewed its ground push in recent weeks, including the capture of Beaufort Castle, also known as Qalaat al-Chakif.

The 900-year-old Crusader fortress, located on a strategic hilltop, was previously used by Israel as a base during its two-decade occupation of the region, which ended in 2000. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the move a “dramatic shift” and said he had ordered the military “to expand its ground maneuver in Lebanon.”

US President Donald Trump called Netanyahu “f***ing crazy” during a heated phone conversation after the Israeli leader threatened to bomb Beirut again, Axios reported.

Kuwait’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation has released a video it says shows the moment an alleged Iranian drone hit a terminal at Kuwait International Airport on June 3.

The agency described the incident as a “brutal Iranian drone attack,” saying it caused loss of life, serious injuries, and extensive material damage.

Kuwait’s Foreign Ministry previously said at least one person had been killed when a projectile struck Terminal 1 at the airport and other “vital facilities,” including diplomatic missions. Several other people were injured, the ministry added, without giving a number.

اللحظات الأولى للاعتداء الإيراني الغاشم من قبل المسيرات الذي تعرض له مبنى الركاب T1 في مطار الكويت الدولي بتاريخ 3 يونيو 2026 وتسبب بخسائر بالأرواح وإصابات بشرية بليغة وأضرار مادية جسيمة

The first moments following the brutal Iranian drone attack on Terminal 1 (T1) at Kuwait… pic.twitter.com/eTzQoVXB4K

— الطيران المدني (@Kuwait_DGCA) June 3, 2026

Tehran has denied deliberately targeting the passenger terminal. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) claimed earlier that the damage was likely caused by a US Patriot missile launched to defend an American base in Kuwait from Iranian strikes.

The incident followed an exchange of US and Iranian strikes. The IRGC said it had launched attacks on US military bases in Kuwait and Bahrain, including the US Fifth Fleet headquarters, after American strikes on Qeshm Island.

The US Department of War claimed that Iranian missiles fired at Kuwait failed to hit their targets, saying two projectiles fell short or broke apart en route. Kuwait said its air defenses were responding to missile and drone attacks during the incident.

US President Donald Trump has confirmed reports that he called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “f***ing crazy” during a heated phone conversation over Israel’s military operations in Lebanon.

Axios reported earlier this week that Trump had angrily urged Netanyahu to cancel planned strikes on Beirut, warning that further escalation could jeopardize ongoing US-Iran negotiations and a fragile regional ceasefire.

Speaking on the New York Post’s ‘Pod Force One’ podcast on Wednesday, Trump acknowledged using the language attributed to him.

“I did,” Trump said when asked whether he had called Netanyahu “f***ing crazy.” 

“I was a little bit perturbed at his constantly fighting with Lebanon. At some point I said, ‘We gotta stop this. We gotta stop it.’” Trump added that he still had a “very good relationship” with the Israeli leader.

The US president also dismissed claims that Netanyahu had pushed him into the conflict with Iran, saying anyone making such accusations was “the enemy.”

Lebanese health authorities said on Wednesday that more than 3,500 people have been killed in Israeli attacks since early March. The escalation has drawn criticism from Tehran, which insists that the US-Iran ceasefire framework also covers Lebanon.

Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned on Tuesday that continued Israeli operations could derail diplomacy.

“If the Israeli aggression against Lebanon continues, we will not only halt the path of negotiations, but we will also be in direct confrontation with the enemy,” he wrote on X.

The tensions come as the eight-week-old ceasefire between Iran and the US faces renewed strain. US Central Command said it carried out “self-defense strikes” on Iran’s Qeshm Island on Wednesday, while the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it targeted US-linked assets in the Gulf in retaliation for recent American attacks. Kuwait International Airport was reportedly struck during the exchange.

Germany has failed to win a temporary seat on the UN Security Council for the first time in modern history, losing a General Assembly vote to Austria and Portugal. Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul called the outcome “a real disappointment” and blamed Russia for the loss.

“There is our firm support for Ukraine; the fact that Russia does not want such a voice at ​the Security Council,” he told reporters after the news broke.

Portugal won 134 votes and Austria 131 in the contest for two seats allocated to the Western Europe and Others group, while Germany received only 104 votes in a secret ballot on Wednesday.

Zimbabwe and Trinidad and Tobago were elected unopposed to seats reserved for Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean, respectively.

Kyrgyzstan secured the Asia-Pacific seat after defeating the Philippines. The five incoming elected members will replace Pakistan, Somalia, Greece, Denmark, and Panama for a two-year term beginning on January 1, 2027.

The vote was presided over by former German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, who is serving as president of the UN General Assembly.

Austria Wins UN Security Council Seat for 2027–28, Defeating Germany. Watch how Austria celebrates #austria #unitednations #un #securitycouncil pic.twitter.com/qsr9im2YVq

— Markus Iser (@maecx) June 3, 2026

Germany’s failed bid marked a break from its previous Security Council campaigns, which were traditionally preceded by years of coordination within the Western group. In earlier races for the 1977–1978, 1987–1988, 1995–1996, 2003–2004, 2011–2012, and 2019–2020 terms, Berlin either ran unopposed or entered as a clear favorite, and chose to stay on the sidelines when facing serious competitors.

Germany has also long sought a permanent seat on the Security Council, arguing that the body must be expanded to better reflect today’s political and economic realities, while also promoting itself as a major UN donor and supporter of multilateralism.

Wadephul said last year that the council should include additional permanent and non-permanent seats, especially for underrepresented regions in Africa, Asia, and Latin America.

African leaders have called for at least two permanent seats for the continent, while UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has described Africa’s exclusion from permanent membership as “indefensible.”

India has also pushed for permanent membership, saying it is “eminently suited” for the role and citing its population, economy, democratic system, and UN peacekeeping record. New Delhi is also using its Voice of Global South initiative to cast itself as a representative of developing nations in debates over global governance.

The Security Council has 15 members: five permanent veto-holders – Russia, China, the US, the UK, and France – and ten elected members, half of which are replaced each year for staggered two-year terms.

Clashes have broken out in the UK city of Southampton after hundreds of people gathered to protest the murder of 18-year-old student Henry Nowak and his treatment at the hands of police in his final minutes.

The rally on Tuesday followed the release of police bodycam footage from last year showing officers handcuffing Nowak, who had been stabbed. Police ignored Nowak’s pleas for help after his murderer, Vickrum Singh Digwa, falsely accused the student of carrying out a racist attack.

The footage revived debate over claims of unequal police treatment of different ethnic groups, known as “two-tier policing,” and sparked nationwide outrage.

The protesters initially gathered outside the city center police station on Tuesday before moving closer to the home of Nowak’s killer, Digwa.

Protests in Southhampton continue with police now protecting the home of Vickrum Digwa's family following the release of the horrific bodycam footage of Henry Nowak. pic.twitter.com/sHTGpXRvHZ

— Pacific Wire (@ChynoNews) June 2, 2026

Rally participants chanted Nowak’s name and “I can’t breathe” – the words he had repeated while being arrested. Activist Tommy Robinson joined the protest, telling the crowd that the case was “about race.”

Violence broke out, with videos on social media showing the crowd pelting riot police with various objects. Chairs, cans, flares, bricks, bins, and an e-scooter were reportedly thrown at officers, forcing them to retreat from some areas.

🇬🇧 Ingleses partem para cima da polícia que protegeu um muçulmano assassino.

As cenas da morte do estudante inglês Henry Nowak, esfaqueado por um muçulmano, enfureceram a população de Southhampton. pic.twitter.com/OJbY1KEucK

— Rafael Fontana (@RafaelFontana) June 3, 2026

Police responded by pushing back, including by hitting the protesters with riot shields. Eleven officers as well as a police dog were injured in the clashes, according to reports. Two people were arrested over the incidents, with police indicating that the number of arrests will increase as they review footage from the scene.

Riot erupts in Southampton between police and protesters as Henry Nowak protest turns ugly. Full video on YT. #henrynowak #Southampton pic.twitter.com/ItfF9XNBIm

— Urban Pictures (@Urban_Pictures) June 3, 2026

Prime Minister Keir Starmer denounced the violence at the protest as “disgraceful and completely unacceptable.” He also criticized Reform UK leader Nigel Farage for what he called an “unforgivable” response to Nowak’s murder. Farage had earlier called on the British public to respond to the incident with “pure, cold rage” and called it a proof of “two-tier culture” in the UK. 

The damage to Kuwait International Airport’s Terminal 1 was likely caused by a US Patriot missile launched to defend a regional American military base from an Iranian attack, Tehran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has claimed.

However, footage later released by Kuwait’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation appears to dispute this claim.

The incident took place during a US-Iranian missile exchange on Wednesday, triggered by an American attack on a tanker en route to Kharg Island and what CENTCOM called “self-defense strikes” on Qeshm Island.

“Our investigation and research into the Kuwaiti passenger terminal attack shows that the IRGC’s air force did not fire at this target, and the destruction of the Kuwaiti airport passenger terminal was caused by an error in the American Patriot systems, which landed on this terminal after failing to intercept Iranian missiles,” an IRGC spokesman announced on Wednesday.

A video obtained by RT purports to show the aftermath of the strike. A short clip appears to show the inside of a terminal building filled with smoke and dust. Pieces of debris can be seen lying on the floor with several fires visible, including on the roof.

The Foreign Ministry did not comment on the extent of the damage inflicted on the airport. It condemned what it called Iran’s “aggressive attacks” and blamed it for “increased escalation” and “heightened tension” in the Middle East. It also warned that Kuwait “reserves its full and inherent right” to respond.

The escalation comes almost 100 days into the conflict and nearly two months after the US and Iran reached a fragile ceasefire after over a month of active hostilities. Tehran halted negotiations with Washington earlier this week over the ongoing Israeli offensive in Lebanon.

Iran also restricted traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a key energy chokepoint, after the US-Israeli attack in February, while Washington began a naval blockade of Iranian ports.

The murder of 18-year-old student Henry Nowak has sparked national outrage in the UK after police bodycam footage submitted to court showed officers arresting and handcuffing him as he lay dying, while his killer remained uncuffed after falsely claiming to be the victim of a racist attack.

The case has triggered protests, renewed accusations of two-tier policing, and an investigation into how British authorities handled the incident.

Who was Henry Nowak?

Nowak was an 18-year-old University of Southampton student from Chafford Hundred, east of London in Essex. He was walking back to his student accommodation on December 3, 2025, when he was attacked in Belmont Road.

Who killed Henry Nowak?

Vickrum Singh Digwa is a 23-year-old Sikh from Southampton who had no previous convictions before the murder. He lived with his family on St. Denys Road in Southampton and had been helping his brother with Deliveroo deliveries on the night of the attack.

Prosecutors, however, have described him as a man with a “weapons obsession.” A British court heard that he had trained with weapons since the age of 12, slept in a bedroom surrounded by weapons, and had frequently searched for weapons on his phone.

Police reportedly also found a cache of more than 20 weapons at Digwa’s family home, including flick knives, knuckledusters, swords, a machete, an extendable baton, an axe, and an air rifle.

The murder

On December 3, 2025, while en route to his accommodation in Southampton, Nowak encountered Digwa in Belmont Road.

Shortly before the attack, Nowak recorded Digwa openly wearing a large blade hitched on his belt. In the video, Nowak can be heard saying: “You’re a bad man, say you’re a bad man,” to which Digwa replies: “I am a bad man.” The video cut off after that.

Digwa then stabbed Nowak five times, including wounds to the backs of his legs and a fatal wound to the heart. Police later found Nowak’s phone hidden in Digwa’s pocket.

The police response

Police were called to the scene by Digwa’s brother Gurpreet, who told officers that they had “just been attacked racially by some white person.” This was a lie.

When officers arrived, Digwa told police that Nowak had racially abused him, punched him, grabbed his hair, and torn off his turban. Police believed Digwa’s account and treated Nowak as the suspect.

Bodycam footage showed officers handcuffing Nowak, who was lying on the ground and repeatedly telling them he had been stabbed and could not breathe. One officer responded: “Don’t think you have, mate.”

Nowak was dragged across gravel, placed under arrest for assault, and left in handcuffs as he lost consciousness and drowned in his own blood.

Digwa, who still had the murder weapon on him, was not handcuffed.

The trial

Digwa was arrested after officers eventually realized Nowak had been stabbed, and was later charged with murder and possession of a bladed article in a public place. He denied murder and claimed he had acted in self-defense.

His defense argued that Digwa was attacked first and feared that Nowak could use his blade against him. Digwa also claimed he had not realized he had inflicted the fatal chest wound.
Prosecutors rejected that account, describing the racism allegation as a “wicked lie” and claiming that Digwa attacked Nowak without provocation, filmed him while he was wounded, and did not immediately call police or an ambulance. The court also heard that Nowak’s phone, found hidden in Digwa’s pocket, contained no evidence of racial abuse.

Has Digwa been sentenced for the murder of Nowak?

The jury convicted Digwa on May 28 and on Monday, he was sentenced to life in prison with a minimum term of 21 years.

Digwa’s mother, Kiran Kaur, was also found guilty of assisting an offender after hiding the murder weapon and will be sentenced on July 17.

Less than a day after Digwa was sentenced, he appeared again at Southampton Magistrates’ Court alongside his father Moga Singh, 52, and brother Gurpreet, 27, on separate weapons charges linked to the cache found at the family home.

The religious weapon argument

Digwa attempted to justify carrying a blade by citing his Sikh faith. Practising Sikhs are legally allowed to carry a small ceremonial knife known as a kirpan.

🇬🇧 This is the knife that Vickrum Digwa used to kill Henry Nowak

He said he carried it as part of his Sikh faith

Sikhs in the UK are allowed to carry knives called Kirpans, but for regular Brits, if they carry a knife the same size, they face a prison sentence

Baptized Sikhs… https://t.co/a80RqLpo6T pic.twitter.com/WJ7956fy51

— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) June 2, 2026

The court heard, however, that Digwa was carrying both a small traditional kirpan concealed under his clothing and a much larger 21 cm knife worn openly on his belt, with which he stabbed Nowak five times.

Judge William Mousley KC rejected Digwa’s attempt to link the killing weapon to Sikh religious practice, telling him that he had brought shame upon his family, his community and his religion.

‘Inhumane and degrading’

The case has prompted outrage and condemnation across Britain, with much of the anger focused not only on the killing itself but on the way police treated Nowak after accepting Digwa’s false racism allegation.

Nowak’s father, Mark, said his son “did not die with dignity” and described the police treatment as “inhumane and degrading.”

“Henry told officers that he could not breathe nine times. He told them that he had been stabbed four times,” he said. He contrasted this with Digwa’s treatment, saying the killer was believed, initially left uncuffed, and later taken inside the family home, where police “even took him to the kitchen so he could choose his food.”

How have UK politicians reacted to Nowak’s death?

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage called on the British public to respond with “pure, cold rage.” In a statement on Tuesday, Farage described the case as “proof, if ever there was any, that we’re living in a two-tier culture in this country where the rights and privileges of white people matter less than those of ethnic minorities.”

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch called the footage “awful,” said there had been “multiple failures,” and urged the government to treat the case as seriously as it had treated the killing of George Floyd in the US.

The fear of being called racist was greater than dealing with Henry Nowak’s murder.

We should respond to this with pure cold rage.

Britain’s historic way of life is being thrown away. pic.twitter.com/4N6vL76q1F

— Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) June 2, 2026

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the bodycam footage was “really harrowing” and that there were “serious questions for police,” including how accusations of racism shaped their decision-making. However, he rejected claims that Britain has a problem with “two-tier policing.”

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood also warned MPs against politicizing the case, insisting it was about murder, not about Sikhism or race.

Public outrage and protests

Public anger escalated after Digwa’s sentencing and the release of the police bodycam footage. Hundreds of protesters gathered in Southampton, outside the city’s police station and later near the Digwa family home chanting Nowak’s name and “I can’t breathe.”

Riot erupts in Southampton between police and protesters as Henry Nowak protest turns ugly. Full video on YT. #henrynowak #Southampton pic.twitter.com/ItfF9XNBIm

— Urban Pictures (@Urban_Pictures) June 3, 2026

Activist Tommy Robinson addressed the crowd outside the police station, telling demonstrators the case was “about race.” Violence erupted. Chairs, cans, flares, bricks, bins and an e-scooter were reportedly thrown at riot police, forcing officers to retreat in some areas. Eleven officers and a police dog were injured, according to reports.

Two people have been arrested so far while police said they are reviewing footage and could make additional arrests.

The Nowak case has renewed the broader debate over “two-tier policing” and whether the British authorities hesitate to act against minority suspects, even in cases of serious violence, while responding harshly to public anger over immigration and crime.

Some examples include the 2023 Nottingham murders, when a paranoid schizophrenic migrant killed three people after mental health workers released him out of fear of being perceived as racist, and the 2024 Southport murders, where police appeared to grant leniency and refused to disclose the identity of a Rwandan teenager who killed three young girls and injured ten others at a dance class.

The protests that erupted in response have been met with rapid arrests and prison sentences while the British government has faced accusations of cracking down on free speech and arresting citizens for any form of criticism of immigration, crime, and policing failures.

How is the British establishment reacting to public anger over Nowak’s death?

In parliament, Starmer commended Nowak’s family for showing “extraordinary dignity” after his life was “stolen in appalling circumstances.” He said there were “serious questions to answer,” but condemned the Southampton clashes as “disgraceful and completely unacceptable.”

“This is a time for serious work, not rage,” the prime minister said.

Policing minister Sarah Jones has also appealed for calm.

The National Police Chiefs’ Council is reviewing its anti-racism commitments after MPs raised concerns that the guidance could encourage officers to treat people differently based on ethnicity.

The Independent Office for Police Conduct is reviewing bodycam footage and trial material and is expected to report within three months.

Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary has apologized for how Nowak was treated. One of the four officers involved has resigned, while the other three continue to serve and are being treated as witnesses.

The Attorney General’s Office is also considering requests to review Digwa’s sentence under the unduly lenient sentence scheme.

Hungary has lifted its veto on Ukraine beginning formal accession talks with the EU, following days of hints from Prime Minister Peter Magyar and strategic leaks from Brussels, whose reporters announced the news with much fanfare on Wednesday.

Will Magyar compromise on Hungarian rights?

In the hours following the announcement Magyar claimed that a "comprehensive agreement on the linguistic, educational, cultural and political rights of the 100,000-strong Hungarian minority,” has been reached with Kiev, but no confirmation has come from the Ukrainian capital.

Speaking alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Berlin on Tuesday, Magyar said that he was “very optimistic” that a deal could be done to guarantee the rights of Ukraine’s Hungarian minority, in exchange for his government lifting the veto. 

Hungary's PM Péter Magyar on Ukraine:

I can repeat here in Berlin: I am ready to meet President Zelensky early next week. If we truly succeed in agreeing on these fundamental human rights...

Using your mother tongue in a kindergarten, a school, in administration — that is not… pic.twitter.com/m6mn5YrmUA

— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 2, 2026

“The negotiations are progressing encouragingly,” he said, adding “I am ready to meet with Ukraine’s president at the beginning of next week, if we manage to agree on these fundamental human rights.”

Within an hour of Magyar’s statement, Politico published an article claiming that Budapest had privately “signaled it will drop its long-standing opposition to Ukraine’s bid for EU membership,” citing four unnamed diplomats.

How did Politico try to influence EU members on Ukraine? 

Politico, the Axel Springer-owned Brussels insider, reported that Magyar’s government had “privately signaled openness to lifting its veto following a meeting on Monday between Ukrainian and Hungarian experts.” The Ukrainian side, the outlet claimed, provided verbal assurances that they would resolve most of Hungary’s concerns – including the Hungarian minority’s right to use their native language in schools – and formal accession talks with Ukraine and Moldova will be opened at an EU leaders’ summit on June 15.

Why was Politico’s article important?

That this story first appeared on Politico was likely no coincidence. Politico’s neoliberal, Atlantacist worldview is literally written into the constitution of its owner, Axel Springer, and its journalists’ proximity to power in Brussels has made it the outlet of choice for all kinds of strategic communications from within the EU machine – from telegraphed policy moves like Tuesday’s report, to outsourced smear campaigns.

Further hit pieces – all of them citing EU diplomats and officials – followed, claiming that “Europe is failing Ukraine,” de Wever “fears retaliation from [Russian President Vladimir] Putin,” and “Europe still doesn’t want to pay to save Ukraine.”

Magyar’s predecessor, Viktor Orban, derided Politico as “the Brusselian elite’s official publication” after it named him 2025’s “disruptor of the year.”

How are Hungarians treated in Ukraine?

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, around 156,000 ethnic Hungarians found themselves trapped within Ukraine’s borders, after Kiev refused to recognize a successful self-rule referendum in the region of Transcarpathia. Relations between Budapest and Kiev rapidly declined from 2017 onwards, when Ukraine passed a series of laws mandating the sole use of the Ukrainian language in schools and local government.

Tensions were further inflamed after 2022, when the Ukrainian military targeted Transcarpathians in what the Hungarian Foreign Ministry called a “brutal” military draft.

[4] Soldiers raided a coffee shop in the district of Beregsász (Berehove). Beregszász is the closest city to the Hungarian border just 5km away. The city is demographically 48% Hungarian. pic.twitter.com/FlICxr1Oie

— Based Hungary 🇭🇺 (@HungaryBased) January 22, 2023

Ukraine’s language laws have been criticized by the Council of Europe’s Venice Commission for failing to safeguard minorities’ linguistic rights, and condemned by human rights organizations. 

Why lift the veto now?

Orban maintained that Ukraine joining the EU would drag the bloc into open war with Russia, undercut Hungary’s agricultural sector, and effectively give a free pass to the corruption and criminality of the Ukrainian government. However, the Transcarpathia issue was the brightest of red lines for Orban, with the then-prime minister declaring in 2023 that Hungary “will not support Ukraine in any issue in international life until the previous laws that guaranteed the rights of Transcarpathian Hungarians are returned.”

More than 2 million Hungarians have made their will clear: NO to Ukraine’s EU accession! ❌ Their voice cannot be ignored, we cannot consent to decisions that go against their will. Ukraine’s EU membership would mean the ruin of the European Union, we must not and will not allow… pic.twitter.com/AOUdxUu3iO

— Orbán Viktor (@PM_ViktorOrban) June 27, 2025

Anita Orban, Magyar’s foreign minister (and no relation of Viktor), has maintained this policy, telling an interviewer last month that “until the situation of the Hungarian minority in Ukraine is resolved, we cannot make progress in any other area.”

Hungary’s concerns are laid out in an 11-point plan. Anita Orban has refused to say whether her government would compromise on these demands, but Politico noted that Ukraine would address “most” – but not all – of the points, and added that this would be done without “passing new legislation in Ukraine.”

All of this suggests that the Ukraine's language laws have not been repealed or replaced, but that Magyar has been forced to abandon some of the document’s points, which have not been made public.

It is unclear, but likely, that Magyar and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen addressed Ukrainian membership of the EU when they met to discuss frozen funding for Hungary last week. 

Could anyone else block Ukrainian attempts to join the EU?

With Viktor Orban out of office, Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is now considered the EU’s most Ukraine-skeptic head of state. However, while Fico maintains cordial relations with Russia and opposes all military aid to Ukraine, Zelensky claimed that the Slovak prime minister would support Ukraine’s EU membership bid after the two met in Armenia last month.

Has Zelensky’s veneration of Nazi collaborators harmed Ukraine’s EU bid?

Polish President Karol Nawrocki said last week that Ukraine “is not ready to be part of the European family,” after Zelensky granted the title ‘Heroes of the UPA’ to a Ukrainian commando unit. The UPA, or Ukrainian Insurgent Army, was the armed wing of Stepan Bandera’s Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), and collaborated with Nazi forces to murder around 100,000 Polish civilians in what is now western Ukraine between 1943 and 1945.

🚨🇵🇱 HUGE! Polish President Karol Nawrocki REJECTS Ukraine Joining the European Union:

"There is NO place in the European family for bandits and murderers who killed women and children. Such bandits cannot be glorified." pic.twitter.com/VerNXtjpPA

— Based Hungary 🇭🇺 (@HungaryBased) June 1, 2026

However, Nawrocki added that supporting Ukraine in its conflict with Russia remains Poland’s “strategic goal.” 

Even if Nawrocki wanted to block Ukrainian accession, the decision would not be his to make. Poland’s government is run by Nawrocki’s pro-Brussels rivals, and Nawrocki would be unable to veto any accession treaty without finding a majority of MPs or senators to support him.

What comes next for Ukraine?

Euronews’ report suggests a win for von der Leyen and her expansionist plans for the EU, and barring the emergence of some last-minute obstacle, formal talks will likely be confirmed on June 15. However, with the accession process in motion, all of the old issues between Kiev and its European counterparts will return to the forefront: corruption, agricultural market disruption, and the prospect of a permanent welfare recipient joining the European bloc.

These long-term issues could be far more challenging for Zelensky and his officials to solve than the Transcarpathia impasse ever was.

A Czech regional court has ordered a transgender neo-Nazi fugitive convicted of multiple offenses to be deported back to Germany, according to Reuters and Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Marla-Svenja Liebich, formerly known as Sven Liebich, had previously sparked an uproar over prison placement in Germany after undergoing a legal gender change. 

Liebich was sentenced to 18 months in prison on multiple counts in 2023, including incitement to hatred, insult, trespass, and defamation. The former member of the banned far-right group Blood and Honor appealed the sentence but lost.

In 2024, just weeks after Germany’s new Self-Determination Act came into force, Liebich legally changed gender and became officially recognized as a woman. Following the change, Liebich petitioned to serve the sentence in a women’s prison – a move that was approved by a court.

The ruling triggered a public debate, with some critics alleging tactical misuse of the law and warning of potential loopholes. German Interior Minister Aleksander Dobrindt has slammed the case as evidence of the law’s potential for abuse.

Liebich failed to report to prison in August 2025 after fleeing the country. Earlier this year, the 56-year-old was apprehended by Czech police in the western town of Krasna, near the German border, and put in pre-trial custody.

Commenting on the extradition ruling, a spokesperson for the regional court in the western Czech city of Plzen told AFP that Liebich has three days to appeal, otherwise the extradition order will become final and the German authorities are expected to take custody within ten days.

Liebich reportedly opposed extradition during an initial hearing in Plzen on May 18, arguing that it could result in placement in a men’s prison.

Liebich’s gender transition was widely regarded by commentators and critics as an attempt to mock the Self-Determination Act, introduced under the previous government. In 2022, he disrupted an LGBTQ Pride parade in the eastern German city of Halle, where activists said participants were called “parasites on society.”

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has urged the participants of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) to begin every conversation with Western journalists with the word “Starobelsk.” 

Starobelsk is a town in Russia’s Lugansk People’s Republic where 21 people, mostly teenage girls, were killed and dozens more injured in a multi-wave Ukrainian drone attack on a college dorm on May 22.

Western politicians turned a blind eye to the atrocity, while the BBC and CNN rejected an invitation by the Russian authorities to visit the site of the attack.

During her Wednesday appearance at a panel on SPIEF, entitled ‘Your Words are Like Bullets: How Information has Transformed into the Most Powerful Weapon of the Modern Era,’ Zakharova expressed outrage over BBC Russia correspondent Steve Rosenberg coming to the forum in St. Peterburg, but not to Starobelsk.

The Western media’s refusal to report on the deadly Ukrainian drone attack on the college dorm was “absolute cynicism,” the spokeswoman insisted.  

By constantly reminding them about Starobelsk, SPIEF’s guests will make Rosenberg and his colleagues understand that their position is “abnormal,” she said.

It is because of this stance by the BBC “that their population doesn’t understand what’s happening. And yet, like an obedient, zombified herd, they continue to contribute to the funding of the Kiev regime,” Zakharova stressed.

“We’ll tell [about it] today. I don’t understand why they say that the BBC is silent,” he replied.

According to Zakharova, Western leaders are well-aware what happened in Starobelsk, but they decline to talk about it in an attempt to make the public “accept the killing of people based on national, ethnic, cultural and linguistic grounds as a new ethic.” 

The only way to resist this push is to “preserve journalism as a field that deals with the media space based on objectivity, legality and morality,” she insisted.

In recent days, Israel has intensified its military campaign in Lebanon, taking the operation to a whole new level. This isn’t just another exchange of strikes in the south of the country, but a demonstrative expansion of Israel’s ground presence beyond the previous boundaries of the conflict. Israeli forces crossed the Litani River and captured Beaufort Castle, a symbolically and strategically significant fortress perched on a high cliff in southern Lebanon. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz stated that the operation was carried out at the direction of the political and military leadership, while the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) explained its objective as the elimination of Hezbollah infrastructure and fighters in the Beaufort area. 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the capture of Beaufort as a “dramatic stage and a dramatic change” in Israel’s policy in Lebanon. The goal is to deepen and expand control over areas previously under Hezbollah’s influence. Essentially, this means that Israel is no longer limiting itself to targeted strikes and border deterrence. It is now attempting to create a new military-political reality in southern Lebanon, where Hezbollah’s former zone of influence is to be transformed into an area of either ​​direct or indirect Israeli control.

The significance of these actions extends beyond the Lebanese front, however. In recent weeks, Netanyahu has essentially been playing the same game: trying to undermine any kind of agreement between Iran and the United States. The negotiation track was already extremely fragile, vague, and fraught with mutual distrust. But for Israel, even the slightest chance of a compromise between Washington and Tehran is unacceptable. If Trump finally relinquishes the idea of a direct military escalation (such a scenario is unlikely but still possible) and attempts to broker at least a temporary deal with Iran, Israel risks finding itself without the previous level of American involvement, but with the lingering threat of an ‘axis of resistance’ that has every chance of resurfacing in the near future.

Iran’s reaction was almost immediate. Tehran announced its withdrawal from negotiations with the US, citing Israel’s actions in Lebanon. Iran’s logic is understandable: the Lebanese front was seen as part of a broader ceasefire, and Tehran perceives the Israeli operation as a violation of the regional balance of agreements. For Iran, this is a convenient argument to demonstrate that Washington is either incapable of controlling Israel’s actions or is deliberately allowing them while talking about de-escalation.

In other words, Netanyahu achieved the intended effect: US-Iran negotiations have come under additional pressure. Israel formally explains the operation as necessary to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure and ensure the security of Israel’s northern regions. But politically, it appears to be an attempt to disrupt any – even temporary –  stabilization of the situation between Washington and Tehran. For Netanyahu, a ceasefire is dangerous because it would draw attention back to the responsibilities of his government, the internal crisis, and the cost of a protracted war. The continuation of the conflict, however, gives a legitimate reason to declare a state of emergency, issue mobilization orders, and focus on security. 

In this situation, the US has proposed a new ceasefire initiative to Israel and Lebanon. The American plan appears quite pragmatic: in the first stage, Hezbollah must cease all attacks on Israeli territory, and Israel, in turn, would refrain from escalating the conflict in Beirut. In other words, Washington is not so much trying to resolve the Lebanese crisis definitively as to urgently stop its escalation before it derails the broader plan, which primarily involves negotiations with Iran.

Trump himself later confirmed that he talked with Netanyahu but did not reveal what they discussed, limiting himself to a general statement about his hope for a quick agreement. However, this is precisely where the main political paradox emerges: Trump had already declared peace, had already tried to portray the situation as a move toward de-escalation, and had already talked about a ceasefire. But in practice, this did not deter Israel. West Jerusalem continued to act as it saw fit, while Washington once again found itself publicly calling for restraint but unwilling to actually constrain the Israeli leadership.

It is no coincidence that the far-right, extremely radical Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said, “This is the time to tell our friend, President Trump, ‘no’.” Ben-Gvir essentially articulated what Netanyahu is doing in practice: Israel is ready to accept US support, US diplomatic cover, and US security guarantees, but is not prepared to automatically submit to American demands if that means stopping the war. Ben-Gvir is simply stating what the radical wing of Israeli politics has long demanded of Netanyahu: not to agree to a ceasefire, not to give in to US pressure, and not to allow Trump to turn the Lebanese front into part of his deal with Iran.

Therein lies the weakness of the American position. Trump may get angry, shout, and exert pressure on Netanyahu, demanding not to attack Beirut, but Netanyahu operates on a different basis: that no matter what Israel does, the US will still be forced to support it. For the Israeli prime minister, this is not just a show of diplomatic confidence; it is the foundation of his entire current strategy. He understands that Washington cannot afford an open break with Israel, especially in the face of a confrontation with Iran and pressure from the pro-Israel lobby within the US political system.

The main point is that Netanyahu is not interested in ending the war. A ceasefire deprives him of his main political resource: state of emergency mobilization. As long as the war continues, he can talk about security, the survival of the state, and the fight against Hezbollah and Iran. As soon as a real ceasefire is established, questions of his personal responsibility, the internal crisis, Israel’s international isolation, and the price the country is paying for the protracted military campaign will return to the forefront.

Therefore, the current escalation in Lebanon is no surprise to anyone. The Lebanese front is increasingly turning into a mechanism for exerting pressure on Iran, the US, and the entire architecture of possible regional de-escalation; and if anyone believes that lasting peace can be achieved, I’d say they are either too optimistic or too naive.

A former Polish ambassador to Ukraine has returned a state honor awarded him in Kiev, citing Vladimir Zelensky’s veneration of Ukrainian Nazi collaborators whose units were responsible for the mass extermination and ethnic cleansing of tens of thousands of Poles during WWII. 

Bartosz Cichocki returned the state award after Ukraine held a state reburial of Andrey Melnik, who co-founded the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) in 1929 with Stepan Bandera.

Melnik’s OUN-M and Bandera’s OUN-B were directly responsible for the mass murder of over 100,000 Poles during the Volhynia and Eastern Galicia Massacres that took place between 1943 and 1945.

Zelensky also recently named a commando unit after the “Heroes of UPA,” a reference to the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, the OUN’s military wing.

In comments to the Polish Press Agency on Monday, the retired diplomat said he had handed the decoration back to the Ukrainian Embassy. He said he nevertheless supports Ukrainians fighting against Russia, as well as those opposing “historical lies and corruption.”

How has Poland reacted to Ukraine venerating nazi collaborators?

Although the glorification of UPA and Ukrainian Nazi collaborators has been part of Kiev’s policy for years, the latest gestures have triggered an unusually strong backlash in Poland.

Polish President Karol Nawrocki has called for Zelensky to be stripped of the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest state honor, and warned that a country venerating “bandits and murderers” is not ready to join “the European family.” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Zelensky’s decision had pushed a longstanding historical grievance to “a rather alarming level.”

Cichocki also received the UPA-inspired "Cross of Merit" in 2022 from then-Ukrainian Army commander-in-chief Valery Zaluzhny, frequently described in the media as a possible successor to Zelensky.

Dziękuję @CinC_AFU gen. Waleremu Załużnemu za wysokie wyróżnienie - tym zaszczytniejsze, że wręczone na marginesie wizyty Szefa @SztabGenWP gen. Rajmunda Andrzejczaka w Kijowie 🇺🇦. pic.twitter.com/Yo3Zp7wYVP

— Bartosz Cichocki (@B_Cichocki) December 21, 2022

By contrast, the Ukrainian Order of Merit was established in 1996 and does not carry the same historical baggage.

Moscow’s concern that the West tolerates ‘Nazis’ in Ukraine

Following the state reburial of Melnik, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Zelensky had once again demonstrated the “true essence” of the “regime” he leads. Moscow has long argued that Kiev’s brand of Ukrainian nationalism is rooted in Nazi ideology and fuels discriminatory policies against ethnic Russians.

“The official, state-level glorification of Nazi criminals and collaborators is taking place in the center of Europe,” Peskov said. “I don’t know if anyone in the European capitals likes this, but we don’t like it at all.”

The International Fencing Federation (FIE) has lifted all Ukraine conflict-related restrictions imposed in 2022 on Russian and Belarusian athletes, allowing them to compete under their national flags and anthems.

Numerous Olympic federations barred athletes from the two countries across dozens of sports in 2022. However, a number of international sporting bodies have since permitted some to compete individually under a neutral flag, while a few organizations dropped the bans altogether.

In a statement on Tuesday, the FIE announced that the decision will take effect starting with the 2026 Senior World Championships in Hong Kong, scheduled for July 22 to July 30.

“The decision reflects the FIE’s commitment to the fundamental principles of the Olympic Charter, including non-discrimination, equal treatment, and the universality of sport,” the federation said.

Russian and Belarusian fencers were previously allowed to return to individual international events under a neutral flag in March 2023, with restrictions similarly relaxed for team events in late 2025.

Others to lift their bans include the international federations for judo, taekwondo, and aquatic sports, as well as the governing bureau of United World Wrestling.

Russian officials have repeatedly accused Western nations of politicizing sport and pressuring federations to exclude their athletes, as well as of applying double standards with respect to other countries involved in armed conflicts.

The Pentagon has barred journalists from entering its press office after redesignating it a classified space, the latest in a series of restrictions on reporters’ access to the department. 

First reported by the Washington Post late on Monday, the move was confirmed by Acting Pentagon Press Secretary Joel Valdez, who said journalists would no longer be permitted to enter the office because speechwriters working for Secretary of War Pete Hegseth routinely handle classified information there. Access to senior public affairs officials would remain available by appointment.

“This is the most transparent War Department in history,” Valdez wrote on X, adding “No amount of spin from the Fake News media will change that.” 

This is the most transparent War Department in history. No amount of spin from the Fake News media will change that.

The Pentagon Press Office has been redesignated as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility due to speechwriters from the Office of the Secretary of War… https://t.co/tlWb1XIeOk

— Acting Press Sec Joel Valdez (@JoelValdezDOW) June 1, 2026

The restriction affects an office that for decades served as a central point of contact between journalists and Pentagon officials. Reporters were previously able to visit the area to seek comment from public affairs staff, attend informal briefings, and interact with officials without escorts.

The latest move comes amid a widening confrontation between the Pentagon and the US media under Hegseth, a former Fox News host appointed by President Donald Trump. More than a year into his tenure, the department has imposed a series of restrictions on reporters, including escort requirements inside the building and limits on access to previously open areas. 

The restrictions triggered multiple lawsuits. In March, a federal judge struck down key parts of the policy after a lawsuit filed by the NYT. The Pentagon appealed the ruling and subsequently introduced an interim requirement that journalists be escorted while inside the building. The newspaper filed a second lawsuit in May, arguing that the policy amounts to an unconstitutional attempt to restrict independent reporting on military affairs. The litigation remains ongoing.

Hegseth has repeatedly accused major media outlets of spreading “fake news” and described the reporting on the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran as an “endless stream of garbage,” comparing the Pentagon media pool to the biblical Pharisees.

Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) has said it targeted US military assets in the Persian Gulf region in retaliation for American attacks. US Central Command (CENTCOM) said its forces intercepted multiple Iranian ballistic missiles and drones and carried out “self-defense strikes” on Qeshm Island.

The incident began after a US warplane fired a Hellfire missile at an Iranian-linked tanker near the Strait of Hormuz late on Tuesday, damaging its engine room. Washington said the Botswana-flagged M/T Lexie was heading toward Kharg Island in breach of its unilaterally imposed blockade.

In response, the IRGC said it targeted an alleged US-affiliated vessel named Panaya with naval missiles.

US forces then apparently proceeded with a strike on an IRGC telecom tower, in what CENTCOM later called “self-defense strikes on an Iranian military ground control station on Qeshm Island.”

Iranian ballistic missiles fly overhead, a car crashes, and surface-to-air missile interceptors launch in a crazy video of tonight’s attack by Iran against Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait. pic.twitter.com/JAoVrytEDo

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) June 2, 2026

The IRGC then escalated with ballistic missile strikes on a “US air and helicopter base in a regional country,” as well as “the Fifth Fleet’s command center” in Bahrain.

The moment of the fall of American air defense missiles after failing to intercept in Kuwait. https://t.co/ngnGeZY1FC pic.twitter.com/t4TKKgOd3a

— IRIB (Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting) (@iribnews_irib) June 2, 2026

The US Department of War claimed that all Iranian missiles failed to hit their targets.

Two projectiles fired at Kuwait allegedly fell short or broke apart en route, while three missiles launched at Bahrain were intercepted by US and Bahraini air defense forces.

The Kuwaiti army confirmed that it was responding to missile and drone attacks, while Bahrain’s Interior Ministry urged the public to “remain calm.”

Several videos circulating online purportedly showed air defense activity overnight, with several interceptors seemingly veering off course and hitting the ground.

Two hours later, the US military claimed it had successfully intercepted an “additional wave of Iranian drones” and “ensured no American personnel or assets were harmed.”

Iran restricted traffic through the key energy chokepoint after the US-Israeli attack in February, while Washington enforced a naval blockade on Iranian ports.

The IRGC warned that any violation of ceasefire would bring a “harsh price” for the US military. CENTCOM meanwhile said its forces “remain vigilant and ready to defend against unwarranted Iranian aggression during the ongoing ceasefire.”

A man has barricaded himself inside a JPMorgan Chase bank in Bakersfield, California, with an unknown number of people inside, police have said.

The ongoing hostage situation is taking place at the Chase Bank building near Chester Avenue and 17th Street. Officers responded to the downtown branch after a bomb threat was reported at around 1 PM local time on Tuesday.

Around a dozen police cars, a tactical vehicle, and emergency responders swarmed the scene as several nearby city buildings were placed on lockdown, including City Hall North, City Hall South, the Development Services Building, and Bakersfield Police Headquarters.

Five hours into the standoff, negotiators managed to secure the safe release of two hostages, while the remaining hostages were reported to be “in good health,” according to police. Authorities have not publicly identified the suspect or said how many people remain inside.

BREAKING: The hostage situation remains ongoing at a Chase Bank in Bakersfield, California, where FBI negotiators are in contact with a suspect believed to be holding people inside and possibly armed with explosives. pic.twitter.com/8u9rpwHHlF

— Breaking911 (@Breaking911) June 3, 2026

“What I can guarantee to the community right now is that every single resource is at this this site’s disposal – SWAT team, bomb squad, K9 team, gang unit, drone team. Every single asset we have to bring this to the safest conclusion is out here right now, not just ‘cause that’s what the community needs, but that’s what you guys deserve,” said Sergeant Eric Celedon of the Bakersfield Police Department.

CHASE BANK

🚨Breaking - Police negotiate in hostage situation at Chase Bank amid bomb threat in downtown

🚨Bakersfield Police Address Bomb Treat at Downtown Bank

June 2, 2026

Evacuations are underway and streets are closed in downtown Bakersfield due to a hostage situation… pic.twitter.com/aV9cUX1DRj

— Sid (@Trending_Sid) June 2, 2026

JPMorgan Chase spokesman Peter Kelley said the bank was working with law enforcement, adding: “Our focus is on the safety of everyone involved.”

DETAILS TO FOLLOW

The remains of missing Los Alamos National Laboratory employee Melissa Casias have been found in Carson National Forest, New Mexico State Police have said. A handgun was located alongside the remains, but the exact cause and manner of death have yet to be determined.

A hiker discovered human remains in the McGaffey Ridge area and notified authorities on May 28. The Office of the Medical Investigator has since positively identified the remains as those of Casias.

Casias worked as an administrative assistant at the key US nuclear research facility. She was reported missing on June 26, 2025, after she failed to arrive at work and did not return home after visiting her daughter, while her purse, identification, and cell phones were found left behind.

Another LANL employee, Anthony Chavez, 78, went missing in May 2025 and has not yet been found. Steven Garcia, 48, a government contractor at the Kansas City National Security Campus, which produces more than 80% of non-nuclear components for US nuclear weapons, similarly vanished from his Albuquerque home in August 2025, leaving behind his phone, wallet, and keys and taking only a handgun.

NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory materials official Monica Reza was reported missing in 2023, while two other JPL workers, Frank Maiwald and Michael Hicks, have died since 2023, with no cause of death made public and no foul play alleged. Retired Air Force Major General William McCasland went missing this February.

The House Oversight Committee requested briefings from the Department of Energy, the Department of War, the FBI, and NASA about scientists and other personnel connected to US nuclear secrets or rocket technology.

US President Donald Trump called the matter “pretty serious stuff,” but the authorities have so far not established any confirmed link among the cases.

The militant group Hezbollah has released a video showing its kamikaze drones attacking Israeli soldiers in the immediate vicinity of Beaufort Castle in southern Lebanon.

The 900-year-old medieval fortress was seized by the Israeli military over the weekend, with West Jerusalem hailing it as a major achievement and vowing to push deeper into the country. The castle, a key vantage point in the area, housed an Israeli military base for two decades during the occupation of southern Lebanon, which ended in 2000.

The group released footage of its FPV drones operating in the area on Monday, a day after Israel captured the castle. According to media reports, there was no Hezbollah presence at the fortress, and no military equipment or weaponry was found at the site by the IDF.

The video features two FPV drones, one of which hits a building where Israeli servicemen were sheltering, while another UAV hits an IDF Humvee, parked tightly alongside two other soft military vehicles.

The latest round of hostilities between the IDF and Hezbollah, prompted by the US-Israeli attack on Iran, has been marked by a sharp increase in the latter’s use of FPV drones.

The FPV drone threat has apparently become a major challenge for the Israeli military, with only rudimentary measures against UAVs implemented thus far. Some armored vehicles used in the invasion have been spotted featuring sub-par anti-drone nettings and cages, while stationary nets have been observed in certain locations occupied by Israeli forces supposed to protect parked vehicles.  

On Tuesday, Israeli media reported, citing sources, that the IDF command had decided to scale down heavy vehicle presence in southern Lebanon and investigate nighttime FPV drone attacks.

Western countries have been quick to point the finger at Moscow over a recent drone incident in Romania while demonstrating little interest in a comprehensive investigation into it, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN Vassily Nebenzia has said.
Multiple similar aerial incursions in the past, which were hastily assigned to Russia at first, eventually proved to be of Ukrainian origin, he noted.

Last Friday, an explosives-laden UAV crashed into an apartment block in the Romanian city of Galati near the Ukrainian border, injuring two people. Bucharest promptly claimed the drone originated from Russia and attempted to trigger NATO's article 4.

Speaking on Monday at an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, the Russian envoy suggested that Romania’s haste in convening it had been dictated by the West’s desire to create “yet another anti-Russian information wave.”
Nebenzia pointed to several inconsistencies in Bucharest’s version of events, noting that the Russian Geran 2 kamikaze drone, which, according to the Romanian authorities, hit the residential building, typically carries a payload of around 50 kilograms. A blast consistent with this amount of explosives would have inflicted far greater damage on the building than what was documented by the Romanian media.

The Russian representative also said that officials had initially alleged that the incident was a targeted attack, only for Romanian President Nicusor Dan to state a few hours later that the UAV had strayed from its intended route because of Ukrainian air defenses.

Alternative versions, including a potential provocation by Kiev, are not even being considered, the Russian diplomat stated, despite multiple Ukrainian UAVs having crashed in Latvia, Lithuania and Finland in recent months.

Nebenzia recounted a tragic incident in November 2022, which saw a missile kill two people in Poland. The West initially blamed Russia, only to acknowledge later that it was a Ukrainian S-300 air defense missile.

Moscow is ready to engage in an “objective and depoliticized” investigation with any relevant materials shared with Russia, Nebenzia said, echoing earlier remarks by President Vladimir Putin.

A Taiwanese institute has unveiled a new model of armed “robot dog” designed for coastal patrols, reconnaissance, and high-risk military missions. The machines were presented during an event in Taipei on Tuesday.

National Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology (NCSIST) demonstrated three weaponized quadruped robots walking, crouching, and navigating uneven terrain. The machines are said to be based on the Vision 60 platform developed by US firm Ghost Robotics.

The models include reconnaissance, combat, and LiDAR-equipped variants, and can be used for patrols, perimeter security, and target tracking in all-weather conditions. The robots weigh around 52kg and have a top speed of 2.5 meters per second.

Jen Kuo-Kuang, the deputy director of NCSIST’s Missile and Rocket Research Division, said the institute has already had preliminary contact with the Taiwanese military, which he said sees an urgent need for the robots in coastal surveillance, maritime patrols, and base perimeter security. 

Taipei has recently approved a special defense budget allocation of about $280 million for US arms purchases amid perennial tension with Beijing.

China considers Taiwan part of its sovereign territory – a position shared by the vast majority of countries, including Russia. Chinese President Xi Jinping has repeatedly warned that while Beijing seeks peaceful reunification with Taiwan, it would not rule out the use of force to reclaim the island if provoked.

Chinese authorities have repeatedly condemned Taipei’s ties with Washington and continued US arms sales and military cooperation with the self-governing island, describing it as interference in China’s internal affairs.

US President Donald Trump recently described arms deliveries to Taiwan as “a very good negotiating chip” with China, while also saying he supports maintaining the status quo across the Taiwan Strait.

“I believe Europe should approach China not with fear and suspicion but with confidence and a serious, open-eyed willingness to cooperate,” Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić wrote in an opinion piece for the South China Morning Post, published on the first day of his late-May state visit to Beijing – a visit he described it as the most important trip of his political career.

At a time when many Western countries frame relations with Beijing through the lens of strategic rivalry, Belgrade has chosen a different path – one based on pragmatic engagement and mutual benefit.

During the visit, which took place from May 24 to 28, Chinese President Xi Jinping awarded Vučić the Order of Friendship, the highest honor China bestows on foreign nationals. The two countries adopted two joint political statements, while 23 intergovernmental agreements and 10 additional documents involving ministries, agencies, and companies were signed. The agreements reveal a focus shifting from infrastructure financing and heavy industry toward technological integration, industrial modernization, and long-term strategic cooperation.

With almost €1 billion in newly announced investments, Serbia and China are laying the foundations for a partnership increasingly centered on innovation rather than simply construction.

Serbia 2030 and the search for a new development model

For Belgrade, the visit was fundamentally about accelerating economic development and implementing Serbia 2030, a step-by-step national modernization strategy Vučić had unveiled in March. Over the past decade, China has played a central role in Serbia’s economic transformation through investments in transport infrastructure, energy, mining, and manufacturing.

Projects such as the acquisition and revitalization of the Smederevo steel plant and the Bor mining complex demonstrated how Chinese capital could rescue strategically important sectors while preserving jobs and industrial capacity. Investments in highways, railways, bridges and energy facilities will further strengthen Serbia’s economic foundations.

Vučić has repeatedly argued that Serbia must move beyond an economic model based primarily on low-cost labor and foreign direct investment. Instead, the country aims to develop domestic technological capabilities, higher-value production, and greater economic resilience. China is uniquely positioned to support that transition.

Unlike many Western financing mechanisms, which are often slower and accompanied by extensive political and regulatory conditionality, Chinese investment offers speed, flexibility, and a willingness to engage in large-scale strategic projects – just what a country pursuing rapid modernization needs.

The visit therefore marked not merely a continuation of existing cooperation but a qualitative shift toward sectors expected to define global competitiveness in the coming decades: artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, robotics, green energy, digital infrastructure, and high technology.

Building Europe’s next technology hub

Perhaps the most intriguing aspect of the new partnership is Serbia’s ambition to become a regional center for advanced technology and innovation.

One of the most high-profile projects currently under discussion involves cooperation with Chinese technology firms in the field of humanoid robotics. Earlier this year, Vučić revealed negotiations with the Chinese company AGIBOT regarding what could become Europe’s first service-robot manufacturing facility. The proposed investment would reportedly include not only a robotics factory but also data centers supporting artificial intelligence development and machine-learning training.

Such a project would align closely with Serbia’s broader ambition to establish itself as a hub for AI and supercomputing in Southeast Europe.

The government plans to double national data-center capacity to one gigawatt by 2035, expand state-operated digital infrastructure, and develop a Serbian-language artificial intelligence model. Chinese expertise, financing, and technology transfer could significantly accelerate these objectives.

At the same time, Serbia’s geographic position offers advantages for Chinese investors. Through its network of trade agreements, preferential access to European markets, relatively competitive production costs, and willingness to engage pragmatically with international partners, Serbia is emerging as a potential gateway through which Chinese capital, technology, and manufacturing can reach broader European markets.

Trade, energy, and the new industrial partnership

Economic ties between the two countries continue to deepen. The Serbia-China Free Trade Agreement, which entered into force in 2024, has become a crucial institutional mechanism for expanding bilateral commerce. By lowering tariffs and facilitating market access, it has encouraged greater economic exchange and opened opportunities for Serbian exports.

Nevertheless, Belgrade is aware that trade growth alone is insufficient. Serbia continues to run a significant trade deficit with China, reflecting a broader challenge facing many developing and middle-income economies. Serbian policymakers increasingly recognize the need to move beyond exporting raw materials and importing finished manufactured products.

That is one reason Chinese foreign direct investment, although still highly important, has become more selective. Following years of rapid expansion, Chinese investment flows into Serbia declined in 2025 – not because their partnership has weakened, but because Belgrade is now prioritizing investments in technology-intensive sectors instead of concentrating primarily on mining and heavy industry.

Energy represents another area where Chinese cooperation could prove decisive.

Chinese nuclear companies have already expressed an interest in the Serbian market, particularly regarding small modular reactors, a technology increasingly viewed worldwide as a practical path toward reliable low-carbon electricity generation. Discussions involving the China National Nuclear Corporation have reportedly explored possible future cooperation in this field.

If realized, such projects would represent one of the most significant technological leaps in modern Serbian history.

Defense partnership

Security and defense cooperation also featured prominently in the broader context of the visit. Serbia’s policy of military neutrality requires the diversification of partnerships and procurement sources, making China an increasingly important defense partner.

In recent years, Serbia became the first European country to operate several major Chinese defense systems, including HQ-22 medium-range air-defense missiles, HQ-17 short-range air-defense systems, and CH-92A and CH-95 unmanned aerial vehicles. Additional interest reportedly exists in the long-range HQ-9B surface-to-air missile system.

Defense cooperation extends beyond procurement. Serbian and Chinese engineers have already cooperated on the development of Serbia’s own Pegaz drone, demonstrating the potential for joint technological development rather than simple buyer-seller relationships. As Belgrade seeks to digitalize its armed forces and security institutions, opportunities for cooperation in artificial intelligence, unmanned systems, cybersecurity, surveillance technologies, and data analytics are likely to expand.

Critics often portray cooperation between China and smaller European states as a source of geopolitical tension.

For Belgrade, however, engagement with Beijing is not about replacing partnerships with Europe or other international actors. Serbian officials consistently emphasize that Chinese projects complement rather than substitute for cooperation with Western partners.

Serbia needs infrastructure, technology, energy security, industrial upgrading, and strategic investment. China possesses the capital, expertise, manufacturing capacity, and long-term planning horizon to help deliver them.

The results of Vučić’s May visit indicate that both sides recognize this convergence of interests.

The “ironclad friendship” frequently invoked by Chinese and Serbian leaders is often dismissed abroad as diplomatic rhetoric. Increasingly, however, it reflects a tangible reality. From artificial intelligence laboratories and robotics factories to satellites, nuclear energy, and advanced defense technologies, the partnership is moving into areas that will define economic and strategic power in the twenty-first century.

For Serbia, the objective is rapid modernization, economic resilience, and long-term stability. China sees Serbia as a trusted European partner, willing to pursue cooperation which is grounded in mutual respect and shared development.

In a world increasingly shaped by fragmentation and geopolitical suspicion, that may be the most important message emerging from Belgrade and Beijing: nations do not have to choose between sovereignty and cooperation. Mutual interests and tangible results can turn strategic partnerships into powerful instruments of modernization and long-term stability.

EU lawmakers and state representatives have agreed in principle on new rules aimed at speeding up the deportation of rejected asylum seekers amid growing pressure across the bloc to curb illegal migration.

The agreement reached on Monday would allow EU countries to transfer rejected asylum seekers to third countries if they cannot be returned to their countries of origin. The regulation also introduces stricter rules for dealing with illegal migrants, especially those considered a security risk.

These include the possibility of home searches, welfare cuts, document confiscation, and extended detention periods which would be extended from six months to two and a half years. Entry bans would also be increased from five to ten years in most cases, with lifetime bans possible.

“For years, Europe sent the worst possible message: even if you had no right to stay, chances were high that nothing would happen. That era is ending. If you have no right to stay in Europe, you will have to leave,” French MEP Francois-Xavier Bellamy, who represented the European People’s Party in the negotiations, told Politico.

The deal still requires formal approval by EU governments and the European Parliament before it can enter into force.

The proposal was initially made by the European Commission last year in response to growing discontent with a decade-long influx of illegal migrants, which has remained one of Europe’s most divisive political issues since 2015 when roughly a million people entered the EU.

Despite Brussels and countries like Germany and Sweden initially embracing an open-door approach toward would-be asylum seekers, a number of EU states, including Austria, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Greece, have since moved to tighten asylum rules and have been pushing for return hubs to be established outside the bloc.

Rights groups and left-wing lawmakers have criticized the new EU rules, warning that they could expand detention, increase raids and expose rejected asylum seekers to unsafe conditions outside EU territory.

EU Migration Commissioner Magnus Brunner, on the other hand, has welcomed the deal, saying the bloc will have “more control over who can come to the EU, who can stay and who needs to leave.”

US President Donald Trump has tapped housing finance chief Bill Pulte to serve as acting Director of National Intelligence (DNI) in the wake of Tulsi Gabbard’s resignation.

Trump announced Pulte’s appointment in a post on his Truth Social platform on Tuesday, describing Pulte as someone with “deep experience managing the most sensitive matters in America.”

As acting DNI, Pulte will coordinate the work of the US federal government’s 18 intelligence agencies, and will be responsible for producing Trump’s daily intelligence briefing. Pulte, however, has no national security experience, having sat on the board of his family’s residential construction firm before being appointed by Trump to head the Federal Housing Finance Agency and chair mortgage groups Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac last year.

Pulte will continue to work in these roles while serving as acting DNI, Trump stated.

Gabbard, a vocal opponent of war with Iran, handed in her resignation amid speculation that she had been sidelined by Trump and his closest officials – among them Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth – while plans were drawn up to abduct Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January and attack Iran in February.

Less than two weeks before her resignation, Gabbard told the New York Post that she was investigating more than 120 US-funded biological laboratories worldwide, including more than 40 in Ukraine. Gabbard said that her probe would focus on whether these biolabs were conducting “dangerous gain-of-function research” to turn naturally occurring viruses into potential bioweapons – as the Russian military has claimed since 2022.

Little is known about Pulte’s views on the Russia/Ukraine conflict, or on the US’ war on Iran. He is considered a Trump loyalist, however, having led mortgage fraud investigations into New York Attorney General Letitia James, California Representative Eric Swalwell and Senator Adam Schiff, and Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, all Democrats whom Trump has accused of unfairly targeting him with legal proceedings.

Pulte also referred Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook to the Department of Justice over alleged mortgage fraud last year, as Trump clashed with the Fed’s then-chairman, Jerome Powell, over his refusal to introduce steep interest rate cuts.

Protectionism is pushing the EU toward economic decline, Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic has told Bloomberg, arguing that barriers to investment between Europe, China and the US are hurting growth.

Vucic made the remarks on Tuesday shortly after returning from Beijing, where he secured more than $1 billion in Chinese investment pledges for his country.

Protectionism is “killing, in the end, Europe,” and there are “too many obstacles” complicating investment flows, the Serbian president said in an interview with Bloomberg.

Vucic also warned that Europe has become complacent in the face of growing global competition. “We all live nicely. We don’t see what’s happening around us,” he said, adding that productivity would be “the toughest and the biggest issue” facing the continent.

Vucic’s remarks come amid trade rows between the EU and both China and the US, including disputes with Beijing over electric vehicle tariffs and subsidies, and with the US over tariffs, market access and industrial policy.

Under Vucic, Serbia has become one of China’s closest partners in Europe. Chinese President Xi Jinping has described bilateral ties as an “ironclad friendship,” while a free trade agreement between the two countries entered into force in 2024. The partnership has helped strengthen Serbia’s economy, one of Europe’s faster-growing in recent years, according to the IMF and World Bank.

Belgrade has also maintained ties with Russia, rejecting EU pressure to impose sanctions on Moscow and support Ukraine. Roughly 80% of Serbia’s natural gas imports come from Russia.

Unlike Serbia, the EU has sought to phase out Russian fossil fuel imports and replace them with alternative suppliers following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, which contributed to an overall economic downturn.

Brussels has criticized Vucic’s close ties with both Beijing and Moscow, urging Serbia to make a “strategic choice” of direction.

Vucic has insisted, however, that joining the EU remains Belgrade’s long-term objective.

British police have released bodycam footage showing officers ignoring the dying pleas of an 18-year-old stabbing victim, after his attacker falsely claimed that he had been the victim of a racist attack.

Released on Monday, the footage shows officers handcuffing student Henry Nowak as he lay dying after being stabbed multiple times by 23-year-old Vickrum Digwa in Southampton last year.

Nowak told the officers five times that he had been stabbed, to which one officer replied “I don’t think you have, mate.” Nowak was handcuffed and dragged across gravel, as Digwa remained uncuffed, telling officers that Nowak had torn off his turban in a racially-motivated attack.

The officers ignored Nowak’s pleas to call an ambulance and informed him that he was under arrest for assault, as he lost consciousness and drowned in his own blood.

Digwa was found guilty of murder last week and sentenced on Monday to 21 years in prison. The court heard that he attacked Nowak with no provocation, with prosecutors calling his claim of racism “a wicked lie.” Digwa’s mother was also found guilty of assisting an offender by hiding the knife that Digwa used to kill Nowak.

Speaking after the sentence was handed down, Nowak’s father told reporters that his son “did not die with dignity. He did not die with the care he deserved. He lost consciousness before anyone believed him.”

“The way he was treated was inhumane and degrading,” he continued. “His murderer, however, was afforded decency. He was believed. He was not handcuffed when arrested… police even took him to the kitchen so he could choose his food. The contrast is unbearable.”

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage called on the British people to respond with “pure, cold rage.” In a statement on Tuesday, Farage described the case as “proof, if ever there was any, that we’re living in a two-tier culture in this country where the rights and privileges of white people matter less than those of ethnic minorities.”

We are living in two-tier Britain where the rights and privileges of white people matter less than those of ethnic minorities. pic.twitter.com/e7EpE1kQrm

— Reform UK (@reformparty_uk) June 2, 2026

Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s office described the case as “shocking and harrowing,” but insisted that “there’s no such thing as two-tier policing.”

The government’s Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is currently investigating the actions of the officers.

Israel has a clear interest in prolonging US hostilities with Iran and has been successfully sabotaging efforts to reach a peace agreement, Tehran-based Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi has told RT.

The political analyst was commenting on the latest escalation of Israeli military operations against Lebanon, including strikes on Beirut, which have triggered a new surge in tensions between Washington and Tehran and could bring negotiations to a permanent halt.

Tehran has said that continued Israeli violence effectively voids the fragile ceasefire with the US, which was announced in early April. US President Donald Trump later pushed Israel to declare a similar halt to hostilities in Lebanon.

According to Axios, Trump lashed out at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during their most recent call for undermining his attempt to find an off-ramp from the conflict.

“Netanyahu is the boss. And not Netanyahu as an individual, but Netanyahu and the Zionists who support him, whether in Washington or in the Israeli regime,” Marandi said, describing how Tehran views the power balance between Iran’s two adversaries.

“Every time the negotiations seem to be getting somewhere, we see the Israeli regime and the Zionist lobby in the United States pushing back and forcing Trump to change his position and to flip-flop,” he added.

In addition to the escalation in Lebanon, the US-Iranian truce was also undermined by sporadic military operations by both sides, most of them related to American attempts to lift the Iranian blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian officials have threatened to expand the disruption of traffic to the Bab al-Mandab Strait, another strategic waterway that could be threatened by Houthi forces in Yemen.

Watch the entire interview.

The UK must prepare for the possibility of “taking the human out of the loop” using highly automated weapons systems, according to Al Carns, the parliamentary under-secretary of state for the armed forces.

Current British policy on automated weapons states that “there must be context-appropriate human involvement in weapons which identify, select and attack targets.” Carns, however, has argued that the rules may need to be loosened, claiming that countries hostile to Britain would not hesitate to deploy weapons capable of killing without human authorization.

“I always say there must be a human in the loop. But you must have the ability to take the human out of the loop when required, because our adversaries won’t care about having a human in the loop,” the MP and former commando told the Financial Times last week on the sidelines of a military drone event in Riga, Latvia.

The newspaper pointed to the US and Ukraine as examples of states already using AI for battlefield target acquisition, adding that Russia is believed to be doing the same.

Ukraine’s military, which uses Palantir technology for intelligence analysis, recently carried out a deliberate drone raid on a pedagogical college in Starobelsk, Russia, killing 21 people. Kiev denied involvement in the attack and claimed Moscow had somehow fabricated the incident.

In February, the British Ministry of Defense announced a legal review of rules governing uncrewed and autonomous weapons, saying the framework “must be updated to be fit for the current era of threat.”

Russia’s stated position on automated weapons and AI systems more broadly is that humans must remain responsible for final decisions.

“AI can advise, and the advice can even be better than anything a human can come up with on their own,” Russian President Vladimir Putin said last year. “But… the responsibility for the final decision must always fall on a particular person.”

Britain’s use of hotels to accommodate asylum seekers has come under renewed criticism after migrants housed at a historic four-star property were filmed relaxing in massage chairs.

The footage circulating online was reportedly filmed at the luxury Ramada Hotel in Solihull, near Birmingham – a 16th-century former coaching inn currently used under the British Home Office’s asylum housing scheme.

The 145-room hotel also includes a gym and en-suite rooms, according to the Daily Mail, which cited a source as saying the massage chairs had not been operational since the migrants moved into the building. The grounds include what is believed to be England’s oldest crown bowling green.

The footage drew criticism on social media, with one X user writing: “All on the taxpayer... We are paying for the comfort of people who simply don’t deserve it.” Another questioned government spending priorities, citing the growing number of Britons relying on food banks.

@dpaudits The oldest bowling green in the uk abandoned #immigration #solihull #ramada ♬ original sound - dpaudits

The debate comes amid growing concern over the cost of Britain’s asylum accommodation program. An October 2025 parliamentary report said the projected cost of housing asylum seekers has more than tripled to £15.3 billion ($21 billion), while accusing the Home Office of failing to recover tens of millions of pounds in excess profits from private contractors.

4-star hotel where illegal migrants sit back in expensive massage chairs.

Grade II listed Ramada Hotel in Solihull houses male 'guests' reclining in the chairs, which are worth thousands of pounds each.

Photos on the hotel’s website also show a well-stocked gym and rooms… pic.twitter.com/ScdscoBw1U

— Sedd (@SeddSezz) June 1, 2026

The UK is reportedly expected to spend around £2.1 billion on asylum accommodation and support this financial year, with hotel housing alone estimated to cost taxpayers roughly £5.5 million per day.

Numerous protests have been held across Britain in recent years over asylum hotels, including demonstrations at the Ramada. Immigration ranked among the public’s top concerns in 2025, with one in five Britons naming it as the country’s most pressing issue in a Gallup survey. Government figures show that more than 200,000 migrants have crossed the English Channel in small boats since 2018.

US President Donald Trump has lashed out at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over Israel’s escalation in Lebanon, Axios reported on Monday, citing two American officials and a third source briefed on the call.

Trump allegedly accused Netanyahu of endangering US negotiations with Iran and demanded that Israel halt a planned strike on Beirut, in what Axios described as one of the worst calls between the two leaders since Trump returned to office.

“You’re f***ing crazy. You’d be in prison if it weren’t for me. I’m saving your ass. Everybody hates you now. Everybody hates Israel because of this,” one official summarized Trump’s remarks to Netanyahu. A second source briefed on the call said Trump was “pissed” and yelled at Netanyahu: “What the f*** are you doing?”

The US president reportedly emphasized Israel’s right to defend itself, but raised concerns that Netanyahu had escalated in a disproportionate way in recent days, with mounting civilian casualties and whole buildings razed to target individual Hezbollah commanders.

Tehran has threatened to abandon talks with the US, since a memorandum being negotiated with Washington explicitly calls for an end to the hostilities in Lebanon. Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said he had spoken with Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and warned that Tehran’s response could go beyond halting negotiations.

“If the Israeli aggression against Lebanon continues, we will not only stop the negotiation track, but we will be in direct confrontation with the enemy,” Ghalibaf wrote on X.

Netanyahu said he told Trump that Israel would strike Beirut if Hezbollah did not stop attacking his country.

“Our position remains the same,” Netanyahu wrote, vowing to continue operations in southern Lebanon “as planned.”

Russia has urged the International Atomic Energy Agency to provide an adequate response and take practical steps over Ukrainian attacks on the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant and the nearby city of Energodar, according to Rosatom CEO Aleksey Likhachev.

Likhachev held an “extraordinary unscheduled” phone call with the IAEA leadership and Director General Rafael Grossi on Monday to discuss the “inadequacy” of the watchdog’s reaction after a Ukrainian fiber-optics-guided drone struck the machine hall of ZNPP’s sixth power unit, puncturing a hole in the building on Saturday.

The Rosatom chief described the strike as the “first targeted attack on an operating nuclear power unit in human history,” saying that Russia expects a clear response from the IAEA, including “indications of both the perpetrators and the reasons for all these strikes.”

The IAEA, which has its experts deployed at the ZNPP, acknowledged damage “consistent with the impact of a drone,” but once again stopped short of blaming Ukraine. Grossi called the strike “a serious incident that endangered key nuclear safety principles.”

“The silence, absence of assessments and personification of risks is essentially a green light for further escalation,” Likhachev told journalists after the call. “Radiation knows no borders and does not recognize passports. In this sense, any nuclear incident poses a threat to a number of countries and this threat will last for many years.”

In recent months, Kiev has also increasingly targeted infrastructure linked to the plant and in Energodar, including kindergartens, schools, roads, transport enterprises, and vehicles carrying supplies for the community, according to the Rosatom chief.

Face-to-face contacts with the IAEA will continue this week, Likhachev added. Interdepartmental consultations involving the Russian Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, Rostekhnadzor, Rosatom, and IAEA leaders are scheduled for early July.

At least 20 protesters have been arrested outside an immigrant detention center in Newark, New Jersey, after they violated a newly imposed curfew, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has said.

The arrests took place on Sunday night at the Delaney Hall facility, following days of escalating confrontations between demonstrators and law enforcement.

Officers moved in after the crowd failed to disperse. Police fired tear gas and detained the activists gathered outside the detention center following a 9:00 PM curfew, media reports said.

Don’t be this guy. pic.twitter.com/jEIrBmsG88

— Homeland Security (@DHSgov) June 1, 2026

“If you riot, you will face the consequences,” DHS said on X on Sunday, adding there would be “ZERO tolerance for rioters.” The agency also released footage showing protesters being escorted onto sheriff’s department buses, including one video of officers dragging a man from a barricade line captioned: “Don’t be this guy.”

Delaney Hall has been the epicenter of demonstrations since late May, when lawyers for detainees said a hunger strike had begun over conditions inside the facility. Those being kept there have told human rights groups they were served expired food, denied adequate medical care and subjected to abuse by authorities. The unrest intensified after Democratic officials, including New Jersey Governor Mikie Sherrill, accused operators of subjecting the immigrants to inhumane conditions and limiting access to visitors.

Newark Mayor Ras Baraka accused ICE of escalating tensions at Delaney Hall, saying the use of “riot gear, flash bangs, tear gas, and similar tactics against lawfully assembled protesters is wrong and clearly untenable.” He said the demonstrations were aimed at drawing attention to “inhumane conditions” inside the detention center.

A sweeping immigration enforcement campaign launched by Trump shortly after taking office has led to thousands of arrests nationwide. The administration has defended the crackdown as an effort to remove what it calls “the worst of the worst” criminals from the US. Public support for the campaign has weakened in recent months, with many Americans saying DHS tactics have become overly aggressive and, in some cases, resulted in violence and deaths.

In Russia-US relations, a tradition has emerged of coining catchy phrases to describe periods of rapprochement between Washington and Moscow. For example, the French term ‘détente’ (easing) was used to describe the situational compromises between the Soviet Union and the US at the height of the Cold War. And then there’s the infamous blunder by the US delegation at the 2009 Geneva talks, when a symbolic red button was presented to the Russian delegation with the word ‘peregruzka’ (overload) instead of ‘perezagruzka’ (reset) printed on it, thus ushering in the so-called ‘reset’ era at the time of the Obama administration. After US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House and the first US-Russia summit to be held in years, a new term emerged: the ‘Spirit of Anchorage’, which became a sort of political meme characterizing the interaction between the White House and the Kremlin.

Despite the varied interpretations expressed in the official statements of the two parties and the complex nature of the dialogue between Moscow and Washington, the essence of the agreements can be boiled down to a few main points:

Firstly, US sanctions are to be lifted and comprehensive bilateral relations developed (in politics, economics, culture, etc.) following the resolution of the Ukraine crisis.

Secondly, on the part of Russia, Moscow is to renounce claims to the territories of Zaporozhye and Kherson regions in their entirety, while the conflict is to be frozen along the front lines. On the part of Ukraine, Kiev is to recognize all the territories controlled by Russia as Russian, including Crimea, and withdraw its troops from Donbass. 

Thirdly, Ukraine’s neutral, non-nuclear status is to be solidified. While pursuing EU membership, Ukraine will need to address disputes with various minorities (Russian speakers, Rusyns, etc.). This should create conditions for a new Eurasian security framework and eliminate issues in relations between the EU/NATO and Russia.

To implement the compromises agreed upon in Anchorage, however, several factors must be addressed. The primary obstacle is the regime of Vladimir Zelensky. After Zelensky’s presidential term ended in 2024, he de facto usurped power under the pretext of giving the Ukrainian government extraordinary powers to consolidate the nation against an external threat. If he were to withdraw Ukrainian troops from Donbass and sign a peace agreement, Zelensky would create the necessary conditions for elections, which he would likely lose due to public fatigue from four years of war.

Moreover, any potential presidential candidate (such as Ukrainian Ambassador to the UK, former Commander-in-Chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces Valery Zaluzhny or Defense Minister Mikhail Fedorov, etc.) has every chance of winning by promoting the thesis that the current authorities are to blame for the fact that a peace deal was not signed earlier. After all, a similar peace agreement could have been signed as early as April 2022, minimizing military and civilian casualties. 

Instead, taking advantage of the voluntary withdrawal of Russian troops from Kiev and Sumy regions and prompted by former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s argument that it was impossible to sign an agreement “with a gun to one’s head,” Zelensky not only withdrew from dialogue with Russia but also passed a law prohibiting anyone from negotiating with Russia’s current government. Thus, the current leadership in Kiev has deprived itself of the political and legal tools to find a formula for resolving the conflict.

Caught between Scylla and Charybdis – i.e., Russia, with which relations have continued to deteriorate since the mid-2010s, and the US, where Donald Trump’s rise to power has placed the tensions over tariffs and the ownership of Greenland at the center of relations – current European politicians (from NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen to French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer) have set out to torpedo the peace agreements. Their aim was not so much to inflict a ‘strategic defeat’ on Russia but rather to preserve Ukraine as a sort of military and diplomatic battering ram against Russia. Kiev was to be used as a pretext to continue the militarization of European economies against the backdrop of the ongoing relocation of civilian industries to other jurisdictions (China, the USA, etc.).

However, as the US intensified its diplomatic engagement in the Ukraine conflict, Europe found itself marginalized and left out of the negotiation process, including the bilateral Russia-Ukraine talks (which resumed in the spring and summer of 2025) and the trilateral talks facilitated by the US (in early 2026). In light of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s statements on May 9 about the imminent conclusion of Russia’s Special Military Operation, Europe sought to find a way back into the negotiation process by appointing a special envoy to Moscow.

Europe’s diplomatic passivity reflects growing frustration within Donald Trump’s team. Prospects for resolving the Ukraine crisis are becoming increasingly murky as attention has shifted to another regional conflict – the war with Iran. The 40-day war against Tehran created a fundamentally different strategic landscape for the US, and finding a compromise with the Islamic Republic became a higher priority than continuing mediation between Moscow and Kiev.

After the operation in which Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro was kidnapped on January 3, 2026, Trump tried the same strategy in Iran but found himself ensnared in an asymmetric conflict. Despite significant military superiority over Iran and the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the US was not able to undermine Tehran’s resilience. Instead, these actions led to a cascade of unforeseen consequences.

Few in the White House could have anticipated that the unprovoked aggression launched by the US against Iran on February 28, 2026, would lead to Iranian strikes on US military bases and civilian infrastructure in the Gulf Arab nations, as well as a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which has triggered one of the most severe energy crises since the 1970s. As a result, gas prices in the US have surged, and the crisis is becoming the main argument against the Republicans during the upcoming midterm elections in November. If the ruling party loses its majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives, the Democrats will likely use the remaining two years before the next presidential election to pursue the impeachment of Trump, potentially paralyzing any of the current administration’s foreign policy initiatives.

In light of this, it’s important to take US Secretary of State Marco Rubio (the son of Cuban émigrés who fled communist persecution, by the way) seriously when he claims that the US is distancing itself from the Ukraine conflict. Practically speaking, this means that the ‘Spirit of Anchorage’ is more dead than alive. This sentiment has been echoed by several high-ranking officials in Russia, including Vladimir Putin’s aide, Yuri Ushakov, and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, and is further illustrated by the recent hostile actions of the US, such as refusal to grant a visa to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Alimov to attend the US General Assembly meeting in New York.

However, if there’s one lesson to be learned from the behavior of this US president, it’s that even when the spirit of cooperation seems to have faded, Donald Trump can summon it back at any moment, provided he has the political will to do so.

Unelected European Commission President ‘Queen’ Ursula von der Leyen was in Lithuania a few days ago to come up with a plan to tackle Ukrainian drones that risk regime changing European allies. The strategy? Blame Russia – the political equivalent of a universal remote to change the channel from one’s own incompetence. Not only does Russia get to be held responsible for its own stray drones, but also for Kiev’s.

So why Lithuania? Well, its president, Gitanas Nauseda, has been making proclamations about how his country won’t be used for military ops or have its sovereignty violated by drones or anything else. Okay, but what if it’s just the doing of a Ukrainian with shaky stick control – like a teenager with one hand on the gamepad and the other buried in a bag of Doritos? Except that it’s setting off national emergencies. That’s cool, right?

Meanwhile, over in Estonia, the defense ministry has already been going on about how they expect Ukraine to get its droning skills up to par so that these things don’t keep wandering into Estonian airspace. But Estonian Defense Minister Hanno Pevkur is being super philosophical about all these incursions into his country’s own airspace... and Latvia’s... and Lithuania’s, while sounding like he’s dealing with a kid who’s learning not to scribble on the walls. With regards to the Ukrainians, he said he just needs to figure out “what exactly it means and what they themselves had in mind by it.”

Right, because maybe this is just their way of expressing themselves. A few days ago, Ukrainian Foreign Minister, Andrey Sibiga admitted that this was happening in a social media post, which blamed Russia for knocking the drones off course.

I’m sure the Latvian prime minister will be psyched to hear that... Oops, I mean the FORMER Latvian PM who felt compelled to resign while detonating his defense minister’s career on the way out after Ukrainian drones started hitting his country. “The measure of public and my trust in Defense Minister Andris Sprüds has been exhausted. The Latgale drone incident was the last straw,” said now former Latvian PM Evika Silina.

Looks like an attempt by Ukraine to bring full regime change to its good Baltic pal, Latvia.

Next up: Finland? In mid-May, Helsinki airport briefly closed due to a drone before reopening. Residents were instructed to stay home. Then the Finnish president, Alexander Stubb, comes out and says that it’s alright to crawl back out from under the beds. Turns out it was just some fake news... spread en masse by Finland. The drone wasn’t delivering Putin. Not yet, at least. But maybe soon. Before 2030 for sure, in any case – as they keep saying.

As you might imagine, people really loved the Finnish authorities for interrupting their day to conduct a test run for when Putin decides to crash land via drone and ruin everyone’s afternoon sauna. Turns out that it’s actually Ukrainian drones that have been veering into Finland since at least March, according to multiple reports.

But now Queen Ursula is saying that it’s Russia that’s messing with Ukrainian drones and sending them into Baltic and Finnish airspace. If that was really the case – that Russia could predict the exact trajectory of multiple Ukrainian drones to the point of being able to simultaneously calculate the precise deflection vectors needed to push them all off course in real time with no advance warning – then why wouldn’t Russia be doing that with the Ukrainian drones that are striking Russian assets? That’s the question asked by French electronic warfare expert Olivier Dujardin, who adds that the odds of this capability actually existing is basically zero. Nonetheless, Queen Ursula and the leaders of the Baltic states appear to believe Moscow is using this alleged technology strictly to mess with them, rather than to help itself.

Ursula’s big on combating disinformation except when it comes to scratching past the surface of an inconvenient narrative that might actually force the EU to take a step closer to peace or dispel the stories they keep telling themselves.

So, basically, they’ve chalked it up to believing this fairy tale about Russia making Ukrainians suck at navigating drones, forcing them to constantly veer into Baltic airspace en masse. And now – what do you know –  here’s the foreign minister of one of those same Baltic countries, Lithuania, who apparently feels so empowered by this EU fake news that he’s rattling sabers over the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad.

“We have to show the Russians that ⁠we’re capable of penetrating the small fortress they’ve built in Kaliningrad. NATO has the capability, if necessary, to raze Russian air defences and missile bases there to the ground,” Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys said recently.

Really sounds like he’s game for peace there. The EU has this guy all riled up and psyched about war... like a puppy gets with walkies. They keep talking about fighting Russia, and he wants them to open the front door already and let the dogs of war off the leash.

Ursula now claims the EU has wanted peace from day one, but at the same time seems keen to leverage any ridiculous pretext to avoid it – even when a more rigorous examination of the facts would best serve the interests of any détente – something they seem intent on avoiding.

Looks like the EU is about as adept at navigating the road to peace as Ukraine is at directing drones.

Defense tech contractor Anduril is currently valued at $61 billion, with plans to expand and go public. But it’s a valuation that depends on its founder’s ability to hawk vaporware to the Pentagon, and to talk the US to the edge of a cataclysmic war with China.

Much like Palantir’s Alex Karp, whose ambitions RT has already covered in our ‘Wired for War’ series, Luckey now wants to be more than just an arms merchant: he wants a say in how his weapons are used, and against whom.

Anduril and the coming war on China

Speaking at West Point in May, Luckey told future US military officers that China plans to “take Taiwan,” and if successful, “they’re immediately going to hop over to Okinawa, and/or part of the Philippines, maybe part of Vietnam as well.” Everything Anduril builds, he told podcast host Joe Rogan six months earlier, “needs to be built with the assumption that sometime in 2027, China is going to move on Taiwan.”

Anduril founder Palmer Luckey says if China takes Taiwan, next targets will be Philippines, Vietnam or Japan

Xi will dig up some ancient tributary story and use it to claim Okinawa. We saw Chinese media already pushing a Ryukyu independence story

That’s the real domino effect pic.twitter.com/FCtM26kLCx

— David Walpiri (@DWalpiri) May 27, 2026

Luckey’s assumption is based on a creative interpretation of a 2022 CIA report, which claimed that Chinese President Xi Jinping plans to build a military capable of seizing the island by 2027. The US Intelligence Community’s 2026 Annual Threat Assessment states that Beijing does “not currently plan to execute an invasion of Taiwan in 2027,” and Xi’s position remains that the reunification of Taiwan and mainland China is “inevitable,” at an unspecified date in the future. 

Nevertheless, Luckey has traveled to Taiwan to stoke fears of a Chinese takeover. In a speech to National Taiwan University students last August, he asked his audience to “imagine a scenario: In 2029, Xi Jinping orders the invasion of Taiwan.”

“But after years of preparation…Taiwan is ready. Thousands of AI-powered drones spring toward the incoming Chinese fleet. Autonomous submarine systems and surface craft emerge from the sea to protect the island. Mass-producible missiles crowd the skies over Taiwan, stopping hundreds of Chinese fighter jets. The day is won.”

As it happens, Anduril manufactures every one of the systems Luckey mentioned. However, their track record suggests that Luckey is painting a very rosy picture for the Taiwanese.

Do Anduril’s weapons work?

Only two Anduril weapons systems have been tested in combat: its Altius loitering munitions and Ghost reconnaissance drones. Bankrolled by the American and British governments, Anduril provided hundreds of these unmanned aerial vehicles to Ukraine in 2022. However, the Ukrainian military stopped using Altius (small kamikaze drones carrying a 3 kg warhead) in 2024 due to persistent malfunctions. Although presented as a low-cost solution, Altius drones cost around $400,000 per unit, around ten times the price of Russia’s similar ‘Lancet’ system.

Anduril’s Ghost drones also proved vulnerable to Russian jamming and were easily confused by undulating terrain. Both Altius and Ghost UAVs failed spectacularly during demonstrations for the US military last year, as did almost every major Anduril project to date.

A fleet of unmanned attack boats running on Anduril’s ‘Lattice’ operating system refused to take commands and shut themselves down during an exercise in California last May; an anti-drone interceptor crashed in Oregon that August and caused a 22-acre fire; and the company’s flagship project, an AI-powered unmanned fighter jet named the YFQ-44A Fury, has suffered persistent delays due to mechanical failures and has been beaten to first flight by General Atomics’ YFQ-42 Dark Merlin.

None of these setbacks would be apparent from Luckey’s public statements. “Our autonomous weapons have destroyed hundreds of millions worth of Russia’s war machine,” he claimed last year, long after Ukraine rejected the Altius and Ghost systems. Two months later, Luckey confirmed the delivery of a batch of Altius drones to Taiwan, describing the sale as “an enormously consequential moment for Anduril and for the free world.” In a social media post, Anduril claimed that the US military has “consistently praised” Ghost’s reliability, despite a service member labelling the project a “clusterf**k” to Reuters.

War as a subscription service

Anduril intends to iron out these kinks, scale up production, and drive down costs to undercut legacy contractors like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and General Dynamics. But this goal presents another problem: mass-produced, low-cost weapons are only profitable if they are constantly consumed and replaced. Legacy contractors can sell big-ticket items like fighter jets and intercontinental ballistic missiles during peacetime, but Anduril’s future is tied to the likelihood of a major regional or world war. Luckey’s hawkishness on China makes sense, therefore, as a business strategy.

Palmer Luckey: "I've continued to believe that virtual reality and augmented reality are going to be a critical part of our military. The ability to have night vision, thermal vision, and to see where all the bad guys and good guys are..."pic.twitter.com/VLDcrD0LKx

— Joe Rogan Podcast News (@joeroganhq) March 26, 2026

The Pentagon is betting big on the promise of Lattice and EagleEye, handing Anduril $159 million last year to develop a prototype headset, and $967 million in 2020 to develop Lattice. However, when it comes to selling software-as-a-service to the Pentagon, Anduril is competing with established players: Palantir’s ‘Gotham’ is already in use by multiple US defense and intelligence agencies; ShieldAI’s ‘Hivemind’ has been tapped to guide the Pentagon’s ‘LUCAS’ attack drones; and Saronic’s ‘Echelon’ has been selected by the US Navy to pilot its unmanned naval attack craft.

Compared to its competitors, Lattice has come up short. “We cannot control who sees what, we cannot see what users are doing, and we cannot verify that the software itself is secure,” an internal US Army memo concluded after the platform was tested last September. After the fleet of attack boats running on Lattice became uncontrollable in California, a US Navy report highlighted “continuous operational security violations, safety violations” and mistakes by Anduril that, if left uncorrected, would present an “extreme risk to force and potential for loss of life.”

Palmer Luckey’s big break

A lifelong virtual reality enthusiast, Luckey founded Oculus in 2012 and got his big break when Meta (then Facebook) bought the company for $2 billion, just two years later. Luckey sold Oculus without ever releasing a commercial product, and Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg ended up pumping five times the sale price into it and other VR products as his misguided ‘Metaverse’ project floundered. As of January, Meta’s ‘Reality Labs’ VR division has posted $80 billion in operating losses since 2020.

According to publicly available figures, the Pentagon has spent $145 billion on this modernization drive to date. 

Anduril’s Indo-Pacific gamble

With its essentially unlimited budget, the US military has always been a sugar daddy for scammers and snake-oil salesmen, and it is inevitable that some of this money will be wasted on companies that overpromise and under-deliver. 

What’s more dangerous, however, is that this money will flow to companies willing to say and do whatever it takes to ensure that their products – effective or not – get used on the battlefield, either in conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, or in a devastating world war in the Indo-Pacific.

Luckey has said that he wants the US to stop acting as the world’s policeman and become the “world’s gun store” instead. He also maintains that defense contractors should function as extensions of the American government, and has pledged to align his arms sales with Washington’s foreign policy goals. Based on Palmer’s own words, Beijing likely heard his comments on Taiwan not only as a sales pitch, but as a statement of intent. The cost of miscalculation could be huge.

The Israeli military is targeting rescue workers in and around the city of Nabatieh as it expands its offensive into southern Lebanon, RT correspondent Ali Rida Sbeity reported from the ground on Monday.

The reporter traveled through the city, accompanying first responders as they searched for survivors amid the rubble left behind by Israeli strikes. Rescue teams “have been targeted a few times in the area,” resulting in a number of fatalities, according to Sbeity.

Moreover, Al-Najda Al-Shaabiya Hospital – one of the few medical facilities still operating in the area – came under Israeli attack over the weekend, the RT journalist reported, while noting that the situation in Nabatieh is escalating by the hour.

On Sunday, West Jerusalem announced that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had captured Beaufort Castle, also known as Qalaat al-Chakif, which is situated at a key vantage point in southern Lebanon. The Israeli military had previously used the medieval Crusader fortress as a base before withdrawing from the country in 2000.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that he has ordered the IDF to “deepen and expand our hold in places” that were supposedly under the control of Shiite militant group Hezbollah.

The development coincided with an intensification in Israeli aerial bombardment of southern Lebanon in recent days.

Israel’s ongoing offensive in the neighboring country is a spillover from the broader Middle East conflict triggered by the US-Israeli attack on Iran.

On Monday, Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported that the Islamic Republic was halting “negotiations and exchange of messages” with the US until Israel stops its military operations in Lebanon and in Gaza.

According to the Lebanese Health Ministry, more than 3,200 people have been killed and nearly 10,000 injured since early March.

Last month, the Lebanese Health Ministry accused the IDF of deliberately targeting medics during airstrikes on the country, with the UN previously estimating that at least 103 Lebanese medical workers have been killed and 230 injured during the current conflict.

All the perpetrators behind the deadly drone attack on the college dorm in the Russian town of Starobelsk must suffer a “well-deserved and inevitable punishment,” President Vladimir Putin has said.

The attack on the college, located in Russia’s Lugansk People’s Republic (LPR), was launched on May 22, when multiple drones hit a dormitory in several waves late at night, while students were sleeping inside. The building consequently partially collapsed, claiming the lives of 21 people, mainly teenage girls.

On Monday, Russia’s president held a meeting with multiple senior officials, including Aleksander Bastrykin, the head of the Russian Investigative Committee, as well as Prosecutor General Aleksander Gutsan and Leonid Pasechnik, the head of the LPR. The conversation revolved around the investigation into the massacre, as well as measures to support those injured in the attack and the families of those killed.

Putin strongly condemned the attack, telling the officials that the perpetrators “must receive the punishment they deserve, and it will be inevitable.” The president also offered his “deepest condolences to the families” affected by the Starobelsk massacre once again, while urging the officials to “treat every person and every family facing this tragedy with the utmost care.”

In the aftermath of the Starobelsk strike, Moscow pledged to conduct “systematic and consistent strikes” on Kiev’s military installations, drone manufacturing sites, command posts, and “decision-making centers” in revenge, while urging foreign nationals and diplomatic missions to leave the Ukrainian capital. 

Kiev has denied responsibility for the incident, with various officials providing conflicting accounts on the massacre, ranging from claims the dorm was actually a command post of the elite Rubicon drone unit to flat dismissal of the attack as a “fake story” by Moscow.

Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar has threatened legal action against the country’s president, demanding that the official, who was elected under his predecessor Viktor Orban, step down from office.

Magyar, whose Tisza party beat Orban’s Fidesz by a wide margin in the April general elections, has been seeking to remove key figures appointed during the 16-year rule of the former prime minister.

President Tamas Sulyok, who was elected by lawmakers in early 2024, has become the latest target for the ongoing purge, with Magyar accusing him of failing to represent “national unity” and serving the interests of Orban’s party.

“I have told the president that if he maintains his stance and does not resign, I will inform ...the lawmakers of Tisza about our legislative proposals today, and we will immediately start the necessary procedures,” Magyar said on Monday.

The president has refused to step down, and Fidesz has accused Magyar of issuing an “unlawful ultimatum.” Sulyok’s mandate runs until 2029, and Orban’s party insists he can’t be removed from office under the current legislation. Magyar, however, has threatened to use his party’s two-thirds parliamentary majority to alter the country’s constitution, introducing legislation to make it possible.

While the president holds a largely ceremonial role in Hungary, he still has the means to potentially disrupt Magyar’s effort to dismantle the legacy of Orban. The presidency can send bills back to the parliament for reconsideration, as well as refer them to the nation’s Constitutional Court for legal evaluation.

Sulyok served as president of the Hungarian Constitutional Court from 2016 until 2024, and served prior to that as its vice president.

Russia’s military pact with Afghanistan’s Taliban government stems from a pragmatic geopolitical approach to regional security, a policy expert has told RT India.

Moscow and the Taliban government signed a military cooperation pact last week, boosting a regional alliance aimed at strengthening Russia’s influence in Central Asia.

The deal was finalized during an international security forum in Moscow after a meeting between Russian Security Council Secretary Sergey Shoigu and Afghan Defense Minister Mohammad Yaqoob.

“Since the Taliban is in charge of power in Afghanistan… it is our duty to collaborate with them so as to contribute to regional security, to global security, to counter-terrorism,” Gleb Makarevich, Research Fellow of the Center of the Indo-Pacific Region, the Primakov Institute of World Economy and International Relations, told RT India.

He said Russia seeks to improve ties with the current Afghan government to “invest in regional security in broader terms.” Central Asia is a region of utmost interest for Russia, Makarevich pointed out.

“We are talking more about pragmatism because there are a lot of Soviet munitions and Russian munitions left in Afghanistan,” he said, noting that the Taliban is seeking assistance in repairing those arms and to collaborate in the defense sector.

Makarevich asserted that Moscow’s approach is to seek regional solutions to problems originating in these theaters, while acknowledging that Russia can’t resolve all those issues.

Türkiye’s domestic political landscape has entered a phase in which judicial decisions, intra-party struggles and strategic calculations by the authorities are becoming increasingly intertwined.

The arrest of Ekrem Imamoglu, the mayor of Istanbul from the center-left opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), in 2025 and the subsequent court decision to remove Ozgur Ozel from the leadership of the CHP and transfer control of the party back to its previous leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu represent two connected episodes within a broader political process. They suggest that the Turkish political system is preparing for a period of heightened uncertainty, in which future elections will be seen not merely as a routine electoral procedure, but as a contest over whether the system which has been shaped over the past two decades will be preserved or revised.

A rival in Istanbul

Imamoglu was detained on March 19, 2025 on charges of corruption and abuse of office, and was later arrested. The timing was especially significant, since the CHP was preparing to name its candidate for a future presidential race, and Imamoglu was widely viewed as the most likely figure to be nominated. By that moment, his political weight had already moved far beyond municipal politics. After his victory in Istanbul, he had become one of the most recognizable figures in the opposition and a potential national rival to Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Istanbul has always been exceptionally important in Turkish politics, being the country’s economic center, a symbol of political legitimacy and the place where Erdogan’s own national career first took shape. The rise of Imamoglu therefore meant the emergence of an opposition figure capable of weaponizing urban discontent, the demand for economic normalization and expectations of institutional renewal. His arrest moved political competition from the sphere of electoral rivalry into the sphere of legal and administrative control.

Destabilizing the opposition

The current court decision regarding Ozgur Ozel should be seen as a continuation of the same strategy. The judicial removal of Ozel from the leadership of the CHP (over alleged issues regarding the legitimacy of the party congress and procedural violations) and the transfer of control to Kemal Kilicdaroglu effectively sets the country’s main opposition force back to its previous configuration.

Ozel took over the CHP after Kilicdaroglu’s defeat in the 2023 presidential election and became a symbol of the party’s attempt at renewal. Under his leadership, the party achieved major gains in the 2024 municipal elections, demonstrating that the opposition could not only criticize the government, but also expand its electoral base. The return of Kilicdaroglu objectively alters the balance inside the opposition, damaging its ability to preserve mobilization before the next electoral cycle.

A restrained analysis of this situation requires attention not only to the interests of the authorities, but also to the bigger picture of a state operating in a complex external and internal environment. Judging by its recent steps, the Turkish leadership is seeking to preserve control over a political direction it considers strategically important. Over the past two decades, Türkiye has significantly transformed its position in the international system. It has become a more autonomous regional actor, strengthened its defense industry, expanded its military presence in neighboring regions and used foreign policy more actively as an instrument of national positioning.

For the current leadership, a change of power would mean the risk of revising the entire trajectory built under Erdogan. This includes the presidential system, foreign policy autonomy, the defense industry, policy in the Eastern Mediterranean, and relations with Russia, the West, the Middle East and the Caucasus. The authorities therefore seek to minimize the possibility of a sharp political turn at a time when the regional environment is becoming increasingly unstable.

The best defense

One of the central elements of this course is the emphasis on strengthening the country’s defense capability. Türkiye has consistently developed its own production of drones, naval platforms, armored vehicles, missile systems and other components of the defense industry. For Ankara, military modernization is a matter of sovereignty. The less dependent the country is on external suppliers, the greater its room for independent decision-making. In this sense, the defense industry has become part of the political philosophy of contemporary Türkiye, where security, technological independence and foreign policy autonomy are treated as interconnected elements.

This is also reflected in the Blue Homeland doctrine – the idea of unquestionable Turkish sovereignty over islands in the Aegean Sea. The intensification of disputes with Greece over these islands, maritime zones and jurisdiction reflects Ankara’s desire to consolidate its interests in areas it considers critical for security and future influence. The intention to legally formalize claims over more than 150 islands and islets fits into a broader trend in which Türkiye seeks not simply to react to regional changes, but to fix its position in advance through legal and military-political instruments.

All of the above means the recent actions of the Turkish authorities can be interpreted as an attempt to preserve governability during a period of several overlapping crises. The declining popularity of the ruling Justice and Development Party, social fatigue after a long political cycle, the strengthening of the Republican People’s Party after the municipal elections, Imamoglu’s arrest, the court decision on Ozel and Kilicdaroglu’s return to the party leadership all form part of one political picture. The authorities are trying to prevent the opposition from entering future elections with a unified structure, a popular candidate and a renewed leadership.

Hardening to the breaking point

The Turkish authorities’ strategy, however, contains an internal contradiction. The more the state seeks to control the political field, the stronger the question of institutional trust becomes. While some do see these steps as efforts to preserve stability and protect a strategic course, others see them as simply shutting out political competition. This divergence will define the next stage of Turkish politics.

The next elections in Turkiye will decide who controls the overall direction of the state. If the opposition comes to power, it will face a difficult task. It will have to address economic problems, restore trust in institutions, recalibrate relations with the West and preserve the degree of strategic autonomy that has already become part of a new Turkish consensus. A complete rejection of defense autonomy, active regional policy and the defense of maritime interests is unlikely, because these directions have long moved beyond Erdogan’s party agenda.

The current situation surrounding Imamoglu, Ozel and Kilicdaroglu therefore reveals a transformation of the Turkish political system. The authorities are trying to preserve the chosen course and retain control over its continuation, while the opposition is trying to prove that it can offer renewal without weakening the state or reducing Türkiye’s international weight. Between these two approaches lies the central conflict of contemporary Turkish politics. It is not only about who wins the next election, but about what direction the Turkish state will take under conditions of growing regional instability.

Democrat-led US states are considering imposing a 100% tax on payouts by a $1.8 billion fund set up by US President Donald Trump for victims of attempts to weaponize the legal and political system against them.

Trump and his allies have long claimed to have been subjected to politically motivated investigations and prosecutions during the Biden administration, including the FBI search of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, the probe into his supposed ties with Moscow, and other criminal cases.

Trump’s team has presented the ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ as part of a broader effort to compensate people allegedly mistreated by the federal government.

However, critics have described Trump’s proposal as a “slush fund,” with Colorado Senator Michael Bennet calling it a “corrupt theft of taxpayer dollars” in an interview with the Washington Post on Sunday.

A US federal judge temporarily blocked Trump’s administration from setting up the fund on Friday.

What is the fund?

The ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ is a $1.776 billion pool of federal money intended to compensate people who claim they were victims of government lawfare and were targeted for political, personal, or ideological reasons.

The Justice Department (DOJ) created it earlier this month as part of a settlement ending Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax records. The sum is a symbolic reference to 1776, the year of the US Declaration of Independence.

History of ‘lawfare’ against Trump

The announcement of the fund comes after years of Trump describing the criminal investigations against him and his supporters as politically motivated “weaponization” of the justice system, which was a central theme of his 2024 presidential campaign.

Examples cited by Trump’s camp include the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago over classified documents, the years-long investigation into the now-debunked Russia collusion, prosecutions related to the January 6 Capitol riot, and the leak of Trump’s tax records by former IRS contractor Charles Littlejohn.

The administration has also pointed to cases involving lesser-known Trump supporters like 70-year-old former Colorado county clerk Tina Peters, who was imprisoned in 2024 over an attempt to uncover evidence of voter fraud.

Vice President J.D. Vance has said it would be “reasonable” for Peters to “get some compensation” from the Anti-Weaponization Fund, arguing that her sentence was “completely disproportionate.”

Who decides who gets paid?

The fund would be overseen by a five-member commission. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s defense attorney, is expected to appoint most of its members.

The commission will be able to authorize payments to claimants who show they were illegally targeted by the federal government, issue apologies, or request more information from claimants and federal agencies.

The DOJ has said there are no partisan restrictions on eligibility. A senior administration official told the New York Post that anyone can apply, including Democrats, January 6 defendants, or even former US President Joe Biden’s son Hunter.

Why are critics angry?

Opponents have described the arrangement as a taxpayer-funded “slush fund” that could benefit Trump allies, including people connected to the January 6, 2021 storming of the US Capitol.

Some Republicans have also objected. North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis said it would be “absurd” if someone who assaulted a police officer, admitted guilt and was convicted was subsequently pardoned and then received taxpayer-funded compensation.

The viral ‘QAnon Shaman’ Jacob Angeli-Chansley, who was one of the Trump supporters involved in the Capitol Hill riots, has also come out against the fund, stating he would not take “a dime of that blood money” after becoming disenchanted with the president over his handling of the Epstein Files, attack on Iran and support for Israel.

Blue states threaten to tax everything

While Democrats remain a minority in Congress and have limited power to block the program, some state-level officials have been looking for ways to prevent residents from keeping payouts.

California Assembly Budget Committee Chair Jesse Gabriel said Democrats are planning to include a tax on the payments in the state budget. “That money belongs to taxpayers, and we’re going to make sure it stays with taxpayers,” he told the Washington Post on Sunday.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has endorsed the idea, saying it is “an action we look forward to taking.” Lawmakers in New York and Wisconsin are also working on bills targeting any payments from the fund.

“If you’re a New Yorker and you take from this illegal slush fund, New York state will tax 100% of it,” New York Assembly member Alex Bores said in a video posted on X. “If you storm the Capitol and you take from this slush fund, too bad, we’re taking it.”

The DOJ has criticized the state proposals, accusing blue-state governors of “flaunting their love of lawfare.”

What does the Trump side say?

The DOJ has defended the fund, saying it “remains extremely confident” in its legality.

Supporters also argue the fund is not unprecedented, pointing to the existing DOJ Judgment Fund, which has long been used to settle claims against the federal government, and stating that the program is “just a rebranding of an existing legal settlement fund Congress authorized decades ago.”

What is the current status of the fund?

On Friday, US District Judge Leonie Brinkema temporarily blocked the Trump administration from setting up or operating the fund while she considers additional legal arguments. The order will remain in effect at least until June 12.

Ukraine and its neighboring EU countries would be the first to suffer if Kiev’s continued attacks result in an incident at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP), Aleksey Likhachev, CEO of the Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom, has said.

Europe’s largest nuclear power plant has been targeted by Ukraine on multiple occasions since Russia took control of the facility in March 2022. On Saturday, a fiber-optics-guided drone struck the machine hall of ZNPP’s sixth power unit, puncturing a hole in the building. According to Rosatom, this was Kiev’s first “deliberate attack” on the station’s main equipment.

Ukrainian authorities have denied any involvement in the incident. Vladimir Zelensky said in April that the only way for Russia to guarantee security at the plant was to hand it over to Kiev.

Likhachev told journalists on Monday that “any explosion, any fire [at the plant] guarantees a loss of both power and water supplies to the reactor unit. And that is a precursor to a nuclear incident.”

“Ukraine and neighboring Western states are the first to be at serious risk” if this happens, the Rosatom chief added.

According to Likhachev, his conversation about the events at the ZNPP with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi later in the day will also serve as “an address to the leaders of European countries.”

“This whole radiation situation doesn’t respect national borders. By playing with fire and allowing the escalation of tensions around the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant, the leaders of European countries are clearly putting their people, their cities and their territories under a direct threat,” he noted.

Iran has halted negotiations with the US over the ongoing Israeli offensive in Lebanon, moving to block maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, Tasnim news agency has reported, citing sources.

Israel has intensified its bombing campaign in Lebanon in recent days, against what it describes as sites used by the Hezbollah militant group. The Israeli military has pushed deeper into the country’s south, seizing Beaufort Castle, a 900-year-old Crusader fortress and a key vantage point in the region.

While Iran made an end to the war in Lebanon a condition for its Pakistani-mediated negotiations with the US, the hostilities between Israel and Hezbollah have continued despite a supposed ceasefire announced in mid-April.

In response to the escalation in Lebanon, Tehran is stopping the “negotiations and exchange of messages through a mediator,” according to Tasnim. Iran has reportedly demanded an “immediate cessation of hostilities” in the country, as well as in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza, making it a condition for continuing the contacts with the US.

Tehran and its regional allied groups have also expressed readiness to seal off the Strait of Hormuz, as well as to “activate other fronts,” including disrupting maritime traffic in the Bab al-Mandab Strait, according to the agency.

Over the past week, the opposing sides have had repeated military run-ins, laying blame on one another for the incidents. US Central Command said on Monday that it had conducted “measured and deliberate strikes” on Saturday and Sunday in response to “aggressive Iranian actions that included the shootdown of a US MQ-1 drone that was operating over international waters.” Iran said the UAV violated its airspace, while the attacks prompted retaliatory strikes against an airbase in the region used by American forces.

The Iranian Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) has said it carried out a retaliatory strike on an air base used by the US after American forces attacked targets in southern Iran over the weekend.

The latest exchange has further strained a fragile ceasefire reached in April after more than a month of fighting triggered by US and Israeli attacks on Iran. Washington and Tehran are currently attempting to negotiate a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that would extend the truce for another 60 days and restart talks on Iran’s nuclear program.

US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement on Monday that it had conducted “measured and deliberate strikes” on Saturday and Sunday “in response to aggressive Iranian actions that included the shootdown of a US MQ-1 drone that was operating over international waters.” It accused Tehran of “unwarranted… aggression during the ongoing ceasefire.”

Iran announced the downing of the UAV on Sunday, saying it was hit due to violations of the country’s airspace over the Persian Gulf.

Later in the day, the IRGC said it had responded to what it described as an American strike on a communications tower on the Islamic Republic’s Sirik Island.

The Iranian military “targeted the air base, from which the [US] attack originated, and the predetermined targets were destroyed,” it said in a statement.

The statement did not identify the location of the targeted base, although Kuwait’s KUNA news agency earlier reported that the Gulf nation’s air defenses had intercepted incoming missiles and drones.

The IRGC warned “that if the aggression is repeated, the response will be completely different” and that the US would be to blame.

Tehran has been making changes to a draft MOU after reports of US President Donald Trump sending a tougher proposal to Iran on Sunday, Tasnim news agency reported. The exchanges on the text of an MOU “are ongoing, with both parties regularly proposing amendments,” the agency’s source said.

Israeli attacks in Lebanon are killing civilians and must end, UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper has said, after the Jewish state stepped up military activity against its northern neighbor.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has intensified airstrikes in recent days and moved deeper into Lebanese territory despite the ceasefire agreed in mid-April after more than a month of fighting.

On Sunday, Israeli troops seized Beaufort Castle, a 900-year-old Crusader fortress, while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he had instructed the military “to expand its ground maneuver” against Lebanese armed group Hezbollah.

Netanyahu’s order could further complicate indirect talks between the US and Iran, with peace in Lebanon being among Tehran’s key demands for prolonging the truce with Washington.

In a post on X on Monday, Cooper said Israel’s military escalation in Lebanon “has killed and displaced civilians, destroyed infrastructure, and eroded space for diplomacy. It must end.”

“All sides must respect the ceasefire and engage with negotiations in good faith,” the foreign secretary said.

German Foreign Minister Johannes Wadephul said in a statement on Sunday that the Israeli advances are a “cause for serious concern,” warning that they could “exacerbate the already tense situation and trigger new waves of displacement within Lebanon.”

At least 12 civilians were killed by IDF strikes in Lebanon on Sunday, according to Al Jazeera.

Data from the Lebanese authorities suggests that more than 3,400 people have been killed, around 10,000 wounded, and over 1.6 million displaced in the country since Israel launched its military operation against Hezbollah in early March, just days after the US-Israeli attack on Iran.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke with both Netanyahu and Lebanese President Joseph Aoun by phone over the weekend in an attempt to push through a new proposal for a “gradual de-escalation” between Israel and Hezbollah. “This would create space for gradual de-escalation and an effective cessation of hostilities,” Rubio said.

As a first step, Rubio’s plan calls for Hezbollah to halt drone attacks on Israel, with the IDF refraining from escalating operations in the Lebanese capital, Beirut, in return, a source said.

US conservative political commentator Candace Owens has brushed off criticism of her recent visit to Russia, after posting photos from what she described as an “unbelievably beautiful” Moscow.

Owens described the trip to her 6 million YouTube subscribers as a “family vacation.” Some fellow commentators criticized the visit, with Daily Wire co-founder Ben Shapiro labeling it an act of “ideological subversion.”

“I’m starting to understand why the talking heads panic and shout and lie about ‘Russian collusion’ when they learn an American with a platform is traveling here,” Owens wrote on X on Sunday, sharing a photo of herself on Red Square.

“It is genuinely shocking how clean, beautiful and orderly this city is. It is so far removed from media depictions,” she added.

Uh-oh @LauraLoomer… 😱
Подкаст-авиакомпания снова отличилась!

Cc: Baron Coleman pic.twitter.com/RlECM2K4sa

— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) May 31, 2026

Owens also shared photos from a theater and a church.

“I’m not sure what I was expecting, but I wasn’t expecting this,” she wrote.

I’m not sure what I was expecting but I wasn’t expecting this.
Moscow is an unbelievably beautiful city. pic.twitter.com/q35ZthjxxK

— Candace Owens (@RealCandaceO) May 31, 2026

Republicans and Democrats alike, along with numerous media figures, similarly criticized journalist Tucker Carlson for traveling to Moscow twice in 2024 to record interviews with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.

Carlson said he found Moscow to be “so much nicer” than cities in the United States and argued that American media coverage of Russia and the Ukraine conflict was heavily biased. He dismissed his critics as “professional liars.”

Owens later broke with US President Donald Trump over his support for Israel. Following the launch of her own show on YouTube, the popular podcaster drew criticism for controversial statements, including suggestions that Israel could have been involved in the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Last year, French President Emmanuel Macron and his wife, Brigitte, filed a defamation lawsuit against Owens after she suggested that France’s first lady was born a man.

The UK authorities have denied The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur entry into the country days ahead of two events where he was due to speak – apparently over his repeated criticism of Israel. Uygur’s nephew, Hasan Piker, who is a left-wing political streamer in his own right, has said his British visa has also been revoked “at the behest of Israel.”

On multiple occasions over the past few years, pro-Palestinian activists have accused the UK’s Labour government led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer of suppressing anything deemed too critical of Israel.

In a Monday X post, Uygur wrote that he’d been “banned from the UK… for criticizing Israel.”

“Are we free anymore? This is oppression of Western citizens by our own governments on behalf of a different country!” The Young Turks host added.

According to The Times, UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood cancelled Uygur’s electronic travel authorization (ETA) last week.

The US host and left-wing political commentator had been scheduled to appear at the SXSW festival in London on Thursday, as well as at an event in Oxford the following day.

Uygur’s nephew, Piker, had also been booked to speak at the SXSW event in the British capital. Commenting on the entry bans, he wrote on X that the “West is betraying ‘liberal values’ for a genocidal fascist foreign government.”

Both Uygur and Piker have repeatedly described Israel’s military campaign in Gaza against Hamas as “genocide.”

UK Green Party leader Zack Polanski accused the UK’s Labour government of “doing everything possible to silence criticism of the Israeli Government.”

Earlier this month, a UK court convicted four members of the pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action over a 2024 raid on an Israeli-linked defense facility in Bristol, with sentencing expected in mid-June.

The British government has been widely criticized for its use of anti-terror legislation to strangle reporting on the case. The activist group itself was proscribed as a terrorist entity last July.

Meanwhile, former Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who was expelled from the party in 2024 over alleged failure to address anti-Semitism, has expressed support for Palestine Action.

The US military has been covertly guiding vessels through the Strait of Hormuz in recent weeks, The New York Times reported on Sunday, citing officials familiar with the matter.

Iran closed the vital waterway, which previously handled around 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies, to ships from “hostile countries” in response to the US and Israeli airstrikes launched on February 28. Tehran later said that vessels from third countries could pass if they paid a toll and complied with military instructions.

In April, US President Donald Trump announced ‘Project Freedom’, aimed at escorting stranded merchant ships from neutral countries. He publicly suspended the initiative less than 48 hours later, reportedly after Saudi Arabia refused to allow US forces to fly through its airspace or use Prince Sultan Air Base.

According to the Times, US Central Command (CENTCOM) has coordinated the passage of around 70 commercial vessels through the waterway over the past three weeks. An official told the newspaper that most of the vessels had turned off their transponders to avoid detection by Iranian forces. The ships reportedly used a shipping lane closer to the Omani coast.

Tens of thousands of sailors aboard between 1,600 and 2,000 vessels, including oil and gas tankers, remain stranded in the Persian Gulf.

In April, the US imposed a blockade on Iranian ports and has since intercepted more than 100 cargo ships. On Sunday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said that 28 vessels had passed through the strait over the previous 24 hours after obtaining permission.

Pro-Trump lawyer Abelardo de la Espriella secured a narrow lead over left-wing Senator Ivan Cepeda in the first round of Colombia’s presidential election on Sunday.

With votes counted from more than 99% of polling stations, de la Espriella received 43.72% of the vote, while Cepeda secured 40.92%. Conservative candidate Paloma Valencia came third with 6.92%. The runoff will take place on June 21.

Colombia has historically been the United States’ most important ally in the region in terms of security cooperation and counternarcotics efforts.

The US is Colombia’s largest trading partner, and the country shares a long border with neighboring Venezuela.

Relations between Washington and Bogota deteriorated significantly in recent years under outgoing President Gustavo Petro, who criticized US President Donald Trump’s mass deportation policies and military strikes on suspected drug trafficking boats. The two leaders frequently traded insults on social media and in public statements.

Petro, Colombia’s first left-wing president, is constitutionally barred from seeking a second consecutive term and has endorsed Cepeda.

The candidate has praised Trump’s “cultural battle against wokeism” and vowed to uphold traditional gender norms.

De la Espriella welcomed Trump’s return to the White House and backed the US commando raid in Caracas earlier this year, during which American forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

“It has been revealed how USAID and woke populism fueled the leftward shift in countries like Colombia… To guarantee a fair race, it is urgent that your father’s administration puts Petro in his place,” de la Espriella wrote on X in January in response to a post by Donald Trump Jr.

Cepeda, the son of a Communist senator killed in 1994 by state-linked paramilitaries, has opposed Trump’s interventionism and condemned his threats against Petro.

“We are neither a colony nor a protectorate of the United States. We will not submit to any form of imperial or authoritarian domination,” Cepeda wrote on X in January.

In an interview with Jacobin shortly after Maduro’s abduction, Cepeda denounced Trump’s attempts to revive the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine, which treats Latin America and the Caribbean as an exclusive sphere of US influence.

“We are a zone of peace. And we do not accept foreign interference. That is how governments and peoples must align,” he said.

With much of the world’s attention on the still unresolved conflict between the US and Iran, the average consumer of news may be forgiven if they had forgotten that the US had, on January 3 of this year, launched a mini-invasion of Venezuela which resulted in the death of scores of people, including a number of Cuban security personnel, and the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife.

The US justified this action by noting that Maduro was, in its books, a fugitive from justice, having been previously indicted in a US Federal Court on narcotics trafficking charges. The ease with which the US orchestrated the collapse of the Maduro regime and facilitated the transfer of power to a more than compliant vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, helped the administration of US President Donald Trump project an aura of invincibility when it came to the implementation of what the president and his advisors were calling the ‘Donroe Doctrine’, their take on the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine which declared the Western Hemisphere to be the exclusive domain of the US.

Little more than a week later, on January 11, President Trump posted on his Truth Social account what amounted to a direct threat against the government of Cuba. “Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela,” the president wrote, stating that there had been a direct relationship between Venezuelan economic support to Cuba and Cuban security support to Venezuela. “Venezuela now has the United States of America, the most powerful military in the world (by far), to protect them, and protect them we will. THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA—ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!”

The president then set off a firestorm of speculation on American social media when, responding to a joking post that was made on X late the week prior stating that said, “Marco Rubio will be president of Cuba,” he wrote in response “sounds good to me!”

Regime change in Cuba, it seemed, was on the cards.

An invasion of Cuba was no longer a top Trump administration policy.

Almost overnight, this calculus changed. On May 21, Marco Rubio declared that Cuba was “one of the leading sponsors of terrorism in the entire region.” His comments came the same day that the US Department of Justice unsealed an indictment against former Cuban President Raul Castro. In one day, the Trump administration had reconstructed the pathway toward military action by the US against Cuba, mirroring the regime change justifications that had been cobbled together before the January 3 assault on Caracas that led to the capture of Nicolas Maduro and the collapse of his regime. These actions coincided with the arrival of a US carrier battlegroup off the shores of Cuba.

Rubio’s painting Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism carries zero intellectual weight or factual predicate, coming as it does on the heels of a concerted effort undertaken by the Biden administration to remove that designation from Cuba because there was no longer any basis for such a claim. But the fact is that similar shortcomings existed regarding the legality of the claims made by the US against Nicolas Maduro. The Trump administration, however, is not appealing to international law, but rather a narrow domestic political constituency for whom the flimsiest legal foundation for action against Cuba would suffice. But the designation as a state sponsor of terrorism holds even more importance, given that it directly mirrors the runway to military action constructed by the US in the lead-up to the decision to bomb Iran in February of this year. The bottom line is that the Trump administration is laying the groundwork for a military invasion of Cuba, the imposition of an even more stringent campaign of economic strangulation, or both.

The impetus for such action rests not with any inherent threat posed by Cuba and its government to the US, but rather the need for the Trump administration to be able to chalk up a ‘win’ on its national security scoreboard following its embarrassing setback with Iran.

The real threat to Trump comes if the Republicans lose control of the Senate, especially by a margin significant enough to rase the specter of conviction, which at least 60 of 100 Senators must vote in favor of. Here is where President Trump is making a huge miscalculation when it comes to the issue of Cuba and domestic American politics. Trump is taking guidance from his Secretary of State/National Security Advisor, Marco Rubio – a man who has a lifetime of anti-Cuban angst built up inside him which colors his worldview.

Both Rubio and Trump understand the realities associated with Florida politics, and the important role played by Florida’s large Cuban diaspora in shaping presidential politics. But the midterms are not a national election. Midterm elections generally respond to a different political barometer, one where the needle is moved by local political issues generally defined by the state of the local economy. National issues generally run secondary, and in the grand scheme of things, the Cuban vote in Florida doesn’t change the national calculus when counting House and Senate seats on election night. Moreover, Rubio and Trump would do well to study the 1992 presidential campaign, which saw the incumbent, George H. W. Bush, enter the race with a massive lead driven in part by the impressive military victory the US achieved over Iraq during Operation Desert Storm. Bush’s challenger, Bill Clinton, stumbled when he tried to match Bush’s foreign policy credentials, resulting in his campaign manager, James Carvelle, posting a yellow sticky note on the door leading into the campaign ‘war room’ which read simply, “It’s the economy, stupid!”

Bush had promised no new taxes and yet failed to deliver on that promise. The economic downturn which resulted from this mistake provided the momentum Clinton needed to come from behind and defeat Bush in November 1992.

It’s the economy, stupid.

But the fact is Trump and Rubio may not be able to deliver the expected victory in any event. Cuba is not Venezuela, and the CIA may lack the ability to replicate the purchased betrayal of Maduro among the Venezuelan political, military and economic elites. Is not something many Cuba watchers believes can be pulled off in this island nation. Fulton Armstrong, a former National Intelligence Officer for Latin America who one time worked in a covert fashion as a CIA officer operating on Cuban soil, recently authored a memorandum on behalf of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) where he noted that the “US-driven ‘regime collapse’ and occupation or imposition of a government of our choosing [in Cuba] will fail badly. The same people who keep ‘57 Chevrolets on the road with a coat hanger will wreak havoc against a foreign-imposed regime,” adding “US coercion against Cuba hasn’t worked for more than six decades.”

Marco Rubio may yet convince Donald Trump to invade Cuba. But rather than the icing on a rejuvenated foreign and national security policy that helps preserve the Republican Party’s hold on the US Congress, and as such keeps Trump’s policies, domestic and foreign, viable for the next two years, a Cuban invasion will more than likely produce a debacle which, when piled on the failure in Iran, will mark the end of the Trump era once and for all.

The Vienna Festival cancelled a scheduled appearance of US-German tech mogul Peter Thiel after facing mounting criticism from its sponsors and a mass exodus of other participants.

The co-founder of PayPal and Palantir Technologies, widely known for his controversial right-wing and “transhumanist” views, was expected to participate in a discussion titled ‘Armageddon and the Antichrist? From Theology to Realpolitik.’ This year, the Festival declared itself the “Republic of Gods,” advertising itself as a “space of radical criticism and new beginnings.”

The scheduled panel immediately drew controversy, with some seeing it as an opportunity to debate Thiel’s controversial ideas, while others argued the entrepreneur’s apocalyptic worldview should not receive a platform at all. His scheduled appearance has been criticized by the Vienna city authorities, which sponsor the festival.

“The invitation to Peter Thiel is quite rightly causing great discontent among the public,” Vienna’s City Councillor for Culture, Veronica Kaup-Hasler, told Der Standard newspaper.

“Not at any cost: I take the critical voices very seriously. Out of my responsibility for the overall program, I unfortunately had to decide against the planned event with Peter Thiel, although I found it extremely compelling and thematically consistent within the framework of the Republic of Gods. However, insisting on the event would run counter to my appreciation of our artistic program and everyone involved in it,” Artistic Director Milo Rau said in a statement.

Thiel’s public speeches have repeatedly sparked controversy. Back in March, he held a series of invitation-only lectures on the Antichrist in Rome at a secret location near the Vatican. Some media reports even claimed that the event would be held in the Pontifical St. Thomas Aquinas University – the alma mater of Pope Leo XIV. The institution rushed to deny any links to the event, while other Vatican-linked officials criticized Thiel’s activities as well.

Israel has captured Beaufort Castle, a 900-year-old Crusader fortress and a key vantage point in southern Lebanon, hailing the development as a “dramatic shift” in the ongoing campaign.

The takeover of the site was announced on Sunday, when West Jerusalem circulated photos of Israeli and Golani Brigade flags flying above the fortress. The medieval castle, also known as Qalaat al-Chakif, was previously used by Israel as a base during its two-decade occupation of southern Lebanon that ended in 2000.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hailed the capture as a major achievement, with the Israeli leader stating he had ordered the military “to expand its ground maneuver in Lebanon.” According to media reports, the IDF found no weaponry inside the castle.

“Now my directive is to deepen and expand our hold in places that were under Hezbollah’s control. The capture of Beaufort is a dramatic stage and a dramatic shift in the policy we are leading,” he said.

תיעודים חדשים: כוחות סיירת גולני במבצר הבופור

לכל הפרטים👇https://t.co/Hnn0njXnoi pic.twitter.com/DSwaINpJzY

— צבא ההגנה לישראל (@idfonline) May 31, 2026

Israel has also continued its bombing campaign in southern Lebanon, which has significantly picked up in recent days. The majority of the strikes appear to be concentrated around the city of Nabatieh and its immediate vicinity, which is expected to be the next target in the ground offensive.

RT’s footage from the city, which is located some 6km to the northwest of the castle, shows large plumes of smoke and dust emanating from the sites affected by Israeli airstrikes. The attacks have inflicted heavy damage on the city’s residential areas and surroundings, footage shows.

The Israeli onslaught continues despite the reported ceasefire declared more than six weeks ago. The ongoing hostilities between Israel and Lebanese militant group Hezbollah are a spillover of the broader conflict in the region triggered by the US-Israeli attack on Iran.

Meta and the parent companies of Snapchat, YouTube and TikTok have agreed to pay millions of dollars to settle a lawsuit accusing the social media platforms of contributing to mental health problems among students, Reuters has reported. The lawsuit, brought by a Kentucky school district, is one of many similar cases pending in US courts and is widely seen as a bellwether.

Reuters reported on Friday, citing settlement documents, that Meta Platforms, the parent company of Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp, will pay $9 million as part of the agreement. Co-defendants Snap Inc and ByteDance previously agreed to pay $8 million each, while Alphabet agreed to pay slightly more than $2 million, according to the report.

The lawsuit was filed by the Breathitt County School District in Kentucky last Thursday, with the plaintiff initially seeking more than $60 million in damages. The district alleged that the companies deliberately designed their platforms to be addictive to young users, contributing to problems, including anxiety, depression, and self-harm.

Meanwhile, some 1,200 school districts across the country have filed similar lawsuits against social media companies.

Those cases, along with lawsuits brought by individuals, municipalities, and states, have been consolidated in federal court in California, while another 3,300 cases remain pending in the state’s courts.

In a landmark verdict in March, a jury in California ordered Meta to pay $4.2 million and Google $1.8 million in a lawsuit by a 20-year-old woman identified as Kaley. The plaintiff said she had developed an addiction to YouTube and Instagram as a child because of such design features as infinite scrolling.

Two other co-defendants, TikTok and Snap, settled the case before the trial began.

Meta Platforms have also faced growing regulatory pressure further afield, having been labeled an “extremist organization” in Russia in 2022 and targeted by multiple European Union actions, including a €797 million ($940 million) antitrust fine.

The EU is mulling a temporary freeze on its price cap on Russian oil as the US-Israeli war against Iran led to soaring energy prices and global economic shock, Bloomberg reported on Sunday, citing sources.

The proposed measure is part of the EU’s 21st sanctions package against Russia over the Ukraine conflict, which is set to be discussed in early June. Under the current oil price cap mechanism, Western entities are barred from handling Russian oil above the mandated threshold, which is automatically set every six months at 15% lower than the average market rate for Russian Urals crude.

The current price threshold is $44.10 per barrel, while the Urals market price floats around $86 per barrel, although it is significantly lower than the $120 per barrel seen at the height of the Iran crisis.

Moscow has dismissed the oil price cap, calling it illegal, and has barred oil shipments to countries that adhere to it. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called it a “distortion and destruction of the market pricing process.” Russia has diverted much of the energy it once exported to Europe to countries such as China and India.

The Iran war has hit the EU economy hard, with the World Bank projecting energy prices surging 24% in 2026. TTF natural gas futures have risen by up to 60% since the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, marking the continent’s sharpest energy shock since 2022.

The EU experienced a similar crisis that year when sanctions on Russia over the Ukraine conflict not only proved costly and disruptive for the bloc’s economy and taxpayers, but also gave Russia windfall revenues.

The US – which has also grappled with rising gasoline prices – issued a Russian oil sanctions waiver to alleviate pressure on the markets, allowing vulnerable countries to buy Russian oil already at sea. The measure was extended earlier this month despite Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent’s pledge not to do so.

A senior Israeli diplomat has mocked Paris after it summoned an extraordinary UN Security Council meeting over West Jerusalem’s actions in Lebanon, pointing at France’s domestic troubles.

Over the past few days, Israel has intensified its bombing campaign in the country and advanced deeper into Lebanese territory despite the purported ceasefire announced more than six weeks ago. The Israeli troops seized the Beaufort Castle, a 900-year-old Crusader fortress, while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he had instructed the military “to expand its ground maneuver in Lebanon.”

On Sunday, Paris requested an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council over the latest developments in Lebanon. Announcing the decision, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot argued that “nothing can justify the continuation of Israeli military operations in Lebanon and its ever-deepening occupation of Lebanese territory.”

Israel’s political advisor to the permanent representative of Israel to the United Nations, Waleed Gadban, took to X to mock France’s request. The senior diplomat shared footage from the chaotic celebrations in Paris after local football club Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) won the Champions League, apparently implying France should focus on its domestic affairs instead. “Meanwhile in Paris,” he wrote.

Meanwhile in Paris. pic.twitter.com/exIdFtk4ai https://t.co/UDpPnnOXEk

— Waleed Gadban (@GadbanWaleed) May 31, 2026

The PSG’s victory has triggered widespread rioting across the French capital and beyond, with nearly 800 people arrested amid the chaos. The celebrations left more than 200 persons injured, with at least one other killed in a road accident. Some 57 law enforcement officers were also injured while trying to quell the unrest.

Earlier this month, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan used a ceremony marking the 158th anniversary of the Council of State and Administrative Justice Day to renew his call for a new constitution.

At the heart of Erdogan’s speech was a simple but powerful claim: Türkiye’s last two constitutions – the 1961 and 1982 charters – were not the product of free popular will. Instead, they were imposed by military regimes that came to power through coups. As a result, Erdogan argued, neither constitution truly reflected the will of the people or rested on a genuinely democratic foundation.

The president went so far as to describe this legacy as a “democratic disgrace,” insisting that correcting this historical injustice is not merely a political preference but an obligation owed by the current leadership to Turkish society. In doing so, Erdogan elevated the constitutional debate from the realm of ordinary political proposals to what he framed as an urgent national imperative.

He drew a sharp distinction between two fundamentally different approaches to constitution making. The first is a top-down process in which a constitution is drafted and imposed by military rulers, political elites, or narrow interest groups. The second is a bottom-up process in which it emerges from the values, expectations, and aspirations of society.

Erdogan has positioned himself firmly in the second camp, arguing that Türkiye needs a constitution that is “inclusive, liberal, and civilian” – written by the people and for the people. In his view, the authority to create a constitution belongs exclusively to the nation, and no state institution or political faction has the right to appropriate that power.

It was no coincidence that Erdogan delivered this message at a ceremony honoring the Council of State, an institution whose history stretches back more than 150 years and traces its roots to the reformist spirit of the Tanzimat Edict. Proclaimed by Sultan Abdulmecid I in Istanbul on November 3, 1839, the decree launched an era of sweeping modernization reforms across the Ottoman Empire, aimed at rationalizing government administration, modernizing the legal system, and expanding protections for subjects along European lines.

Erdogan invoked this historical legacy directly, noting that the Council of State was established in 1868, while the first Ottoman constitution followed just eight years later. He presented this sequence as a natural progression: Institutions capable of checking state power emerge first, and constitutional governance follows.

In Erdogan’s interpretation, administrative courts are more than venues for resolving disputes between citizens and bureaucrats. They serve as a balancing mechanism designed to offset the inherently unequal relationship between the individual and the state.

Yet the picture is not nearly as straightforward as Erdogan suggests.

Constitutional reform or political survival?

Critics point out that while the president speaks of limiting state power and protecting individual rights, his administration has faced persistent accusations of undermining judicial independence. They cite pressure on the judiciary, the mass dismissal of judges following the failed coup attempt in 2016, and the expansion of executive influence over judicial appointments. Against that backdrop, appeals to the ideals of independent justice and protection from state overreach often sound more like political rhetoric than a reflection of institutional reality.

The factual background is worth recalling.

Last year, Erdogan announced the formation of a special legal working group tasked with drafting a new constitution. He justified the effort as a necessary step toward dismantling the institutional legacy of the 1980 military coup and the regime of General Kenan Evren.

On the surface, the argument is difficult to dispute. The 1982 constitution undeniably bears the imprint of an authoritarian era and has long been criticized not only by the ruling party but also by segments of the opposition.

Yet behind this broadly legitimate demand for constitutional renewal lies another dimension.

Under Türkiye’s current legal framework, Erdogan is not eligible to seek another presidential term under normal circumstances. A new constitution, however, could effectively reset the clock on presidential term limits.

The truth likely lies somewhere between these two competing narratives.

There is broad agreement – even among many of Erdogan’s opponents – that Türkiye’s constitutional framework is overdue for revision. The 1982 constitution no longer reflects either the country’s current political architecture or the evolution of Turkish civil society over the past several decades. In that sense, constitutional reform is objectively necessary.

The more important questions concern the intentions behind the reform and the shape it will ultimately take.

When constitutional change is initiated by an incumbent president on the eve of a new electoral cycle, it inevitably raises legitimate concerns about whose interests will ultimately be enshrined in the new charter: Those of the citizenry or those of the governing establishment.

What is actually happening behind the scenes within Türkiye’s political system – and what the real balance of power around the constitutional process looks like – will become clear only when a draft constitution is placed on the negotiating table.

The question, therefore, is no longer whether Türkiye will get a new constitution. The real question is what price the country will pay for it – and what consequences it may have for Türkiye’s domestic political landscape.

The polarization factor

This is where the greatest risk lies.

Turkish society is already deeply polarized, a reality vividly demonstrated during the 2023 presidential election. Contrary to his own expectations, Erdogan failed to secure victory in the first round and ultimately prevailed only in the runoff against an opposition candidate widely regarded as more moderate and less politically formidable.

The outcome underscored a crucial fact: Around half of Turkish society remains firmly unconvinced by the current political course.

Under these conditions, a constitutional referendum risks becoming less an act of national consensus and more another front line in an ongoing struggle between two deeply divided political camps.

Türkiye’s economic challenges further complicate the picture.

Without these economic buffers, Ankara’s difficulties would likely have been considerably more severe.

This reality narrows Erdogan’s room for maneuver. Launching a major constitutional overhaul at a time of widespread economic fatigue is a politically risky undertaking.

The external dimension should not be overlooked either.

Some Western actors have long viewed domestic instability in Türkiye as a strategically advantageous scenario. Türkiye is a NATO member, a regional power controlling the Black Sea straits, and an increasingly independent actor that seeks to position itself as a mediator in conflicts where Western capitals have lost much of their leverage.

A country consumed by internal political turmoil inevitably becomes less influential abroad.

Viewed through this lens, a constitutional process capable of triggering serious domestic confrontation could become a focal point for external pressure and information campaigns.

Conclusion

The overall picture is therefore a complex and contradictory one.

Türkiye objectively needs a new constitution – a fact acknowledged by political figures across the ideological spectrum. Erdogan’s core arguments for reform are, in many respects, historically grounded and difficult to dismiss.

At the same time, implementing this otherwise legitimate project carries substantial risks. Social polarization could deepen. Economic frustration could evolve into broader political unrest. External actors interested in weakening Turkey’s strategic autonomy could gain additional opportunities to exert pressure.

Ultimately, the success of constitutional reform will depend not only on the quality of the final document but also on whether Türkiye’s political class can manage the process in an inclusive manner – without widening the already dangerous fractures running through Turkish society.

Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis has compared the EU to the Roman Empire in its twilight years, arguing that Brussels is weakening the bloc through its economic, climate, and security policies.

Babis returned to office in December after his ANO movement won 34.5% of the vote and 80 seats in the 200-member lower house of parliament. Since then, he has positioned himself as a leading advocate of national sovereignty, a reassessment of EU policies, and a more pragmatic approach to Europe’s economic and security challenges.

In an interview published on Sunday, Babis accused Brussels of steering the bloc’s economy toward decline through what he called its aggressive decarbonization agenda. “The EU is now probably on the same road as the end of the Roman empire,” he told the FT.

Babis also said Prague would probably miss NATO’s 2% of GDP defense-spending target this year, despite claiming it met it in 2025. He blamed the pressure partly on a deficit left by Petr Fiala’s previous pro-EU government.

The issue feeds into a broader EU debate over dependence on the US, which accounts for around 60% of NATO’s total military spending. President Donald Trump has warned that the US could scale back its role in European defense unless NATO countries significantly increase military spending.

The economic pressures, security concerns, and reliance on external military protection underpin Babis’ comparison with ancient Rome.

The Roman Empire’s later centuries were marked by political instability, economic strain, and military overstretch. It became increasingly reliant on foreign troops while struggling to finance its defenses, as trade and economic activity declined and external pressures mounted.

Germany’s policy on Russia is riddled with contradictions, veteran German politician Sahra Wagenknecht has argued, accusing Berlin of punishing Moscow over alleged violations of international law while excusing similar accusations leveled against the US and damaging its own economy in the process.

Speaking at a public appearance in Berlin this week, Wagenknecht took aim at Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s support for the Western sanctions on Russia and his stance on international law.

“Russia’s oil and gas are selling like hotcakes all over the world, and we act as if we could end this war simply by stopping our purchases,” she said. “People say that because Russia has violated international law, we must impose sanctions. But when the US violates international law, Mr. Merz stands in front of the camera and tells us that international law is actually outdated. So, for the US, it’s outdated, but when Russia violates it, we have to completely ruin our economy because we have to impose sanctions. Nothing adds up with this policy.”

Since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022, the EU has imposed 20 rounds of sanctions targeting Russia’s economy and energy exports while seeking to phase out Russian fossil fuels.

Russia, however, has largely redirected its energy exports to Asia. According to US Energy Information Administration data, Asia and Oceania accounted for 81% of Russian crude exports in 2024, with China and India emerging as Russia’s largest customers.

Germany, meanwhile, entered recession in 2023 as industries grappled with higher energy costs after the loss of Russian gas, much of it replaced by more expensive LNG imports.

Wagenknecht contrasted this with Western responses to US military actions, including recent operations in the Middle East. In March, Merz declined to question the legality of US actions in Iran, arguing that it was not the time to “lecture” allies about international law. Opponents seized on the remarks as evidence that Berlin applies different standards to the US and Russia.

US President Donald Trump has toughened the terms of peace talks with Iran, the New York Times and Axios reported on Saturday, citing officials familiar with the matter.

On Thursday, the two countries reportedly agreed on a memorandum of understanding that would extend the ceasefire reached in April for another 60 days and restart negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. A day later, Trump summoned senior national security advisers to the White House Situation Room.

According to the NYT, Trump became concerned about provisions in the proposed agreement that would unfreeze Iranian assets and grew frustrated with the pace of Tehran’s response to previous proposals. The revised terms were intended to increase pressure on the Iranian leaders.

Axios, citing a senior US official, reported that Trump wanted to include “more specifics” in the document regarding when and how the US would recover Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium.

While initially saying he was not in a hurry to reach an agreement, Trump later acknowledged in the same interview that he was “in a hurry because gasoline prices are going up.” He threatened to “finish it off militarily” if Iran did not submit to his demands.

Tehran has repeatedly stated that the right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is non-negotiable and has denied that it seeks to acquire nuclear weapons. Iranian officials have also ruled out surrendering enriched uranium to the US.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi accused Trump of “betraying diplomacy,” saying military pressure will not force Iran to make concessions. Chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said Iran would not compromise with regard to its sovereign rights.

A US aircraft fired a missile at a cargo ship in the Gulf of Oman while enforcing the blockade of Iran, US Central Command (CENTCOM) has said.

According to CENTCOM, the Gambian-flagged M/V Lian Star ignored more than 20 warnings on Friday while sailing toward an Iranian port.

“A US aircraft disabled the vessel by firing a Hellfire missile into the ship’s engine room after Lian Star’s crew failed to comply. The ship is no longer transiting to Iran,” CENTCOM said on X on Saturday.

AP reported, citing a US official, that the vessel remains adrift and that US forces did not board it.

Iran closed the waterway, which normally handles around 25% of global seaborne oil trade and 20% of liquefied natural gas (LNG) shipments, to ships from “hostile nations” in response to the US-Israeli airstrikes launched on February 28. The US imposed its own blockade on Iranian ports a week after a ceasefire was reached in April.

The US has since disabled five commercial vessels and redirected 116 others while enforcing the blockade, CENTCOM said.

US President Donald Trump has since threatened to resume military operations unless Iran accepts his terms, which Tehran has rejected as unacceptable.

“The Army of the Islamic Republic stands firmly and resolutely against any hostile move by the enemy,” Admiral Habibollah Sayyari, the deputy commander of the Iranian Army for coordination, said on Saturday, as cited by Press TV.

US and Cuban military officials have held a rare in-person meeting at the Guantanamo Bay naval base as Washington continues to increase pressure on the island nation.

The US acquired the site on Cuba’s southeastern coast in 1903. While Cuba retains formal sovereignty over the territory, Washington exercises full jurisdiction and control under a lease agreement that Havana considers illegitimate.

According to US Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), its commander, General Francis Donovan, met with Cuba’s chief of the general staff, Lieutenant General Roberto Legra Sotolongo, on Friday for “a brief exchange on operational security matters.”

Donovan also “led a perimeter security assessment of the naval base and discussed force protection, safety of service members and their families, and operational readiness with base officials,” SOUTHCOM said.

In January, US President Donald Trump imposed sweeping restrictions on fuel supplies to Cuba, contributing to fuel shortages and blackouts across the island. He has argued that the Cuban government poses a security threat and has repeatedly threatened the country with military action.

Last week, former Cuban President Raul Castro was indicted by the US Justice Department over the 1996 shootdown of two American aircraft operated by anti-communist Cuban exiles off the island’s coast. Around the same time, the Pentagon announced that the USS Nimitz carrier strike group arrived in the Caribbean, prompting comparisons with the military buildup that preceded the US commando raid in Venezuela earlier this year, which ended with the capture of President Nicolas Maduro.

CIA Director John Ratcliffe paid a rare visit to Havana earlier this month, reportedly pressing for reforms including political liberalization and a transition from socialism to a market-based economy.

Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel has denounced the US measures as illegal under international law and vowed to defend the country against any military action.

“If we need to die, we’ll die, because as our national anthem says, ‘Dying for the homeland is to live,’” he said last month.

Diaz-Canel added that Cuba is ready for talks with the US, but only on equal footing.

Fans torched scooters and clashed with police in Paris on Saturday after local football club Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) won the Champions League, defeating Arsenal.

According to AFP, around 20,000 people gathered on the Champs-Elysees to watch a broadcast of the match, which was played in Budapest, Hungary. The crowd erupted in celebration after the French club beat its English rival in a dramatic 4-3 penalty shootout.

Violence soon broke out as fans set scooters on fire and launched fireworks at police.

Des poubelles et vélos en libre service sont incendiés en marge des célébrations de la seconde victoire du PSG en finale de LDC. Une habitante tente de s’interposer.#PSGARS #TeamPSG pic.twitter.com/3psl3NIzjd

— CLPRESS / Agence de presse (@CLPRESSFR) May 30, 2026

Paris (May 30) — Rioters started fires in the street to celebrate Paris Saint-Germain winning the soccer Champions League. pic.twitter.com/5w5PMqy43f

— Andy Ngo (@MrAndyNgo) May 30, 2026

Interior Minister Laurent Nunez said 416 people were arrested. One officer was injured.

Tensions autour du Parc des Princes pendant la finale de Ligue des Champions.

Les policiers pris à parti suite à une tentative d’interpellation.#PSGARS pic.twitter.com/PkCZaBIb7M

— CLPRESS / Agence de presse (@CLPRESSFR) May 30, 2026

Police detained several people outside the Parc des Princes stadium.

AFP reported that six vehicles and two businesses were damaged. According to L’Equipe, a kiosk near the Champs-Elysees was set on fire and a bus stop was vandalized.

#PSG, der Moslem- und Afrikanerclub aus #Paris hat gespielt. Natürlich erschüttern sofort schwerste Unruhen Paris. Die Nacht wird blutig. #PSGARS #Elfmeterschießen CL Sieger pic.twitter.com/mbf9JI0f9m

— Max van Stetten (@homo_est_liber) May 30, 2026

Gros affrontements en cours près du àParc des Princes.

Des policiers sont pris pour cible par de nombreux tirs de feux d'artifice et projectiles.#PSG #PSGARS #Arsenal #UCLfinal #Paris pic.twitter.com/tHHxQ5wkeh

— Luc Auffret (@LucAuffret) May 30, 2026

PSG won the title for the second consecutive year, and is only the second French club, after Marseille in 1993, to win Europe’s premier club competition.

The club’s triumph last year was also marred by riots in Paris, resulting in two deaths and nearly 500 arrests.

It’s hard to believe one’s eyes while witnessing the latest performance put on by the comedian tyrant of Ukraine.

Within the space of a week or so, the regime of president-for-eternity-no-elections-needed Vladimir Zelensky has repatriated and reburied with pomp and ceremony the remains of Andrey Melnik, a twentieth-century Ukrainian fascist leader and Nazi collaborator, and named a contemporary military elite unit “Heroes of the UPA” (the Ukrainian Insurgent Army of World War Two).

The UPA was, in effect, the military arm of the OUN, the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists. The OUN had two political wings that mattered, one under Andrey Melnik, the other under Stepan Bandera. They were rivals, but both were fascists.

During the war between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, both OUN wings tried to collaborate with the Nazis. The Nazis, in their arrogance, did not always let them, but the whole OUN was very eager to please. The OUN and the UPA also participated in murderous German violence against Jews, serving as pro-active mass murder auxiliaries. In addition, they conducted a genocidal ethnic cleansing campaign of their own against Poles.

Predictably, the in-your-face obscenity of Kiev’s latest fascism worship has provoked Israel as well as Poland. Polish president Nawrocki would like to deprive Zelensky of the high state honors that Warsaw has foolishly bestowed on him and has threatened to curtail Poland’s support for Kiev’s EU ambitions. In Israel, both its official Holocaust remembrance and exploitation agency Yad Vashem and the foreign ministry have taken exception. That is, of course, ironic, since Israel itself engages obsessively in genocide and ethnic cleansing as well. Maybe, in this case, it takes a genocidal fascist to know one.

Some observers speculate that the fascism fetish is being escalated in public again because of the scandals and continually plunging popularity of the regime: Zelensky and the rest of his merry gang of war profiteers and proxy war meatgrinder jockeys, such commentators believe, are merely using the Nazi play “out of a position of weakness,” to distract from the unprecedently fetid swamp into which they have turned Ukraine’s sleazy politics.

This is a mistake. It is time that even the slowest in the West accept a simple truth about Zelensky, one he is not even hiding (like so many others): He genuinely likes fascists. And, with his extremely cynical manipulation techniques, his vicious persecution of political opposition and any dissent, his abuse of the mass media for propaganda, and his deep contempt for democracy, he has much heartfelt affinity with them, to say the least.

Silly – and, actually, racist – pseudo-arguments, advanced by Western proxy war boosters that Zelensky can’t possibly ally with a violent far-right because he is Jewish deserve no serious answer. The current Israeli regime and its policies of war, genocide, supremacy, and ethnic cleansing are fascist. Case closed.

In fact, the Zelensky regime has a longstanding, consistent habit of pandering to, working with, employing at high levels and on a large scale, and honoring the very far right. Some may love to quibble, in bored-academic-style, about pedantically precise terms for fine distinctions in one big pile of rottenness. But, in reality, those labeled Neo-Nazis, white supremacists, fascists, ultra-nationalists and so on form a large whole having much more in common than not.

And so it is in the present, too. Play with words as much as you like, a fact remains a fact, that Zelensky’s Ukraine is state with a big fascism problem. In time, its roots reach back to the period between World Wars I and II, with a massive escalation during the latter. Regionally, it used to be concentrated in western Ukraine and, after the Soviet victory over the Nazis and Axis forces in 1945, among fugitives in the US, Canada, and Europe. There, with their brand of ready-to-kill fascist anti-Communism, they served the West in the first Cold War and systematically subverted Ukrainian communities and any institution they could buy their way into, such as Yale, Harvard, and Columbia Universities.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, this self-declared Ukrainian ‘diaspora’ – ironically, a term popularized out of the same Israel-envy that produced an unseemly urge to politically claim a Holocaust of one’s own in the shape of the Holodomor (preferably with even bigger victim counts) – re-entered independent Ukraine and “repatriated” its ideology. They impaired Ukraine’s culture and politics with, unfortunately, great success.

In that, long-term sense, Zelensky and his regime’s sympathy for the fascist devil is part of a deeper story. Yet Zelensky’s personal contribution is not merely substantial but crucial. First because he has simply gone much farther than any post-independent leader of Ukraine in making fascism part of a deeply sick new normality. And second, because in our world of often imbecilic identity politics, he has, in effect, exploited his Jewishness to promote the normalization of fascism. It is hard to imagine a greater intellectual and moral perversion. But then again, it’s Zelensky.

Around five US servicemen and contractors suffered minor injuries during a recent Iranian ballistic missile strike on a Kuwaiti air base, Bloomberg reports, citing a source. At least one MQ-9 Reaper drone was reportedly destroyed.

The incident apparently occurred during the latest limited exchange between the US and Iran on Thursday. The US military said it destroyed five Iranian kamikaze drones “that posed a clear threat in and near the Strait of Hormuz” and struck a military site near the port city of Bandar Abbas. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it targeted a US airbase in the region in retaliation.

Bloomberg reported on Saturday that an Iranian Fateh-110 missile was intercepted by Kuwaiti air defenses, but falling debris hit Ali Al Salem Air Base.

The fragments slightly injured around five US personnel and inflicted material damage. One MQ-9 Reaper drone stationed at the base was destroyed and at least one other was seriously damaged, an anonymous person with direct knowledge of the attack told the outlet.

Earlier this week, Bloomberg reported that the US military has lost up to 30 drones of the type worth nearly $1 billion. The bulk of them are believed to have been destroyed or badly damaged by Iranian fire, with a few lost in accidents and on the ground in long-range strikes on US military installations in the region.

The losses have left a major dent in the US fleet of medium-altitude long-endurance drones used for reconnaissance missions and precision strikes. The number of MQ-9 Reaper drones in the US inventory has fallen well beyond the Air Force’s minimum floor of 189, hovering at around the 135 mark. 

The drones will not be easy to replace, as the MQ-9 Reaper’s manufacturer, General Atomics, halted production of the flagship model last year, and only produces variants reserved for foreign customers.

Bulgaria is facing EU sanctions due to an excessive budget deficit, just months after joining the eurozone, Prime Minister Rumen Radev has said. He claimed that the crisis was caused by the previous pro-EU government, which massaged economic numbers to narrowly pass the threshold to join the eurozone in the first place.

Speaking at a cabinet meeting in Sofia on Friday, Radev, who is widely regarded as an EU skeptic, said that the European Commission would publish its formal report on the country’s fiscal situation on June 3, thus launching the so-called excessive deficit procedure.

Under the procedure, Sofia must bring spending from last year’s 3.5% back below the 3% ceiling by putting a binding cap on the budget deficit. If Bulgaria fails, the EU can freeze funding and go as far as to impose fines of up to 0.05% of GDP every six months on the Balkan country.

The prime minister also predicted that “this year, the deficit will be even larger” than 3.5%. The European Commission forecasts that the deficit will hit 4.1% of GDP this year, rising to 4.3% in 2027.
“They [the previous government] lied to push Bulgaria into the euro… The bubble has burst,” he said of the budget deficit.

However, critics have argued that the Zhelyazkov coalition – which supported eurozone membership – projected an unrealistic revenue growth, with potential to balloon the budget deficit.

A Politico report in 2025 also drew attention to a sudden and “mysterious” 82.8% cut in state-set daily hospital fees in April – a move that helped lower Bulgaria’s 12-month average inflation. At the time, an unnamed former local official told the paper that “the only reason Bulgaria has qualified is… due to state-administered prices.” According to Politico, the previous government also cut inflation by slashing rail fares by over 9%.

Radev – who has advocated for more pragmatic ties with Russia and consistently opposed military aid to Ukraine – was not against the eurozone per se, but insisted that such a decision could be made only on a public referendum.

However, the parliament blocked his request, with critics accusing him of trying to sabotage the process. Radev himself said that Bulgarian citizens were being ignored by an elite “marching toward the eurozone” and that “the representatives of the people denied the people their right to choose.”

A senior lawmaker from Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s CDU has proposed requiring Germans to use their homes to pay for elderly care, triggering a political row over social welfare amid the country’s mounting fiscal pressures.

The proposal by Albert Stegemann, deputy chairman of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group in the Bundestag, would tighten eligibility rules for public assistance with nursing-home costs, potentially requiring homeowners to draw on property wealth before receiving state support.

“Those who own assets must first use their own assets, including their home, before the community pays,” Stegemann told Bild on Thursday.

Germany’s long-term care system works in three stages. Mandatory insurance covers part of nursing-home costs, with patients expected to pay the remainder from their pension, savings or other assets. If those funds are exhausted, state social welfare assistance covers the gap.

Stegemann argues that homeowners should be required to draw on housing wealth before gaining access to that final layer of taxpayer-funded support.

The debate is unfolding against the backdrop of mounting strain on Germany’s welfare model. Europe’s largest economy has endured years of stagnation following the energy shock caused by the Ukraine conflict. Although Germany officially emerged from recession in 2025, growth is forecast at just 0.5% in 2026 after a new Middle East-driven energy crisis dealt another blow to its industrial sector.

Nevertheless, Germany is spending heavily on both Ukraine and its own military buildup. It has committed more than €96 billion in military and civilian aid for Kiev since 2022, while announcing a domestic €100 billion rearmament drive.

SPD health expert Christos Pantazis warned that many families fear “losing their home or their life’s work,” and called the idea “absurd.” Opposition Greens accused the government of pursuing socially irresponsible policies.

The US will no longer “subsidize” the defense of “wealthy” allies, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has said, reviving a long-running dispute between Washington and NATO’s European members over military spending.

The remarks were made at a major security summit in Singapore on Friday.

Hegseth linked the Trump administration’s push for higher allied defense spending to its broader strategy of shifting resources toward the Indo-Pacific and countering what he described as Chinese “hegemony” in the region.

“The era of the United States subsidizing the defense of wealthy nations is over. We need partners, not protectorates. We seek alliances built on shared responsibility, not dependency,” Hegseth told the annual International Institute for Strategic Studies Shangri-La Dialogue, according to an official statement by the Department of War.

According to NATO’s official figures, all 32 members met the 2% benchmark for the first time in 2025. However, the US still accounted for 60-62% of the bloc’s total military spending last year.

During a question-and-answer session following his address in Singapore, Hegseth described 2% contributions as “freeloading.”

Last year, NATO members agreed to work toward spending 5% of GDP on defense and security by 2035, including a core defense target of 3.5%.

Several governments have questioned the goal. Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez called a 5% target “unreasonable” and “counterproductive.” Belgium and Slovakia have also raised concerns over the scale of the increase.

US President Donald Trump later criticized NATO allies over their response, saying it is “pretty shocking” that countries which support America’s objectives “don’t want to help.”

Croatian President Zoran Milanovic broke ranks with other NATO members as he slammed Lithuania’s foreign minister for his “irresponsible” call to attack the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad.

Milanovic’s comments came after Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys called NATO the “strongest organization ever created” last week, arguing for a more assertive posture toward Russia and saying European NATO members must turn “fear of the threat into a sense of empowerment.” 

“We have to show the Russians that we’re capable of penetrating the small fortress they’ve built in Kaliningrad,” he said. “NATO has the capability, if necessary, to raze Russian air defenses and missile bases there to the ground.”

Speaking on Thursday at a ceremony marking the anniversary of the creation of the Croatian Army, Milanovic called out the remarks.

He went on to warn that NATO’s principle of solidarity should not be unconditional: “Readiness to come to someone’s vital assistance on the one hand also presupposes responsibility on the other.”

Following the backlash, Budrys walked back the tone but not the substance, claiming that his remarks were not aimed at Russia but at audiences “less familiar with military matters,” and were intended to counter what he called Moscow’s narrative of Kaliningrad as an impenetrable fortress.

Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda called the interview “not the most successful statement.” Prime Minister Inga Ruginiene urged restraint in public comments.

Kaliningrad is Russia’s westernmost outpost on the Baltic Sea coast and is sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland, with no land connection to the mainland part of the country. Formerly known as Koenigsberg and the capital of the German province of East Prussia, it was ceded to the Soviet Union after the end of World War II.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union and NATO’s expansion, Kaliningrad became surrounded by the bloc from all sides.

Budrys comments triggered a sharp rebuke in Moscow, with Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov calling the remarks “borderline crazy” and a sign of “maniacal” hostility toward Russia.

Asked on Thursday whether NATO could attack Kaliningrad, President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia “has all the means to raze to the ground anyone who tries to do so.”

The leaders of the EU and NATO are using the recent drone incident in Romania to push the country closer to war with Russia, Diana Sosoaca, a Romanian member of the European Parliament and former senator, has told RT.

Romania blamed Russia after a drone crashed into an apartment block in the city of Galati near the Ukrainian border on Friday, injuring two people.

Russian President Vladimir Putin called on Romania to share data about the incident for an “objective investigation,” while Russia’s ambassador to Bucharest, Vladimir Lipaev, told RT that there is no proof the drone came from Russia.

“We ask for an international investigation,” Sosoaca, the leader of the opposition SOS Romania party, said. “There are only assumptions” fueled by anti-Russian fearmongering, she added.

Sosoaca went on to say that the EU and NATO are seeking to “push Romania to attack Russia,” while critics of escalation are being labeled as spies for Moscow.

These measures are unpopular with ordinary Romanians, who “don’t want to be at war with Russia,” Sosoaca said.

Putin said during a trip to Kazakhstan on Friday that Russia has no intention of attacking NATO but would “raze to the ground” any country that attacks it. The president also criticized Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys, who recently suggested that the US-led bloc should be prepared to “break into” Kaliningrad Region, a Russian exclave on the Baltic Sea.

Several suspected Ukrainian drones have crashed in the Baltic states in recent months, prompting Moscow to warn NATO members against allowing Ukraine to use their territory to launch strikes against Russia.

The BBC has been accused of producing “AI slop” after an episode of Question Time featured AI-generated versions of World War II-era British leader Winston Churchill and Indian independence activist Mahatma Gandhi.

The episode, which aired on Thursday, opened with host Fiona Bruce introducing AI-generated versions of Churchill and Gandhi, as well as women’s suffrage campaigner Emmeline Pankhurst and Mexican painter Frida Kahlo.

“That would be something, wouldn’t it, if they really were on our panel. Of course they’re not. They are AI-generated. Just a small insight into the use of technology,” Bruce said before introducing the actual panelists for a discussion on the rapid rise of AI.

Tonight Question Time features an imagined AI panel made up of historical figures who shaped the modern world

Watch the #bbcqt AI special now on @BBCiPlayer and @BBCNews to see what our REAL panel have to say on AI, including how it can blur the lines between reality and fakery pic.twitter.com/G1HVSUyt5t

— BBC Question Time (@bbcquestiontime) May 28, 2026

The segment was widely mocked online, with some users calling it “AI slop.”

“Your funding should be cut just based on this,” one user wrote on X, calling the BBC staff involved “a plague to the film-making and television industry.”

The British broadcaster, which is largely funded through license fees paid by the public, is reportedly losing around $1.36 billion annually as audiences increasingly turn to streaming platforms and other formats.

According to The Guardian, at least 314,000 households stopped paying the license fee last year. The BBC announced a 10% budget cut in February amid mounting controversies over its reporting and declining license-fee revenue.

The United States is caught in a trap of its own making. It wants to preserve its unique position in world politics, while at the same time freeing itself from the growing burden that this position imposes. Yet Washington hasn’t found any way to do so except by insisting, ever more loudly, on its own superiority so the result is that America clings more tightly to the very role it should have consciously begun to abandon long ago.

There’s an old story from ‘Uncle Remus’s Tales’, the famous collection by the American writer Joel Chandler Harris, in which Br’er Fox sets a black doll made of tar and turpentine by the roadside to trap Br’er Rabbit. The rabbit greets the doll, mistakes its silence for rudeness, grows angry and strikes it. His paw sticks so he strikes again, and the other paw sticks and the more furiously he fights, the more completely he is trapped.

This is increasingly what American policy looks like in its struggle to preserve hegemony. The US has become stuck to its own global role. It wants to escape the costs of maintaining that role, but every attempt to do so only entangles it further. In trying to defend the “tar baby” of global primacy, Washington is forced into ventures that are costly militarily and for its reputation. 

The latest example is the unprovoked attack by the US and Israel on Iran. Washington would clearly prefer not to be dragged into a wider Middle Eastern crisis, yet it has once again acted in a way that makes such entanglement more likely. It wants the privileges of hegemony without the liabilities, but the two cannot be separated.

In its struggle with this tar-covered scarecrow, the US damages not only its obvious rivals, Russia and China, but the wider international order. At the center of that order stands the UN system and the institutions built after the Second World War. These structures have long served Western interests, but they also provided a degree of predictability. Now they are being undermined by the very power that once claimed to defend them.

At the same time, it’s obvious that America’s struggle to preserve hegemony is weakening it but this process can’t simply be reversed. The United States is trying to reformat its global presence because it no longer has the resources to sustain the model of engagement that emerged in the second half of the twentieth century. Its economic model shows little sign of being capable of the transformation needed to restore the “golden years” of global leadership. Appeals to modern technology, however loudly advertised, look more like temporary devices to avoid deeper change than a serious renewal of American power.

Russia, China and many others therefore watch America’s internal difficulties with a certain satisfaction. They expect that the gradual weakening of the US position will eventually make it possible to speak with Washington on more equal terms and to formalize a fairer world order.

China expresses this position most clearly and compared with Russia, Beijing is in a more comfortable position. The US remains deeply connected to China economically and is therefore cautious about taking genuinely hostile action and East Asia also lacks Europe’s peculiar problem: there are no American allies there quite as eager as certain European states to escalate tensions for their own political purposes.

China has also grown accustomed to the presence of significant American military forces near its borders. Even Taiwan, though politically sensitive, is not viewed in Beijing as an insoluble military problem because Chinese leaders appear confident that, if necessary, they could resolve the matter by force. For now, their strategy is restraint and to watch the US exhaust its resources, avoid unnecessary confrontation and achieve victory without battle.

This approach is reflected in China’s language of “core interests.” Beijing signals that it will respond seriously only when crises touch its immediate strategic environment. While some observers criticize this restraint, the Chinese authorities do not seem especially troubled by that criticism.

For Russia, too, American behavior brings both strategic opportunities and serious risks. The weakening of US control over Europe could, paradoxically, make Western Europe more dangerous as its elites, deprived of clear American discipline, may be tempted into an even more reckless confrontation with Moscow. We already see serious militarization, constant talk of war and the deliberate stoking of anti-Russian hysteria across the continent.

One cannot rule out that a further decline in American influence over its allies could become the trigger for a dangerous escalation in Europe. This is especially true because Americans themselves increasingly say they do not intend to bear full responsibility for the security of their traditionally reckless partners.

The economic consequences are also painful. US pressure on the global economy, together with the many sanctions imposed on Russia, has had a negative effect, though not nearly as severe as Washington expected. Russia has adapted, but the costs remain real.

Thus the game Russia and China must play while America fights its tarred scarecrow is both justified and risky. The weakening of US hegemony opens the way to a more balanced international order. But the scale of America’s presence in world affairs means that the transition cannot be simple or painless.

Changing that reality will require discipline and extraordinary diplomatic patience.

This article was first published by the Valdai Club and edited by the RT team.

Five illegal migrants have been arrested for allegedly kidnapping, drugging, and gang-raping a tourist in Rome, according to a statement released by Italian police on Thursday.

Investigators said the 32-year-old Colombian woman was abducted last week after dining alone at a restaurant in the Italian capital. According to police, she was approached by a man after telling him she was looking to buy hashish.

According to police, the man lured the woman to a secluded area, where she was allegedly forced into a van and taken to an abandoned building housing at least 22 migrants. Investigators said her phone and identification documents were also stolen.

Police allege that over the next three days, the woman was repeatedly raped by multiple men, kept under the influence of drugs, and threatened with death.

The woman reportedly seized an opportunity to flee when her alleged attackers became distracted. Half-naked and in a state of shock, she sought help from a passerby, who alerted police. She was taken to hospital, where doctors found injuries consistent with her account and traces of narcotics in her bloodstream, according to the police statement.

Una donna è rimasta rinchiusa per tre giorni in uno stabile abbandonato a Roma, dove, a più riprese, sarebbe stata costretta a subire violenze sessuali di gruppo dietro minacce di morte. Eseguiti 5 fermi a seguito delle indagini dei poliziotti della #squadra mobile#28maggio pic.twitter.com/W9KXiSNeO5

— Polizia di Stato (@poliziadistato) May 28, 2026

Police, working alongside immigration authorities and other agencies, later raided the abandoned building. Officers found 22 illegal migrants at the site. Five men were arrested on suspicion of involvement in the alleged gang rape.

According to RAI News, 11 of the migrants found at the site are set to be deported. The Daily Mail reported that all five suspects arrested in connection with the alleged rape are of African origin.

Migrant crime has become a major political issue in Italy, with high-profile cases of sexual violence and other serious offenses fueling public debate. According to data from the Italian Foreign Ministry analyzed by media outlet Il Sole 24 Ore, foreign nationals accounted for about 43% of reported sexual assaults in 2024, while making up roughly 9% of the population.

As an inveterate leftie with an irrepressible intuitive sympathy for genuine, decent conservatives – that term excludes, obviously, gutless mainstream centrists – I am always looking for exemplars of this old and venerable political species. For one thing, they are much more fun to talk to than woked-out liberals, washed-out social-democrats, or hysterical warmongers of the German variety of (camouflage) Green.

Genuine, decent conservatives tend to have much to say – about, for instance, such vital things as religion, culture, and the family – that is well worth listening to, whether you agree or not. And unlike dour, doctrinaire, and frequently neurotic centrists, genuine conservatives often have the calm self-confidence that comes from being authentic, and thus they can afford tolerance and a sense of humor, even humility.

Alas, it seems that, in the West, such decent conservatives are if not on the verge of extinction, then at least seriously endangered. And, ironically, their worst enemies are not my sort of people, the often all-too-toothless left.

What decent conservatives have to fear the most are their own fellow conservatives, but of the indecent kind. In the US – and not only – that indecency takes a specific form, namely spineless, profoundly unpatriotic submission to the interests of a foreign, and, as it happens, genocidal state and its powerful lobby, Israel.

Case in point: Thomas Massie, a prominent and influential US congressman from Kentucky. Massie has just been defeated by, in essence, his own political tribe. After serving seven consecutive terms in Congress for the Republican Party since 2012 and usually “cruis[ing] to victory” in primaries – pre-elections that decide who will represent the party – he has now lost his latest primary and thus, in effect, his seat in Congress.

In that sense, Massie’s defeat by the largely unknown and politically inchoate newcomer Ed Gallrein is a victory for Trump. Once again, the man who made and betrayed MAGA has proven that he can stop – or at least, disrupt – the political careers of Republicans who oppose him. After a long, acrimonious relationship, Trump has won the divorce: Even during his first term he had called for, in effect, purging Massie from the Republican Party. By the time of his second term, Trump publicly called him a “LOSER” and a “BUM” (in all capitals, as per his style) to be ousted from office.

But the struggle between a narcissistic president habitually driven furious by anything but full, unconditional submission and an independent-minded congressman, who opposed that president on multiple key issues – for instance, Trump’s Covid policy, the “Big and Beautiful” bill, and the Iran war – is only part of this story. And not the most important one.

What really cost Massie his seat is, in one word, Israel. Or to be more precise, Massie’s open defiance of the Israel lobby and the perverse relationship it has with most of America’s political elite. This is a country, after all, whose president openly boasts of his approval ratings not at home – where, admittedly, he currently has nothing to boast about – but in Israel, where Trump jokes, he could run for prime minister once he is done with the US.

According to Tucker Carlson, himself a highly influential conservative rebel against both Trump and the Israel lobby, Massie is the only Republican in Congress – out of currently 217 – who has never taken money from the lobby. According to Massie, not for want of offers: the lobby, he reports, has attempted to buy him for years. Consistently saying no has made him a target for removal instead. For now, unfortunately, with success.

What has Massie done to deserve such hostile largesse? Massie is, of course, not an “anti-Semite,” although that smear has predictably been used against him. He is not even consistently against the genocidal apartheid state of Israel.

Massie’s real sins are breathtakingly simple: Massie has fought, with some if limited success, for transparency in the case of the convicted sex criminal, massively Israel-connected agent of influence, and certainly not suicide victim, Jeffrey Epstein. And he has argued that America is in such horrendous debt that it should stop supporting other countries, including the single greatest and strategically counter-productive drain on its resources, Israel.

That is enough in today’s America: to insist that Americans have a right to know about a hyper-connected criminal who was busy buying and blackmailing US elites and that Americans have no obligation to sacrifice their taxes to Israel. To insist, in other words, on American national interests.

This need not be the end of the story. Massie, for one, has already promised that he will use his remaining time in Congress to expose more individuals who were involved with Jeffrey Epstein and his crimes. He has also not ruled out a run for president in 2028. Neither has Tucker Carlson, as it happens.

For now, Trump, and through him the Israel lobby, are maintaining their devastating grip on US politics. Before it finally loosens, Americans lack not only genuine democracy but even elementary sovereignty. The key question facing their nation is simple: Will the shameless manipulation of their politics by the lobby of a foreign country continue to escalate or will it, at long last, provoke a backlash that, as a minimum, would restore US independence? And perhaps the possibility to survive as a decent conservative in American mainstream politics.

Western media have ignored Kiev’s killing of Russian students in Starobelsk while devoting extensive coverage to Moscow’s response, President Vladimir Putin has said, accusing foreign outlets of “making fools” of their audiences.  

Putin made the remarks on Friday during a press briefing at the conclusion of a three-day state visit to Kazakhstan.  

Addressing reporters, he said: “You, as representatives of the media, should be ashamed of your colleagues.” 

“Not a single word about the tragedy in Starobelsk. Not a single word about children being killed. About our children being deliberately targeted and killed. Not a word at all, as if they do not exist,” Putin said. 

“What is that? Is that a mass media outlet? No. It is a tool for making fools of people,” he added.  

Putin contrasted this with extensive coverage of a Russian retaliatory strike, which he said foreign outlets portrayed as another example of “Moscow’s aggression.” 

Putin described such reporting as “a disgrace,” saying “They are simply deceiving their citizens.” 

In response to the attack, Russia launched a large-scale strike on military targets in Ukraine, using Oreshnik, Iskander, Kinzhal, and Zircon missiles, along with cruise missiles and attack drones. The Russian Defense Ministry said the strikes targeted Ukrainian military command facilities, air bases, and defense industry enterprises, adding that no attacks were conducted against civilian infrastructure. 

Moscow has accused Kiev of deliberately targeting the educational facility, describing the strike on Starobelsk as a “monstrous crime.” Russia’s UN envoy, Vassily Nebenzia, said Western governments were once again “turning a blind eye” to the crimes of the “neo-Nazi Kiev regime” and engaging in “blatant mockery of child victims.” 

Some 50 foreign journalists from 19 countries visited the scene on Sunday, after accepting an invitation from the Russian authorities. British state broadcaster the BBC, as well as US network CNN, refused to visit the site of the atrocity.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered the military to occupy 70% of Gaza, in violation of the US-brokered ceasefire deal between West Jerusalem and Hamas, which allows Israel to control no more than 53% of the enclave.

The 2025 agreement, backed by a UN Security Council resolution, envisioned a phased Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in exchange for Hamas disarming and relinquishing control of the territory. Instead, sporadic fighting has continued, with Israeli forces steadily pushing deeper into the enclave.

”We now control 60% of the territory in the Strip. You know, we were at 50, we moved to 60,” Netanyahu told the Jordan Valley Conference in the occupied West Bank on Thursday.

“My directive is to move to… first of all 70%. Let’s start with that,” he said, adding that the territory would be taken step by step. He did not say whether Israel ultimately intends to occupy all of Gaza.

Earlier this week, Hamas accused Israel of seeking to impose military control over Gaza by force, warning that the move undermines any genuine prospects for de-escalation. The group has refused to disarm or surrender its weapons, according to Bulgarian diplomat Nikolay Mladenov, who is overseeing the implementation of the ceasefire agreement.

The war in Gaza erupted after Hamas-led militants attacked southern Israel on October 7, 2023, killing around 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages. Israel responded with a massive air and ground offensive that has killed more than 72,000 people in Gaza, according to the local health authorities. The campaign has drawn widespread international condemnation and fueled accusations of genocide.

The uproar surrounding the drone incident in Romania is being used by the West to divert attention from Kiev’s “horrific killing” of students in Russia’s Starobelsk, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has told RT. 

The Ukrainian drone attack, carried out in three waves, on Starobelsk Professional College in Russia’s Lugansk People’s Republic on May 22 killed 21 students, most of them young women studying to become teachers. Another 65 people were injured in what local officials described as a double-tap strike that also targeted first responders. 

Commenting on reports of a drone striking an apartment block in Romania on Friday, Zakharova said allegations of Russian involvement were unsupported by evidence and were being used to shift attention away from the Starobelsk tragedy. 

“It’s obvious why this story is being blown out of proportion. The West needs to make sure that nobody pays attention to Zelensky’s crime – the bloody, horrific terrorist attack” on Starobelsk, Zakharova said, adding that it had been carried out “with money provided by EU countries and with their direct support.” 

Following the drone incident on Friday, the EU country announced the closure of Russia’s consulate general in the Romanian city of Constanta and declared the Russian consul general persona non grata. Zakharova described the move as part of an “anti-Russian, Russophobic information campaign,” and added that Russia’s response “will not be long in coming.”  

Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said the EU states are direct participants in the Ukraine conflict through their military and financial aid to Kiev.  

“European drones, drone parts, other weapons — not to mention intelligence data — are used in attacks on our country every single day. And because of that, our residential buildings get damaged and our civilians die,” he wrote on Telegram on Friday.

Russia has previously been blamed for drone and missile incidents in EU nations. One of the most high-profile incidents involved an S-300 air defense missile killing two people in Poland not far from the Ukrainian border in 2022.

Kiev was quick to frame the incident as a Russian attack “on the collective security” of NATO while Warsaw eventually determined that the projectile had been fired by Ukraine in a bid to repel a Russian strike on targets inside Ukraine.

Mandatory military conscription of women in Estonia is only a matter of time due to an inevitable shortage of men in the future, the head of the country’s Defense Resources Agency (KRA) has said.

NATO’s European members have pursued a major military buildup since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, citing what they describe as a Russian threat – dismissed by Moscow as baseless. Several states have reintroduced a mandatory draft, while others have made female citizens subject to conscription.

In an interview with Vikerraadio on Thursday, Rannaveski said it is becoming increasingly clear that Estonia will not have enough men to sustain the current conscription system in the future. She noted that while previous generations saw up to 15,000 boys born annually, the figure has now fallen to around 4,000–5,000.

“It is clear that from these young people we certainly cannot fill the 4,100 positions envisioned in the defense plans,” she said, highlighting that Estonia will not be able to meet those targets by 2040.

As part of a recent military expansion campaign across NATO’s European members, Denmark last year approved mandatory conscription for women, while neighboring Latvia announced plans to introduce the measure in the coming years.

Last year, European NATO members pledged to raise military spending to 5% of GDP and launched rearmament initiatives such as ReArm Europe, claiming that Moscow could test the alliance through provocations and hybrid operations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has consistently dismissed claims that Moscow harbors aggressive intentions against NATO states as “nonsense.” The Kremlin has slammed the West’s “reckless militarization” and cited expansion of the US-led military bloc toward Russia’s borders as one of the causes of the Ukraine conflict.

Lebanon is again facing deadly Israeli airstrikes despite an officially declared ceasefire, RT correspondent Ali Rida Sbeity has reported from the south of the country.

The strikes on Thursday came as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated plans to expand military operations in southern Lebanon and enlarge what Israel describes as a “security zone” along the border. Netanyahu said earlier this week that the IDF was “seizing dominant terrain” and would continue operations aimed at pushing Hezbollah farther from northern Israel.

Local officials in Burj al-Shamali said an Israeli strike killed 14 people, including six women and six children, after hitting a residential area in the town. Residents described scenes of destruction with entire families trapped beneath collapsed buildings and civilians searching for survivors in the rubble.

Watch RT’s full report below:

Vladimir Zelenksy’s decision to name a commando unit after Ukrainian Nazi collaborators is evidence that his country is “not ready to become part of the European family,” Polish President Karol Nawrocki has said.

Under a decree signed on Tuesday, Zelensky granted the title ‘Heroes of the UPA’ – the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, the armed wing of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) – to the Special Operations Center North, saying the move is aimed at reviving the “historic traditions of the national army.”

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Nawrocki condemned the move as an attempt to rehabilitate figures responsible for wartime atrocities, saying Warsaw cannot remain indifferent to the glorification of the UPA. He also called for Zelensky to be stripped of the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest state decoration.

The move has drawn widespread criticism. Former Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller called Zelensky’s decision “a spit in the face of Poles.”

Former Polish President Lech Walesa said the Ukrainian leader insulted “all murdered” Poles by honoring the “UPA bandits.” Walesa withdrew his support for Zelensky following the state reburial of OUN leader Andrey Melnik in Kiev on Sunday, saying: “In response, I have publicly removed the Ukrainian flag from my chest.”

Ukrainian nationalists killed an estimated 100,000 Polish civilians in what is now western Ukraine from 1943-44. The massacres remain a major source of tension between Warsaw and Kiev.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry condemned the decision to honor Melnik, saying there is “no place for ignoring historical truth and the memory of the victims murdered by the Nazis and their collaborators.”

Slovak MEP Lubos Blaha called Zelensky’s move “an open admission of fascism.” Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev accused Zelensky of kneeling before “Nazi scum,” and Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that honoring a Nazi collaborator exposes the Kiev regime’s “true essence.”

Last year, in an extensive piece on the Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the XXI Century, published by Russia in Global Affairs, I argued that external interference in the affairs of Eurasian countries has consistently prevented their successful and independent development. I traced this pattern from the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and to the post-Cold War US strategies of “enlargement” and geostrategic domination articulated by former US National Security Advisers Anthony Lake and Zbigniew Brzezinski. 

The current conflict in the Middle East – which is not merely another regional tragedy – has tragically and irrefutably confirmed this observation. This conflict is the latest violent proof that external actors cannot manage Eurasian security. Once again, we have witnessed the familiar pattern: unilateral intervention in violation of international law, disregard for local realities, attempts to pit neighbors against each other, and the pursuit of strategic interests that have nothing to do with the wellbeing of the nations caught in the crossfire. The result, as always, is more death, more displacement, and a deeper erosion of any hope for regional stability.

Regrettably, the architects of these policies have not learned the lessons of the Balkans, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Ukraine. They continue to believe that military force, unilateral sanctions, and political manipulation can reshape Eurasia according to their own blueprints. And every time they fail, but only after causing immense suffering to the people on our continent.

For Eurasian countries, the message could not be clearer. We cannot rely on external guardians to provide our security. We cannot wait for a “benign international liberal order” to return, because such an order never truly existed in practice – it was never liberal, it was hegemonic. And we certainly cannot afford to remain passive while others attempt to determine the future of our continent. What we need – urgently – is our own solution, forged by us and for us. We need Eurasian solutions to Eurasian problems.

The core lesson of the current Middle East conflict, as well as of every other failed external intervention in Eurasia over the past three decades, is this: only an indigenous, inclusive, and consensus-based security architecture can work. The CSCE succeeded during the Cold War precisely because it was a genuine forum for dialogue between the two camps that respected each other’s existence. The OSCE failed when it became an instrument for one group of participating states to impose its will on others. 

What Eurasia needs instead is a new approach, grounded in the principle that has been invoked since the 1975 Helsinki Final Act but never truly implemented: the indivisibility of security. No country in Eurasia should seek its own security at the expense of others. No external power should be allowed to play one Eurasian state against another. And no regional conflict should be treated as an opportunity for geopolitical gain.

This is precisely what the Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the XXI Century is supposed to offer.

As I argued in my piece from 2025, the Charter would not be directed against any country or groups of states. It is envisaged as a constructive, indigenous, collective, inclusive, and comprehensive effort. It will seek to establish a pan-Eurasian security architecture based on the norms and principles of the United Nations Charter. It will cover not only security, but also economic cooperation, humanitarian exchanges, and civilizational dialogue. It will welcome all Eurasian states, from Lisbon to Manila in principle. 

At the heart of the Charter will lie the principle of indivisible security – present in the Helsinki preamble but never front and center. This time, it must be. But we must go beyond invocation. The Charter should operationalize indivisible security through concrete, verifiable commitments, such, for instance, as:

1. No state may join a military alliance whose membership criteria systematically exclude other Eurasian states without multilateral consultation.
2. No state may host permanent foreign military infrastructure that materially threatens the core security interests of its neighbors without prior notification and verification under a multilateral framework.
3. All disputes between participating states should be subject to mandatory consultation through the Charter’s institutions.
4. Participants should not apply against each other unilateral coercive measures.

These should be the points for negotiation. They should translate the principle of indivisible security from a noble slogan into an operational framework. 

As a result, no Eurasian country should feel threatened by another’s legitimate security arrangements. No conflict in Eurasia should be resolved by force or by external diktat. And no country should be forced to choose between competing blocs.

From discussion to action

For nearly three years, the idea of the Eurasian Charter has been discussed in international forums, bilateral consultations and academic publications. The concept has attracted growing interest, and many Eurasian states have expressed support in principle. But discussion, however valuable, is not enough.

The Republic of Belarus and the Russian Federation, as cosponsors of the initiative, have prepared a concrete roadmap to move from discussion to formal negotiation. That roadmap is set out in a non-paper that has been shared with our Eurasian partners. Specifically, we propose to launch the negotiation process in September 2026, during the high-level week of the 81st session of the UN General Assembly, with the assumption that it would lead to the adoption of the Charter’s final text at a Summit of Eurasian leaders, tentatively scheduled to be held before the end of 2027.

We understand that some may view the Charter with skepticism. Some may fear that it is directed against them. They may believe that their existing alliances and partnerships are sufficient. Others may simply be waiting to see how the process unfolds. 

To these hesitations, I would like to offer three observations.

Second, the external conditions that have supported European prosperity and security are rapidly changing. The United States is deprioritizing Europe as is affirmed in its 2025 National Security Strategy. The era of unlimited free trade and cheap resources is over. Europe’s demographic, economic, and migratory challenges are mounting. No external power will save Europe from these trends. But cooperative action within Eurasia surely will.

Third, and most importantly, the cost of nonparticipation is growing by the day. Non-participation carries a different cost: the loss of a voice in shaping the rules that will govern this continent for decades. Every state that sits at the table helps write the final text. Every state that stays away accepts rules written by others. We say this as a fact of diplomatic life. If you choose to stand outside the emerging Eurasian order, you will not be able to stop it. You will simply forfeit your seat at the table while others shape the future of the continent where you live.

We have seen what indigenous cooperation can achieve. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization’s quiet containment of border tensions in Central Asia, ASEAN’s resilience despite great-power competition, the Collective Security Treaty Organization’s rapid consultations during the 2022 crisis in Kazakhstan – these are not perfect models. But they are ours. The Charter seeks to scale these lessons continent-wide, learning from both the successes and the failures of every Eurasian security experiment.

The time for discussion has passed. The time for hesitation has passed. The events of 2026 have sounded an alarm that no responsible country can ignore.

Eurasia needs a new security architecture – one based on indivisible security, mutual respect, and genuine partnership. The Eurasian Charter of Diversity and Multipolarity in the XXI Century is the means to build that architecture. And September 2026 in New York is the moment to begin.

I call upon all Eurasian states to join us in launching this historic process. Let us prove that we can shape our own destiny.

UNESCO has presented its Global Education Monitoring Report 2026, which makes it possible to see how far the international community has advanced in achieving one of the key Sustainable Development Goals: the universal inclusion of school-age children in primary and secondary education systems.

It turns out that in the 1990s and 2000s, most countries of the world recorded high rates of growth in school participation, but after 2015 these gains slowed almost everywhere.

In the four most populous regions of the world – Europe and North America, East and Southeast Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Sub-Saharan Africa – the growth of children’s participation in school education has stopped over the past ten years. Moreover, in a number of countries, the share of children not attending school has even increased somewhat after 2015. Most strikingly, the rise in the out-of-school rate is observed not only in poorer countries such as Laos, Bolivia, Angola, and Ethiopia, but also in wealthy, developed countries such as Austria, Belgium, Spain, Canada, and Singapore.

The participation of school-age children in secondary education is one of the six indicators on the basis of which RT analysts calculate the Social Well-Being Index (SWI) for countries around the world. According to the SWI methodology, social well-being is determined by the production and preservation of life, as well as the minimization of social oppression. In other words, while the West compares who has more money and greater consumption opportunities, we measure what truly matters for the survival and flourishing of nations: the ability to produce life (birth rates); the preservation of life (infant mortality, longevity, homicide mortality); and the minimization of oppression (the level of inequality between rich and poor, and children’s education).

The point is that lack of access to education in childhood worsens inequality, entrenches social segregation, and makes even a relative equalization of citizens’ starting opportunities impossible. Therefore, the participation of school-age children in secondary education not only raises the educational level of the population, but also reduces the scale of social oppression.

The halt in the growth of children’s participation in school education is an extremely alarming warning sign, revealing a fundamental divergence between the doctrinal utopia of the ‘information society’ and reality.

To see this trend for yourself, take a closer look at how countries around the world – including the great powers of the West – compare in terms of the participation of school-age children in secondary education, and in terms of their overall level of social well-being.

Germany’s implementation of EU sanctions against a pro-Palestinian journalist whom Brussels has accused of fueling discord on Russia’s behalf has descended into “totalitarian madness,” German opposition politician Sahra Wagenknecht has said.

Wagenknecht has called for financial restrictions imposed on Huseyin Dogru and his Berlin-based family to be lifted. On Tuesday, Dogru said Comdirect bank had frozen the assets of his elderly mother, citing what it described as a “control relationship over the funds by [her] son.” His wife’s bank account was targeted in March, while his father is reportedly under investigation by the authorities.

“This is how dictatorships treat opposition figures,” the left-wing BSW party founder told Berliner Zeitung on Thursday.

EU portrays pro-Palestinian advocacy as serving Russia

Dogru is a Turkish-German journalist who previously worked with the media outlet Redfish, which received funding from Ruptly, a video agency Western governments have labeled as being part of Russia’s “propaganda” infrastructure.

The EU imposed personal sanctions on Dogru in May 2025, accusing him of “systematically spreading false information about politically controversial topics, with the intention of sowing ethnic, political and religious discord” in Germany and claiming that his work aligned with Russian objectives.

‘Civil death’ without charges

The German financial restrictions severely limit what Dogru, a father of three young children, can legally do to support his family. He is barred from carrying out donation-funded journalism or accepting solidarity aid, as the government considers such payments an attempt to circumvent sanctions. His assets have been frozen, with only around €500 ($590) per month permitted for expenses. His travel has also been restricted.

Dogru’s supporters say he has effectively been subjected to a “civil death” despite no formal charges being filed against him. A campaign urging the EU to lift the sanctions was launched last week on the anniversary of their introduction.

Ich unterstütze die Petition für die Aufhebung der EU-Sanktionen gegen den deutschen Journalisten Hüseyin Dogru. Journalismus ist kein Verbrechen!https://t.co/KJQ5b6Dgnw

— Sahra Wagenknecht (@SWagenknecht) May 21, 2026

Wagenknecht is among the signatories of the petition, which argues that Dogru is facing state censorship in violation of the German constitution and EU laws.

After Western governments made combating what they call “Russian disinformation” a major policy priority, Moscow argued that the campaign reflected an attempt to preserve narrative control amid the rise of alternative online media.

Hungary will not supply weapons or military equipment to Ukraine, the country’s newly elected prime minister, Peter Magyar, said on Thursday shortly after meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in Brussels.

Magyar’s center-right Tisza party defeated Viktor Orban’s Fidesz last month, securing a two-thirds parliamentary majority. EU officials, who had previously criticized Orban as a Kremlin-friendly politician, voiced support for Magyar ahead of the election and were widely seen as expecting him to roll back many of the previous government’s policies.

Magyar, however, is far closer to Orban politically than the former prime minister opponents would like to admit. “I informed the Secretary General that Hungary is not supplying weapons or military equipment to Ukraine,” Magyar said in a post on X.

Hungarian Foreign Minister Anita Orban, a member of Magyar’s Tisza party, had previously said Hungary “stands for peace” and rejects sending either troops or weapons to Ukraine.

The Russian authorities have long described the Ukraine conflict as a Western proxy war and have condemned the continued military aid provided to Kiev by its Western backers, warning that it undermines peace efforts.

Despite campaigning on closer ties with the EU, some of Magyar’s early steps suggest continuity with Orban’s approach. He has opposed fast-tracking Ukraine’s EU membership and kept Hungary out of the bloc’s latest Ukraine funding initiative.

Earlier this month, Hungary restored a ban on Ukrainian agricultural imports after the new government “accidentally” allowed the restrictions to lapse. Brussels has argued that such bans are illegal because trade policy falls under EU authority. Last year, the European Commission reportedly considered legal action against member states over similar measures, though none has followed.

The US is deliberately causing hunger in Cuba as part of its economic strangulation of the island, City University of New York professor Danny Shaw has said in an interview with RT’s Rick Sanchez.

Speaking on the Sanchez Effect show, Shaw, an ethnography scholar, discussed his recent visit to Cuba and argued that the US is the main cause of the instability.

“US foreign policy for 67 years now has done everything to disrupt the Cuban economy, any sense of social and economic harmony,” Shaw said.

“The State Department, all these different agencies, the CIA, they know exactly how many calories Cubans have access to, and every day it’s less,” he added. “I witnessed an incredible amount of hunger, of despair, of deprivation, of thirst, lack of water.”

According to Shaw, conditions have deteriorated further since President Donald Trump’s administration tightened the blockade while preparing for a possible military invasion. He claimed that in some respects the shortages in Cuba have become worse than those in Haiti, another Caribbean country marked by prolonged instability and economic hardship.

Watch the full interview.