❌

Normal view

At Least 852 Migrants Dead or Missing in Three Months, EU Rights Agency Reports

23 October 2026 at 14:58

At least 852 people died or went missing while trying to reach Europe by sea between July and September 2026, according to a new report from the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.

The agency’s migration bulletin, published on 22 October, draws on International Organization for Migration data and examines the protection of people travelling through the Mediterranean and along the Atlantic route towards the Canary Islands.

The highest recorded number was on the West Africa–Atlantic route, with 283 deaths or disappearances. The Western Mediterranean accounted for 229, the Eastern Mediterranean for 199 and the Central Mediterranean for 141.

The findings come as the EU implements its Migration and Asylum Pact and governments face continuing scrutiny over rescue operations, border policing and the treatment of children.

The routes behind the figures

The four route totals add up to 852. The overall figure is a minimum because some shipwrecks may go unreported and the identities or number of passengers can be difficult to establish.

The Atlantic crossing to the Canary Islands involves long journeys in small vessels exposed to changing weather and limited rescue coverage. Different Mediterranean routes present their own risks, including departures from North Africa and Turkey.

The agency is careful to distinguish people confirmed dead from those reported missing. Both are included in the latest figures; the data should not be described as a verified count of recovered bodies.

New attention to Ceuta

The bulletin also reviews the mass attempted crossing into the Spanish enclave of Ceuta in July. Spanish government figures cited by the agency put irregular entries from Morocco at more than 72,000 on 30 July.

The event raised questions about reception facilities, safeguarding of children, alleged excessive force and access to protection procedures. Allegations against authorities require examination on their merits and must not be conflated with findings of guilt.

EU Today has reported separately on the Ceuta crisis. The new agency bulletin adds comparative data across migration routes and examines systemic safeguards under EU law.

Monitoring under the migration pact

Independent rights-monitoring structures required under the EU’s new migration framework are still being established in parts of the bloc, the agency says. Their effectiveness will depend on access, independence and whether allegations can be investigated.

The report also addresses restrictions affecting civilian search-and-rescue organisations and uneven support for people displaced from Ukraine.

European governments are simultaneously attempting to reduce irregular crossings, tackle smuggling networks and maintain legal duties to rescue people in distress. These obligations operate together rather than replacing one another.

The new figures provide a measure of the human consequences of dangerous routes, while the recommendations will test how far member states can translate the new framework into effective procedures.

French authorities tighten restrictions and ban specific protests

23 October 2026 at 14:55
France is bracing for another weekend of protests, after violence erupted on the sidelines of last week's mobilisations. Paris is extending a partial curfew in parts of the city until Monday, while protests are banned altogether in the cities of Marseille and Lyon. 70,000 security personnel will be deployed on Saturday and only union demonstrations will be authorised.

Reform UK Donor’s Former Business Links to Iranian Foundation Revealed in French Court Documents

23 October 2026 at 14:53

French arbitration records show that businessman Sasan Ghandehari, a financial supporter of Nigel Farage, invested in a telecommunications venture partly owned by an Iranian foundation subsequently sanctioned by Washington. His representatives deny any wrongdoing.

A French arbitration judgment has revealed that a British businessman who has become a financial supporter of Nigel Farage previously invested in an Iranian telecommunications venture partly owned by a religious foundation subsequently sanctioned by the United States.

Hossein Ghandehari, known as Sasan, was linked through his family’s HP Trust to a project to develop fibre-optic infrastructure in Iran. Documents examined in an investigation published on 22 October show that Ori Group, ultimately owned by the trust, held 49 per cent of Omran Razavi International, with the remaining 51 per cent held by Astan Quds Razavi (AQR).

The disclosures have attracted attention because Ghandehari has pledged substantial financial support for Reform UK. They do not, however, establish that he breached sanctions or that money linked to the Iranian venture was used to fund British politics.

Iranian Venture and Sanctions

The telecommunications project originated in a contract awarded by Iran’s state-owned Telecommunication Infrastructure Company in 2012. Ori Group became a shareholder in the joint venture in 2015, although Ghandehari’s lawyers say the agreement for its stake was signed in December 2014.

AQR, based in Mashhad, administers extensive religious and commercial holdings. On 13 January 2021, the US Treasury imposed sanctions on AQR, describing it as an organisation controlled by Iran’s supreme leader and alleging that its assets benefited senior Iranian officials.

That designation came several years after the venture’s collapse in 2016. Sanctions imposed in 2021 cannot, by themselves, demonstrate wrongdoing in transactions conducted before the designation.

According to the reported arbitration material, AQR took control of the joint venture in 2016. Ghandehari’s representatives maintain that the project was intended to expand internet access and encourage political reform, and that the arrangements received approval from authorities in France and the United States.

His lawyers say the venture ended in asset seizures and persecution by Iranian authorities. They reject suggestions that Ghandehari supported the Iranian leadership, and say AQR had been a necessary local partner for infrastructure work in Iran.

Connections to Reform UK

The disclosures have renewed scrutiny of Ghandehari’s relationship with Farage. In January, Ghandehari paid for accreditation for the Reform UK leader and a member of his staff at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

The House of Commons register of interests records the cost as £50,482.16. This was a declared benefit associated with an overseas visit, not a £50,000 cash donation to Reform UK.

Ghandehari has said he intends to move his tax residence from Switzerland to Britain and make regular substantial contributions to the party. He describes HP Trust as having a portfolio valued at approximately $10 billion, although the trust’s financial position has not been independently established through public accounts.

Farage has repeatedly criticised Iran’s government and supported American military action against Tehran. His public position has brought additional attention to his financial supporter’s historical dealings with an Iranian state-linked institution, although there is no evidence that Farage participated in those arrangements.

Another connection concerns John Richard Simpson, whose company Interior Architecture Landscape donated £200,000 to Reform UK in 2025. Simpson later acquired Orico General Trading, a Dubai-based business previously owned by HP Trust and involved in supplying equipment for the Iranian project.

Simpson says he took over Orico to wind down its operations after the Iranian venture failed. Interior Architecture Landscape has said the Ghandehari family is a client but had no role in its political donations, which it maintains were funded from legitimate British business.

Questions Over Political Funding

The overlapping commercial relationships have brought renewed scrutiny of Reform UK’s financing. They do not establish that Simpson’s company’s donations originated with Ghandehari, AQR or any Iranian state institution.

The Electoral Commission’s rules permit contributions from eligible UK-registered companies carrying on business in Britain, while placing responsibility on political parties to verify their funding sources. The legality of any individual donation depends on its circumstances and the applicable requirements.

EU Today has previously examined Reform UK’s decision to accept cryptocurrency donations and the questions surrounding identification of the original sources of political funding.

The latest disclosures concern a separate issue: historical commercial dealings in Iran, the ownership of connected companies and their subsequent relationships with British political donors. The arbitration material provides a documented chronology, but does not establish improper financing of Reform UK or foreign interference in British elections.

Jewish groups clash over whether EU antisemitism envoy should influence Israel policy, as controversial von Schnurbein goes back to Berlin

23 October 2026 at 14:49

Two leading Jewish groups want the EU’s next antisemitism tsar to also brief diplomats on foreign policy – despite the controversy it caused the last one, Katharina von Schnurbein.

“EU external decisions have direct consequences for Jews living in Europe. Diplomats should hear from the person who sees those consequences every day,” said Pinchas Goldschmidt, who heads the Conference of European Rabbis (CER) in Munich, Germany.

The European Jewish Congress (EJC) in Brussels also told EUobserver: “The [EU antisemitism] coordinator should ensure that this objective is systematically reflected in all relevant EU policies, including external action and foreign policy.”

They spoke as von Schnurbein prepared to leave her EU post after 10 years to become a German “federal government commissioner for Jewish life in Germany and the fight against antisemitism” on 28 October.

The 53-year-old German baroness was highly active at events in EU capitals, had three staff, and travelled to Israel, Serbia, Switzerland, and the US.

She also worked next door to European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and had close ties with the Israeli government.

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

AI Investment Concerns Hit Global Markets as European Technology Shares Fall

23 October 2026 at 14:33

Concerns about the cost of artificial intelligence investment triggered sharp losses in American technology shares on Thursday, with the sell-off affecting European markets as investors reassessed the outlook for chipmakers and major digital companies.

The Nasdaq Composite fell 2.6 per cent, while the Philadelphia semiconductor index lost nearly seven per cent. Shares in Meta declined sharply after its latest earnings revived concern over the capital needed to expand AI infrastructure.

Trading stabilised in parts of Asia on Friday, but European shares remained under pressure. The retreat came alongside a rise in oil prices and renewed demand for US government bonds, underscoring investors’ sensitivity to several risks at once.

The underlying issue is whether the enormous spending commitments announced by technology companies can generate sufficient returns to justify current valuations.

The developments are detailed in the latest reporting and official material, against the background of EU Today’s earlier coverage.

Why the AI investment bill matters

Building and operating AI systems requires large data centres, advanced chips, electricity supplies and network infrastructure. The companies financing that expansion are investing before the full scale and profitability of future demand can be known.

Strong revenue growth can coexist with higher costs, rising debt and pressure on cash flow. For investors, the question is not simply whether AI will be widely used, but how its benefits will be divided among software companies, infrastructure providers and customers.

The latest market reaction follows earnings announcements that renewed scrutiny of spending plans. A one-day share-price fall does not establish that the AI sector is entering a prolonged contraction.

European exposure

Europe participates in the AI supply chain through semiconductor equipment, advanced manufacturing, energy infrastructure and cloud services. A repricing of major American technology companies can therefore affect European-listed firms even when their own operating results have not changed.

The Netherlands and France are among the markets with listed technology businesses exposed to global semiconductor demand. Falling shares may also reflect general risk aversion rather than a judgment about an individual company’s prospects.

European policymakers have argued for stronger domestic computing capacity and digital independence. The economic challenge is to support that capability without assuming every investment will earn a commercial return.

Energy prices add pressure

Brent crude’s rise to around $114 a barrel has intensified uncertainty about inflation and borrowing costs. Rising fuel prices can affect both households and power-intensive sectors, while higher interest rates tend to reduce the present value of expected future profits.

Global investors have consequently moved towards government bonds and other perceived safer assets. That shift reflects changing risk assessments, not a forecast that markets will necessarily keep falling.

Future earnings reports, capital-expenditure plans and evidence of customer demand will determine whether this week’s losses become a sustained correction or a short-lived reassessment.

For Europe, the sell-off puts renewed emphasis on the financing and competitiveness of its own technology ambitions.

Oil Climbs Above $114 as Middle East Attacks Renew Europe’s Energy Fears

23 October 2026 at 14:22

Oil prices rose above $114 a barrel on Friday as attacks in Saudi Arabia and the prospect of further Middle Eastern escalation increased concern about the security of global energy supplies.

Brent crude futures reached $114.72 during the session, their highest level since early May, before easing slightly. The benchmark was trading around $114.31, while US West Texas Intermediate futures rose above $101.

The immediate pressure followed Houthi attacks in Saudi Arabia and intensifying concerns about shipping through the Bab el-Mandeb strait, the narrow passage connecting the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden. Saudi Aramco reportedly ordered the evacuation of its headquarters in Dhahran.

For Europe, the rise introduces an additional cost pressure when natural gas prices are also climbing sharply and policymakers are trying to contain inflation without further weakening industrial growth.

The developments are detailed in the latest reporting and official material, against the background of EU Today’s earlier coverage.

A fragile energy market

The significance of the attacks is not confined to facilities directly affected. Traders price the probability of interruption across production, ports, tankers and shipping routes. Even a limited episode can raise insurance premiums and freight charges while companies adjust deliveries.

Bab el-Mandeb is an important shipping bottleneck for commercial traffic using the Suez Canal. Sustained insecurity can force vessels onto longer routes around Africa, delaying cargoes and increasing transport costs.

Other disruptions have compounded uncertainty, including concerns about a Libyan pipeline and an oil spill near the United Arab Emirates. The scale and duration of their impact remain uncertain.

What higher prices mean for Europe

European manufacturers, haulage companies, airlines and agricultural producers are sensitive to increases in fuel and transport costs. Those pressures can eventually reach consumer prices, although the timing and size depend on contracts, taxes and domestic competition.

The European Union has sought to reduce its reliance on Russian fossil fuels since Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. That diversification does not insulate the bloc from global prices, which reflect worldwide trading conditions.

European natural gas prices have also moved higher in October, adding to the burden faced by energy-intensive industries. Gas and oil are different markets, but geopolitical tensions can affect both.

Central banks and governments

Persistent energy-price increases complicate the inflation outlook for the European Central Bank. Higher imported energy costs can reduce household purchasing power and slow investment, even before interest-rate decisions respond.

A temporary spike may reverse if shipping lanes remain open and supplies are restored. A sustained interruption would produce a different economic calculation, particularly ahead of winter.

The immediate priority for European governments is to assess exposure through import contracts, reserve levels and supply routes rather than assume that a quoted oil price translates directly into the same percentage increase in household bills.

Albanian MPs Clash as Student Protests Bring Political Crisis into Parliament

23 October 2026 at 14:18

Albanian lawmakers clashed in parliament on Thursday after opposition representatives attempted to force a debate on student demonstrations that have continued for ten days in Tirana.

Opposition MPs displayed photographs of students injured during confrontations with police and blocked the parliamentary podium. The assembly continued voting on legislation despite the disruption.

The protests began on 13 October, with demonstrators calling for improvements to universities and student accommodation, more affordable education and stronger employment prospects for graduates.

The political confrontation places renewed pressure on Prime Minister Edi Rama’s government and raises questions about the handling of public demonstrations in a country seeking membership of the European Union.

The developments are detailed in the latest reporting and official material, against the background of EU Today’s earlier coverage.

How the demonstrations developed

The initial protests outside the education ministry turned confrontational, with police deploying crowd-control measures and making arrests. Subsequent demonstrations broadened the dispute from university conditions to the government’s response.

Students have raised demands about accommodation, fees, public investment and the transition from education to employment. Those concerns should be distinguished from the strategies of opposition parties that have subsequently sought parliamentary scrutiny.

The government faces the task of responding to the original educational demands while addressing allegations about police conduct. Claims of excessive force require independent examination rather than assumption.

A parliamentary confrontation

Thursday’s disorder followed the refusal of parliamentary leaders to hold the debate requested by the opposition. Blocking the podium was intended to interrupt proceedings and draw attention to the treatment of protesters.

The governing side proceeded with legislative business, producing a direct confrontation over parliamentary procedure and accountability. Footage and descriptions of the clashes do not in themselves establish criminal liability for those involved.

The disagreement is also a test of the institutions intended to resolve disputes through political debate rather than confrontation.

Albania’s European ambitions

As an EU candidate country, Albania is assessed on reforms covering the rule of law, public administration, judicial independence and fundamental rights. The management of demonstrations and the operation of parliament can therefore become relevant to enlargement scrutiny.

European integration does not dictate a particular response to student fees or education policy. It does, however, require institutions capable of handling public grievances lawfully and transparently.

EU Today has already reported on Albania’s recent anti-government demonstrations. The latest development is the transfer of that conflict into the legislature, together with renewed questions about the handling of student complaints.

The immediate test is whether government and opposition can reopen debate on the protesters’ demands without further disorder, while the authorities account for their response to earlier demonstrations.

Big fish hooked in Hungary, as Orbán’s ex-bank chief placed in custody (Day 163 of the Tisza government)

23 October 2026 at 14:09

The series continues as we report on developments following April’s historic election and on the steps taken since then by the Tisza government. This week, we cover the following topics:

  • Orbán’s former right-hand man in custody.
  • What did we learn from Tisza’s first budget?
  • Ursula von der Leyen to give a speech on the anniversary of the revolution.
  • Poll of the week: more than four million people back Tisza.

Orbán’s ex-right-hand man in custody

The last time a central bank governor was taken into custody in Hungary was in 1944, during the German occupation, as Válasz Online pointed out. This 82-year hiatus ended on Wednesday (21 October), when György Matolcsy was taken into police custody.

But Matolcsy is not simply a former central bank governor; he is one of the architects of Orbán’s economic policy, a key figure in the former prime minister’s system, and together with his family he has in recent years become one of the symbols of Fidesz’s taste for luxury.

Who is György Matolcsy?

“I have a very strong emotional relationship with Matolcsy. I owe him a great deal, I have learned a great many things from him. Matolcsy is an economist of historic stature,” prime minister Péter Magyar quoted ex-prime minister Viktor Orbán’s words from an interview last November, after the former central bank governor had been taken into custody.

Matolcsy was a member of the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party (MSZMP), and after the regime change he became prime minister József Antall’s chief adviser. In 1999 he joined Orbán’s advisory board, and from 2000 to 2002 he served as economy minister in the first Orbán cabinet.

Even after the 2002 election defeat he remained loyal to Orbán, and in 2010 he became minister for national economy, meaning he was put in charge of both the finance and economy portfolios at the head of a merged super-ministry. It was at this time that Orbán called him his right-hand man.

Matolcsy was the architect of Orbán’s “unorthodox economic policy”; he oversaw the nationalisation of private pension funds, the sending home of the IMF from Hungary, and the introduction of high sectoral surtaxes.

The great bank heist

He was appointed central bank governor in 2013, and by 2016 the foundations scandal had already broken. It emerged that 266bn forints’ worth (€840m) of public assets had been shifted into the foundations of the Hungarian National Bank (MNB). These foundations bought buildings and works of art, and also granted substantial benefits to their own leaders.

Later, the foundations’ money was entrusted to an asset management company, which obtained further funds and thus came to control assets of around 500bn forints, of which some 400bn forints (€1bn) – was public money.

This asset manager built up an international corporate network, behind which stood the central bank governor’s son, Ádám Matolcsy, and his circle. The asset manager bought into risky foreign companies, spending a significant part of its resources. The Matolcsy family visibly became very rich, and Ádám also amassed a notorious Porsche collection.

György Matolcsy’s mandate expired in 2025, and after his departure the State Audit Office also concluded that abuses may have taken place at the central bank. For a long time, however, no police investigation was launched.

The current case

The current charges relate to a case that unfolded in the final days of Matolcsy’s activity as central bank governor. Matolcsy wanted to ensure that his family would control the roughly 500bn forints (€1.25bn) of central bank assets even after he no longer held office.

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

New research reveals “striking challenges” facing “Brexit couples”

23 October 2026 at 14:07

 

Post-Brexit changes to EU citizens’ rights have had a detrimental impact on the mental health of those involved and their families, according to a new report.

It says those affected have had their lives “turned upside down” by the demands of the rules.

Some even reportedly contemplated taking their own lives because of the “striking” challenges faced by so-called “Brexit couples”.

These are some of the findings of exhaustive new research in the UK surrounding the end of decades of free movement between the UK and the EU.

Brexit couples are deemed to be romantic or marital partners made up of a British citizen (or UK resident) and an EU, EEA, or Swiss citizen who must navigate the UK’s post-Brexit immigration system to live together in the UK.

Before Brexit, UK-EU couples could live together easily in the UK under EU free movement laws but, after Brexit, EU partners without EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) status lost that automatic right.

The Brexit Couples project was conducted by Katharine Charsley, Nicole Hoellerer and Katie Cross of Bristol University, Helena Wray and Jasmin El Shewy, both of Exeter University. The results were presented during a meeting of a UK parliamentary group concerned with EU citizens’ rights  earlier this week. The session brought together researchers, MPs and people with direct experience of the challenges faced by “Brexit couples”.

The discussion was an opportunity to hear personal testimonies, examine emerging research and consider what further action may be needed to support affected families.

Helena Wray, Professor of Migration Law at the University of Exeter and  Katharine Charsley, Professor of Migration Studies at the University of Bristol shared insights from the project. Their findings are particularly timely on the eve of a key EU/UK summit in Brussels in November when new efforts are expected to be made at the much-vaunted EU/UK “Re-set” in relations between the two sides.

Afterwards, Prof Charsley told this site, “There is a dramatic contrast between the EU free movement enjoyed by UK-EU couples and families before Brexit, and the UK’s family migration system, one of the most restrictive in the world.

“UK-EU couples who want to start their lives together in the UK and families wanting to return after living in the EU often find their plans scuppered by a high and rigid minimum income threshold, extortionate visa fees and other costs, and an over-complex application process.

“Even for those who successfully apply for a visa, the experience is highly stressful, impacting on relationships and financial and mental wellbeing,” added Prof Charsley.

The study points out that 50 years of free movement between the UK and the EU ended on 31 December 2020, when the Brexit transition period expired.

EU citizens already living in the UK could usually preserve their residence rights through the EU Settlement Scheme but, since then, EU citizens wanting to live in the UK must comply with what the study calls the UK’s “highly restrictive migration rules.”

The Brexit Couples project tracked the experiences of members of the first cohort of EU citizens seeking to enter the UK after Brexit as the spouses and partners of British citizens and residents and who therefore had to go through the visa system.

The authors state, “The position of this group was barely considered during the Brexit negotiations even though UK-EU relationships were commonplace, are likely to continue to develop after Brexit, and UK-EU couples living overseas will continue to seek to return.”

They add, “The UK’s partner migration rules are among the most restrictive, complex and expensive in the world.”

The study says that the contrast between the position under free movement before Brexit and the immigration rules after Brexit “is striking and became more so” after the minimum income requirement for UK sponsors increased from £18,600 to £29,000 pain 2024.

The project report, called “Brexit Couples: UK-EU couples in the British immigration system”, showed that, after a “slow start”, the number of UK-EU couples applying under the partner migration rules has started to increase “significantly.”

The researchers interviewed more than 50 UK-EU couples at various points of the partner migration process: some were considering an application, others had made a successful or unsuccessful application, and some could not meet the requirements or had decided not to apply.

“Having lived through an era of almost unrestricted movement between the UK and the rest of the EU, many were shocked to be now treated as migrants,” the report says.

“This led to reflection on who a ‘migrant’ is, and the political and social meanings of the term.”

“Some interviewees hoped for legal recognition of their position as European citizens while, for others, there was a new appreciation of the global and racialised inequalities caused by border controls,” states the 75-page study.

It goes on, “Our statistical analysis shows that UK-EU couples living in the UK before Brexit were on average more educated and more likely to be in professional or managerial occupations than couples in which both partners were born in the UK.

“These characteristics were also present in our sample. yet our research found that they all experienced the partner visa process as difficult, complex, expensive, and stressful.”

The authors say, “As we demonstrate, participants had their lives turned upside down by the demands of the rules and some parents were separated for months from children including, sometimes, when they could meet the substantive requirements of the rules but were caught by errors or inflexibility.”

“The impact on them was severe and included financial and career implications, mental health challenges for themselves and their children, and strains on their relationship.”

The study quotes the EU partner of a UK national saying, “It takes a mental toll on you. Not everyone is going to be equipped to deal with it very well… The anxiety of it is intense… There are people who… are going to have a nervous breakdown.”

A UK partner, suffering from cancer, spoke of the application process, saying, “Throughout the whole damn process that visa was eating away at me, just like you’d imagine the cancer would, and affected my sense of wellbeing… It was just too much, it was just so overwhelming.”

The study says, “Some participants described serious mental health impacts from their engagement in this demanding, stressful and extended process. Several reported anxiety and depression, and one applicant unable to move to the UK to care for her seriously ill partner told us that she had contemplated suicide.”

She is quoted as saying, “I just wanted it all to end… I just got depressed and it got worse and worse. At some point I just planned, in great detail, the way I wanted to end my life because of this… I still haven’t recovered entirely from that.”

The study continues, “Our findings are consistent with existing research which shows the damage caused to families and individuals by the UK’s partner migration system.”

The project, state its authors, “shows that even a population which has advantages compared to many other national groups — being relatively well educated, geographically close and able to make visa free visits — experience the system as extremely challenging.”

“British citizens and settled residents will continue to meet and fall in love with EU citizens despite Brexit.

“Building a new relationship with the EU is a major challenge for post-Brexit governments. The current partner migration rules do not meet that challenge as they are too complex, difficult and expensive. The rules also affect British citizens in relationships with non-nationals from across the globe.

“The contrast between EU free movement and the UK’s immigration system sheds light on the extreme restrictiveness of the immigration regime. Our recommendations aim to remedy injustice and hardship for both UK-EU couples, and a much wider range of families.”

Several recommendations are made surrounding future immigration rules, the application process and costs.

The study’s authors want the UK government to reduce the minimum income requirement for applicants, provide and “more flexible” support, increase length of the initial visa to avoid costs and also to “recognise the importance of visits for maintaining relationships” particularly for UK-EU couples for whom European travel is relatively straightforward even if they cannot live together.

  • Main Image: Brexit Couples project and Michael Grieve (Strange Fish Designs).

An Arctic Traffic Jam Highlights Doubts Over Russia's Northern Sea Route To China

23 October 2026 at 13:34
The Kremlin has heavily invested in the promise that retreating Arctic sea ice opens up a once impassable route that is further from the reach of Ukrainian drone attacks or European naval interdiction of shadow fleet vessels. But officials are learning that cutting a path through ice isn't easy.

Ukraine troops report continuing Starlink problems despite Trump claims

23 October 2026 at 13:09

Communications system still faces speed restrictions after US president said Musk had resumed full service

Ukrainian forces continue to report widespread disruptions to the Starlink satellite network, despite Donald Trump’s claim that Elon Musk had lifted restrictions on the service.

The slowdown, which has affected the key communications system used by Ukrainian troops, began last week after Trump and Starlink founder Musk publicly criticised Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, over continued strikes on Russian oil refineries.

Continue reading...

© Photograph: Dmytro Smolienko/Ukrinform/NurPhoto/Getty Images

© Photograph: Dmytro Smolienko/Ukrinform/NurPhoto/Getty Images

© Photograph: Dmytro Smolienko/Ukrinform/NurPhoto/Getty Images

❌