Paolo Zampolli has voiced optimism about broader participation by Russian athletes in the 2028 Los Angeles Games
Russia could make a major return to the Olympics in 2028 under its national flag for the first time in years, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy, Paolo Zampolli, has said.
Russian athletes were barred from numerous international competitions following the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022. Some were later allowed to compete under neutral status, without their national flag or anthem.
Speaking to TASS on Thursday, Zampolli expressed optimism about broader Russian participation in the Los Angeles Games, arguing that sporting bans should not become a permanent substitute for political dialogue.
”I am optimistic about further progress that would establish a reliable mechanism for fuller participation by Russian athletes at the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics,” he said. “The US must host Games that are safe, fair, and open to every eligible athlete.”
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) provisionally lifted its suspension of the Russian Olympic Committee in July, paving the way for broader participation at LA 2028. However, it has yet to decide whether Russian athletes will be able to compete under their national flag and anthem.
Several international federations, including World Aquatics, World Gymnastics and the International Fencing Federation, have also eased restrictions on Russian competitors.
Zampolli called the return of the Russian flag and anthem at the 2026 Winter Paralympics in Italy an “important step,” arguing that excluding top athletes for reasons unrelated to their conduct undermines international competition.
”True champions want to beat the best,” he said. “The greatest victories are those earned against the strongest opponents.”
Russia’s gradual return to international sport has faced opposition from the EU. On Monday, the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, announced plans to propose measures to “sustain Russia’s isolation in global sports.” Nine member states have also urged Brussels to cut funding for international sporting bodies that readmit Russian athletes.
Moscow has repeatedly denounced the bans as politically motivated and challenged them in court. Despite the restrictions, Russian athletes have continued to win international titles in events where they are permitted to compete.
On Friday, Zampolli announced that he had left his position as special envoy for global partnership, which he held since March 2025. He expressed gratitude to Trump in a post on X, saying that “serving him and the US has been the greatest honor of my life.”
“Special envoys appointments are for one year. President Trump extended it for more than six months,” the businessman and former modeling agent stressed.
Politico reported on the same day that Zampolli was actually fired from the job because of a longstanding dispute with Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau over a number of issues, including the chain of command, and messages that included personal insults.
Zampolli is known to have introduced Trump to his wife, Melania, during a party that he hosted in New York in 1998.
War Secretary Pete Hegseth had said the execution of Nidal Malik Hasan, who gunned down 13 US service members, would be webcast
The execution of Nidal Malik Hasan, who killed 13 US service members in a 2009 shooting rampage at Fort Hood, will not be public, US President Donald Trump has announced. Days earlier, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth promised it would be webcast, drawing criticism from lawmakers across party lines.
In a post on Truth Social on Thursday, Trump wrote that the former US Army major “will die, as scheduled, by firing squad, but this event will not be streamed.” The US president explained that while webcasting Hasan’s execution “might have been a strong deterrent… many very good and well meaning people would rather not watch him die, through streaming, or through any other visual device.”
Trump noted that the relatives of the victims would still have the right to view Hasan’s death in person.
According to Axios, citing an anonymous administration official, the US president has grown increasingly skeptical of the idea in recent days, not least because of all the “negative input” he supposedly received.
Speaking to reporters late last Friday, Trump said he “wasn’t involved in that decision.”
Hegseth told conservative commentator Jack Posobiec last Thursday that Hasan is scheduled to be shot at 1 PM on December 3 – the approximate time of day of the original attack – at the same installation where he carried out the massacre.
“We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it’s public, because people need to understand there’s serious consequences for these types of things,” the secretary said.
It will be the first execution carried out by the US military in more than six decades and the first by an Army firing squad since World War II.
The last public execution in the US took place in 1936, making Hegseth’s idea of livestreaming it highly controversial.
Republican Senator Thom Tillis characterized the proposal as “beyond disgusting,” with his fellow GOP lawmaker, Representative Austin Scott, writing on X that “live-streaming executions is what jihadists do.”
Democratic Senator Chris Murphy also likened public executions to those carried out by terrorist groups.
Archbishop Paul S. Coakley, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, similarly condemned the livestream plan as a “barbaric promotion of a culture of death.”
Born in the US in 1970 to Palestinian immigrant parents, Hasan trained as a doctor before becoming an Army psychiatrist.
On November 5, 2009, he opened fire with two semiautomatic pistols on service members at Fort Hood’s Soldier Readiness Processing Center in Texas, where troops prepare for overseas deployment. He killed 13 people and wounded 32 others while reportedly shouting “Allahu akbar” – Arabic for “God is great” – during the attack.
Return fire from military police wounded Hasan before they could arrest him, leaving the shooter paralyzed from the waist down.
During his court-martial, Hasan acknowledged his responsibility for the attack, stating that he believed he was acting to protect fellow Muslims from US military actions in Afghanistan.
In August 2013, a military court found Hasan guilty of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder. A panel of 13 senior military officers unanimously sentenced him to death later that month.
The US Supreme Court declined to review his conviction in March 2025, and Trump approved the execution earlier this month.
His loyalists expect another comeback, but former supporters say the spell has broken as the nation heads toward an election
As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu fights to retain power, loyalists are crediting him with strengthening the country and defeating its enemies, while former supporters blame his leadership for October 7 and are seeking alternatives on both the left and the right.
With less than a month to go before Israel’s elections, Netanyahu faces an uphill battle to retain power.
But polls show it won’t be an easy task. A recent survey conducted by Maariv, one of Israel’s leading newspapers, estimates that his party, Likud, will only win 20 seats out of 120 total in the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, a drop of 12 compared with its performance in the 2022 elections.
The decline in Likud’s ratings is hardly surprising. Netanyahu and his government have been blamed for failing to prevent the October 7, 2023 attacks, in which more than 1,200 Israelis were killed and 251 people were taken to Gaza as hostages.
He has also faced criticism for pursuing a series of controversial policies concerning the judiciary and the media; remaining in power amid graft probes that led to charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust; and contributing to Israel’s growing isolation on the international stage.
In Bibi we trust
Surprisingly, however, the Maariv poll shows that around 40 percent of respondents still want Netanyahu to remain Prime Minister of Israel. Loyalists offer a long list of Netanyahu’s achievements. For them he is the man who subdued Israel’s enemies, confronted Iran’s nuclear ambitions and strengthened Israel’s position in the region.
Under his leadership, Israel deepened relations with the United States and expanded its diplomatic ties through the Abraham Accords, normalizing relations with the United Arab Emirates, Morocco and Bahrain in 2020. Under him, Israel has also bloomed economically, championing a more open, market-oriented economy, privatization and competition, something that has helped to position the state as a global technology hub.
Naor Shukri, a 56-year-old resident of Haifa, is among those loyalists; he vows to vote for Likud on October 27.
“Indeed, October 7 happened during the watch of Netanyahu, and he is also responsible for that failure. But he is not the only one. Many other people, including the Shin Bet [internal spy agency - ed.], the IDF and various politicians, are equally to blame and need to be investigated.”
“Plus, those events would have happened anyways, regardless of who was running the country. So pinning the blame on Netanyahu is not fair, to say the least,” he added.
Shukri is not alone. Yair Avraham, a 65-year-old resident of Tel Aviv, also believes that although Netanyahu failed to prevent the attacks, his subsequent record should be taken into account when assessing his suitability for another term.
“In the end of the day, he led a brilliant multi-front campaign against Hamas, Hezbollah of Lebanon, the Houthis of Yemen, the Iraqi militias and the regime of Iran. His achievements were recognized internationally and when you look at the map of the Middle East and compare it to what it was like three years ago, you realize that Israel has only emerged stronger. Our enemies are way weaker.”
Both men believe Netanyahu has not received sufficient credit for these and other achievements from the liberal media and the international community. In their view, this reflects an effort to discredit Israel’s actions, replace its right-wing government and hand power to more liberal political circles that they believe would be influenced by the West.
Their claims are not without context. Over the years, European countries have poured billions of dollars into Israel’s liberal NGOs and think tanks that promote equality, coexistence and a two-state solution with the Palestinians. Such funding has long been opposed by conservative circles, which argue that the money has also helped finance anti-government protests that have destabilized the country and ultimately created an opportunity for Israel’s enemies to attack on October 7.
“We all know Europe and liberal Americans are trying to get rid of Netanyahu,” said Avraham.
“They don’t want to see a strong Israel. Inside their own countries, European governments surrendered to their Muslim radicals and they want Israel to do the same. That’s why Netanyahu needs to be the Prime Minister. Only he will make sure it won’t happen.”
The problem, however, is that Netanyahu’s coalition bloc, according to the polls, does not have enough seats to reach the crucial threshold of 61. To overcome this hurdle, Netanyahu will either need to perform better than expected on election day or persuade members of the opposing, so-called change bloc, that joining forces with him would be the better option.
He has pulled off this political maneuver before. In 2020, he convinced Benny Gantz, then leader of the Blue and White party, to form a unity government, bringing an end to a year-long political stalemate.
In 2023, shortly after the Hamas-led attacks, he did it again, establishing an emergency government with Gantz.
This time, Israeli analysts say, such an arrangement is unlikely, largely because politicians from the opposing camp no longer trust Netanyahu or his promises.
Indeed, many Israeli politicians have openly vowed not to join his government under any circumstances. The list is lengthy and includes former prime ministers Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid, as well as other contenders for the top job, such as Gadi Eisenkott and Avigdor Liberman.
But Shukri and Avraham believe Netanyahu is such an experienced politician that he could still surprise his opponents.
“Netanyahu is a magician. He has been buried politically so many times before and yet he is still around, while all his rivals are no longer relevant,” said Shukri.
“Bibi cannot be underestimated. I agree it won’t be easy for him to form a government but he knows how to maneuver the system and I am sure in the end of the day he will find a solution, form a government and remain in power,” echoed Avraham.
War as a political tool?
Critics, however, argue that Netanyahu might not even need to rack his brains over coalition negotiations. They fear he could launch another round of hostilities with Iran, pushing the prospect of elections into the distant future.
Their concerns have not emerged out of thin air. Only recently, Israeli Chief of the General Staff Eyal Zamir warned that a war with Iran could postpone the vote.
Netanyahu himself sent an alarming message in late September, claiming there were “indications” that Israel’s enemies might attack the country ahead of the elections and vowing to retaliate if such a scenario materialized.
“I take the warnings of our Prime Minister very seriously,” argued Avraham. “I doubt he would go into a war just for the sake of postponing the elections. Throughout the years he has been known as a careful politician, who doesn’t like risking our soldiers’ lives and who only does that out of necessity. Here it would be the same. Netanyahu will open a front only if there is a concrete threat, not anything else.”
Shukri appears to agree. “Don’t believe what the liberal media is telling you about Bibi. They will always demonize him and depict him as a politician who clings to power no matter what. The truth is that he genuinely wants the best for the country, and I hope that on October 27, the people will give him that opportunity [to remain in power - ed.].”
He says he voted for Netanyahu and Likud from the time he first became eligible to do so in 2003. Today, however, he intends to support Yair Golan and the Democrats, a left-wing, liberal-Zionist party that advocates a strong security policy alongside diplomatic solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Plotnik says his opinion changed in 2014, during Operation Protective Edge, a 51-day military campaign against Hamas in Gaza that killed more than 2,000 Palestinians, many of whom were civilians.
“Operation Protective Edge was a major turning point. I watched Israeli leaders promise to destroy Hamas, demolish tunnels and restore deterrence, only to see a familiar cycle emerging: military action, a period of calm and then another round of fighting.”
“Everything was one big deception,” he recalled, arguing that right-wing governments had sold voters “fantasies that don’t correspond with reality.”
Then came October 7, 2023. For Plotnik, the massacre was not an isolated catastrophe but the collapse of a security concept that had been failing for years.
Israel’s leadership, he argues, had effectively built a wall that allowed politicians and the public to ignore Gaza while assuming that a state of neither war nor peace could continue indefinitely.
”That concept collapsed,” Plotnik said. “The policy of ignoring and stagnation crumbled down.”
Plotnik believes Israel’s only realistic path towards long-term security is an agreement with its enemies. He plans to support Golan because he believes diplomacy is necessary if Israelis want their children and grandchildren to have a chance to grow up in peace.
His alternative is not pacifism. He points to Egypt and Jordan as examples of how agreements can maintain stability even without affection between populations.
”There is no love between the countries, but there is quiet based on state interests,” he said.
”Not everything will work and the agreement will collapse? We can always go back to fighting,” he added.
From Netanyahu to Ben Gvir
Not every former Netanyahu voter, however, has reached the same destination.
Guy Even Tzur says he voted consistently for Netanyahu from 2015 until now. He still considers himself firmly on the right, but he, too, has decided it is time for a change. His choice is almost the polar opposite of Plotnik’s: Itamar Ben Gvir.
Ben Gvir, leader of the hawkish Jewish Power party, has served as national security minister in the current government of Netanyahu. He opposes Palestinian statehood, advocates a hard line against Palestinian militancy and has a 2007 conviction for incitement to racism and support for a terrorist organization.
However, this does not bother Even Tzur because he believes voters “should be voting ideologically and for people who actually deliver.”
Ben Gvir, he believes, has done just that. Even Tzur credits him with pushing tougher prison conditions for security prisoners, expanding civilian access to firearms and taking a harder line on crime and security.
“This is why he deserves my vote. Netanyahu, on the contrary, showed that he makes mistakes and can miss massively,” he argued.
Even Tzur says October 7 was a major realization point. But unlike Plotnik, he does not believe the war proved Netanyahu’s entire security doctrine fraudulent. He claims Netanyahu conducted the subsequent campaign effectively and achieved major successes.
However, he claims, October 7 also demonstrated that “Netanyahu is not a political magician. He makes mistakes and thus can be replaced.”
The only question that begs to be answered is: by who. Even Tzur believes Netanyahu has not produced a successor from within the Likud, and this is exactly why he wants to create an alternative by strengthening the ideological right. He doesn’t reject the idea of Netanyahu leading the next government but he also wants to give power to more hawkish voices within the camp to make sure tougher policies are implemented.
Plotnik, on the contrary, rejects the notion, claiming that another term of Netanyahu would perpetuate the strategic approach that, in his view, contributed to October 7.
The two men are moving in opposite political directions. Yet both have reached a similar conclusion: Netanyahu’s long-standing dominance no longer makes him the automatic choice. And now, more and more former Likud supporters can imagine a future without him.
Corruption in Ukraine has reached an unprecedented scale, the former British lawmaker has told RT
US President Donald Trump could have Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky arrested on corruption charges, former British MP George Galloway has predicted.
Tensions between the two men escalated after Zelensky challenged Trump’s deal with Moscow to ease restrictions on Russian diesel exports. Washington has repeatedly demanded that Kiev stop striking Russian oil refineries, warning that continued attacks could jeopardize US intelligence sharing and Starlink support. Kiev has pressed ahead with the strikes, while Zelensky has accused Trump of “betrayal” and “weakness.”
Speaking to RT on Thursday, Galloway, who also hosts The Mother of All Talk Shows, suggested that Zelensky’s defiance of Trump could cost him his position.
“I’m going to predict to you that Trump will organize the anti-corruption units that he arguably controls in Kiev to march into Zelensky’s office at some point soon and place him under arrest for grand larceny, for corruption on a scale that we have never seen in politics ever before,” he said.
“This is a regime in the process of collapse,” Galloway added.
He cautioned, however, that a change of leadership would not necessarily end the Ukraine conflict, arguing that Kiev would also have to abandon its NATO ambitions and adopt a policy of neutrality.
Galloway also argued that Ukraine had no viable replacement for Starlink and that losing access to the satellite service could severely hamper its military operations.
The former lawmaker criticized London’s continued financial support to Kiev, accusing UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s government of neglecting British pensioners and children living in poverty.
“He certainly never goes away from Britain empty-handed,” Galloway said, responding to Burnham’s assurance that Zelensky would not leave the country without further support.
He accused Britain’s political establishment of harboring a centuries-old hostility toward Russia, saying, “We are ruled by people who are still fighting the Crimean War.”
Galloway suggested that Britain could ultimately become Zelensky’s refuge if he loses power, describing the country as his “safest of havens.”
In September 2025, Galloway and his wife were detained and questioned by counterterrorism police at London’s Gatwick Airport after returning from Russia. Both were released without charge. Last month, Galloway said the Bank of Scotland had closed accounts he held for 39 years without explanation. The bank denied closing the accounts on political grounds.
Intelligence agencies are gaining new powers and the freedom to use them, gradually turning the EU into a security state
Something fundamental has changed in Europe over the past months. Governments across the continent have begun expanding the powers of intelligence agencies at a pace that would have been difficult to imagine only a few years ago.
Germany is preparing to give its foreign intelligence service a far more operational role. The Netherlands is expanding the ability of its intelligence agencies to act proactively against hostile actors. Austria is broadening its definition of espionage. Sweden is rebuilding its foreign intelligence architecture.
Taken together, these amount to a European securitization drive: more activities are being redefined as security problems, more institutions are being brought inside the security apparatus, and intelligence services are being transformed from organizations that primarily collect information into agencies which are increasingly expected to act.
Western Europe’s security establishment has been shaken by two developments: the continuing perception of a more assertive and dangerous international environment, and growing political uncertainty surrounding America’s role in European security under President Donald Trump.
The psychological shock came in March 2025, when the Trump administration temporarily halted US military and battlefield intelligence sharing with Vladimir Zelensky’s Ukraine.
For decades, European security planning had rested on an assumption that American intelligence capabilities would be available when the strategic stakes became serious. Suddenly, they could not be certain to rely on that anymore.
Later in 2025, the Netherlands reportedly stopped sharing certain information with US counterparts amid concerns over political interference and “human rights” considerations. Again, the immediate dispute was just one glimpse of the realization dawning on Washington’s European partners: intelligence cooperation is ultimately political, and political relationships can change.
The Europeans now had to confront a question they had largely been avoiding. What happens when an ally possessing the world’s most powerful intelligence apparatus can no longer be assumed to have the same political priorities?
The obvious answer is to build more European capacity. This does not mean that Europe is preparing to replace the US, or that trans-Atlantic intelligence cooperation is disappearing. But the European governments want to make sure their spies can still operate, even when Washington’s political priorities are different from theirs.
Germany: From spying to sabotage
Friedrich Merz’s Germany is perhaps the best example of how far the transformation could go. Berlin is pursuing the largest overhaul of the country’s intelligence system since World War II.
Under reforms expected to take effect in January, the Federal Intelligence Service, or BND, would receive substantially greater latitude to conduct offensive activities. In a state of tension or military defense, the service could conduct acts of sabotage abroad.
That’s a major conceptual departure for an organization traditionally associated primarily with foreign intelligence collection.
The reforms would also expand the technological reach of German intelligence. The BND and the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV) would gain a greater ability to process large datasets with artificial intelligence and cross-reference biometric information with internet data. Telecommunications content collected for strategic intelligence purposes could be retained for up to six months, while communications data such as IP addresses could be retained for up to twelve months.
An intelligence agency that can collect more information is more powerful. An agency that can manipulate data, delete data, conduct offensive cyber operations or sabotage targets abroad becomes an instrument capable of exercising power, rather than simply informing those who exercise it.
In continental Europe, where historical experience has made the concentration of coercive authority particularly sensitive, that is a very big difference.
Austria is expanding what counts as espionage
The Austrian government is approaching the matter from a different angle. It has announced plans to strengthen its legal framework against espionage. Under the existing system, foreign intelligence activity could escape criminal liability when it was directed against entities other than Austria itself.
Under the proposed changes, espionage directed against international organizations headquartered in Austria could become a criminal offense. The list includes institutions such as the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations Office at Vienna, the OSCE and various EU bodies.
The definition of harm is also being revised to include activities that have the potential to damage Austria’s security and international standing or economic interests, rather than only when actual damage can be demonstrated. The law would also target the recruitment of individuals by foreign intelligence services, including so-called low-level agents.
This is another important feature of Europe’s new security politics: the security perimeter is expanding.
In August 2026, the Dutch government proposed changes to national security legislation that would broaden the powers of the General Intelligence and Security Service (AIVD), and the Defense Intelligence and Security Service (MIVD).
The proposed rules would allow the services to undertake certain proactive operations without obtaining prior permission and would facilitate greater intelligence sharing with the armed forces, other government bodies and private companies.
The government has explicitly identified China, Iran and Russia among the actors it regards as “obvious adversaries.”
It also increases private sector integration with the national security system. Technology companies, telecommunications firms and operators of critical infrastructure increasingly possess information that governments need, so the distinction between the intelligence community and the private economy is getting erased.
Sweden is rebuilding for the post-neutrality era
Sweden is undergoing its own institutional transformation.
On January 1, 2027, a new Swedish Foreign Intelligence Service, UND, is scheduled to begin operations, separating civilian foreign intelligence from military intelligence. The Swedish government argues that the division will clarify responsibilities and improve the country’s ability to assess a broader range of security threats.
Sweden’s accession to NATO fundamentally altered the country’s strategic environment, and the transformation of its intelligence architecture is a logical consequence.
Membership in NATO requires more than just military interoperability – a state needs to understand threats, produce intelligence, protect sensitive information and contribute intelligence to allies. Sweden is doing something which has become increasingly common across Europe: rebuilding national security institutions for a world in which strategic uncertainty is the baseline rather than the exception.
Brussels cannot build a European CIA – but it is building something
The irony is that the EU as a bloc remains remarkably weak when it comes to intelligence. National security is still firmly controlled by member states. Brussels can coordinate and analyze, but it does not command a conventional European intelligence service.
For decades, this was reinforced by national distrust. The EU’s most capable intelligence services preferred small circles of trusted partners. The Club de Berne, the continent’s best-known intelligence cooperation forum, has no permanent headquarters or secretariat and traditionally meets only periodically.
The situation is beginning to change. Former Finnish President Sauli Niinistö proposed in 2024 that the EU should consider a fully fledged intelligence cooperation capability, effectively a European counterpart to the CIA, capable of serving both strategic and operational needs.
Politically, that remains unrealistic. Few member states are prepared to surrender control over their most sensitive intelligence capabilities to Brussels. But that does not mean European intelligence cooperation is standing still.
Intelligence liaison officers are increasingly present in EU member states’ permanent representations in Brussels. The European External Action Service is strengthening its intelligence-analysis capacity. The EU Intelligence and Situation Centre, INTCEN, is being developed as an increasingly important channel for classified information.
INTCEN does not conduct espionage itself. It relies on intelligence supplied voluntarily by national services and turns it into strategic assessments for European decision-makers.
That model may ultimately prove more realistic than a European CIA. Rather than one giant EU intelligence service, Europe is likely to develop smaller circles of national agencies sharing sensitive information, surrounded by stronger EU-level coordination and analytical institutions.
The real question is who controls the new power
There is a danger hidden inside this whole big transformation. Western European intelligence systems are historically diverse. They developed under different constitutional traditions, experiences of war, and conceptions of the relationship between intelligence and executive authority.
Intelligence services have traditionally been expected to support executive power, not become executive power themselves.
Giving intelligence agencies the ability to conduct offensive cyber operations, manipulate information, disrupt hostile networks or conduct sabotage may be justified under carefully defined circumstances. But every new capability raises the same questions: Who authorizes it? Who supervises it? Who can challenge it? What happens when a government wants to revise the perception of external threats?
Western Europe has legitimate reasons to strengthen its capacity to detect and disrupt threats. The strategic environment is more competitive. Cyber operations have become routine instruments of statecraft. Intelligence warfare increasingly targets companies, infrastructure, political institutions and individuals rather than simply military installations.
But the transformation should be watched closely. Europe’s intelligence revolution is happening through dozens of apparently technical decisions: a longer data-retention period here, a broader definition of espionage there, new cyber authorities somewhere else, closer cooperation with private companies, a new intelligence office in Brussels.
There is no single European ‘Intelligence Act,’ but there does not need to be one. The security state can expand incrementally – which may be exactly what is happening now.
The strategic shock created by the Ukraine war and uncertainty over America’s future role has accelerated a process that was already underway. European governments are concluding that they need more independent intelligence capacity, more operational flexibility and tighter cooperation among themselves.
The likely result will not be a European CIA. It will be something more distinctly European: powerful national intelligence services operating in increasingly dense networks, supported by a stronger Brussels-based analytical and coordinating layer.
The continent is giving its spies teeth. The next question is whether it will also build strong enough institutions to decide when – and against whom – they may bite.
The Yemeni movement said that it was seeking to take out “Saudi military concentrations” in the country
Yemen’s Houthis have conducted a missile strike on the presidential palace in the southern city of Aden, where the internationally recognized, Saudi-backed government is located.
The group claimed the strike killed several Saudi officials and mercenaries, while the government acknowledged only two fatalities among security guards. Later in the day, the figure was revised to five dead and at least 16 wounded.
The Al-Maashiq presidential palace was hit by at least five missiles on Thursday, with footage circulating online showing black smoke and a large plume of dust emitting from the compound. Yemeni Information Minister Moammar al-Eryani said the country’s prime minister and cabinet members were at the compound during the strike yet escaped the attack unharmed.
The militant group, known officially as the Ansar Allah movement, said that the compound served as military operations headquarters run by Saudi officers and was being used as a weapons depot. There were multiple casualties at the site, the Houthis claimed.
“The strike on the Saudi enemy’s military operations headquarters in Aden falls within the framework of the previously announced policy: targeting Saudi military concentrations wherever they may be and considering any military presence of the Saudi enemy a legitimate target for our forces, wherever it is located,” the group’s military spokesman, Yahya Saree, has said.
Yemen has remained locked in a civil war since 2014, with the situation further aggravated by a Saudi-led intervention launched in March 2015 to prevent the then-imminent Houthi takeover. The fighting waned after a United Nations-brokered truce in 2022, but recently returned to all-out warfare.
Throughout September, Ansar Allah inflicted a decisive defeat on pro-Saudi forces on Yemen’s western coast, reaching the strategic Bab-el Mandeb Strait. The most intense fighting is currently around the country’s third-largest city of Taiz, which is controlled by the Aden-based government. Houthi forces have cut off the city and report daily advances, tightening the encirclement.
The renewed fighting has been marked by long-range attacks by both sides. The Houthis have repeatedly attacked Saudi oil installations and international airports, warning air carriers against operating in the kingdom altogether. Riyadh has carried out air strikes against the Houthis, and both sides have repeatedly accused each another of hitting civilian targets.
A Dutch denial of visas for leading Russian gymnasts is just the latest in a series of incidents
The Kremlin has accused European countries of deliberately excluding the strongest competitors from international sporting events as part of a systematic attempt to manipulate results.
The majority of EU members have at some point refused entry to Russian athletes, despite them being cleared by their governing body to compete. Croatia tried to prevent nine Russian gymnasts from attending this summer’s European Gymnastics Championships, the country’s junior and under-23 canoe slalom teams missed the World Championships in Poland, and Russian archers were unable to compete in a World Cup event in Spain because of visa problems.
Most recently, the Netherlands refused entry to Angelina Melnikova, Viktoria Listunova and Anna Kalmykova for the World Artistic Gymnastics Championships in Rotterdam from October 17-25. The tournament forms part of the qualifications for the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics.
“There are clear attempts by certain countries to influence the outcome of competitions by deliberately excluding the strongest,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
Such refusals contradict Olympic ideals and the principle that sport should remain outside politics, he said, adding that they also violate the responsibilities of countries hosting international competitions. Russia will continue working with international federations and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to defend its athletes’ interests, he said.
According to the Russian Gymnastics Federation (RGF), the visa refusal notices stated that “one or more Schengen member states” considered the three gymnasts “a threat to their international relations.”
Melnikova is the reigning world all-around champion and won European all-around gold this year. Listunova won Olympic team gold alongside her in Tokyo, while Kalmykova claimed European all-around silver this summer.
The RGF called the exclusions “direct discrimination” and a violation of equal conditions for Olympic qualification. Sports Minister and Russian Olympic Committee president Mikhail Degtyarev announced that Russia would seek to strip Rotterdam of its Olympic qualifying status.
World Gymnastics expressed regret over the disruption to the Russian delegation’s preparations. It said visa decisions rested exclusively with the Dutch authorities and that discussions with officials and organizers were continuing.
The refusals come despite World Gymnastics restoring Russian participation under national flags and anthems in May. The IOC provisionally reinstated the Russian Olympic Committee in July, following widespread restrictions imposed after the escalation of the Ukraine conflict in 2022.
Several European governments have opposed the return. Euractiv reported last month that Brussels was considering visa restrictions and cuts to funding for sporting organizations that readmit Russian and Belarusian athletes under national symbols.
Russia has also challenged continuing restrictions through the Court of Arbitration for Sport, including World Athletics’ refusal to readmit its competitors before a peace agreement in Ukraine.
An earlier legal challenge helped clear the way for Russians to compete at the 2026 Winter Paralympics, where they won eight gold medals. Russian junior figure skaters also swept all four disciplines at an international Grand Prix event in China in August after a four-year absence.
The Pentagon had to delay an air raid on Iran after the bombers’ departure time was leaked to the press, the US president has claimed
Government employees sharing confidential information with journalists should face the death penalty, US President Donald Trump has said.
Addressing supporters during a midterm rally in Bullhead City, Arizona on Wednesday, Trump cited an occasion when the Pentagon allegedly had to put off an air raid against Iran after the bombers’ departure and arrival times were leaked to the press, including the New York Times and CNN.
It was not immediately clear which military operation Trump was referring to, although several media outlets conjectured that he was speaking about last year’s bombing campaign targeting Iran’s underground nuclear facilities.
“Somebody leaked – some sleazebag,” Trump said, adding that “they ought to go to jail and be shot.”
He argued that “in the old days we used to shoot leakers… [especially] when they leak what time you’re going to attack a country.”
“The leakers are the scum of the earth,” Trump concluded.
Since the start of the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran in late February, the Republican leader has repeatedly lashed out at government officials leaking information to the press as well as media outlets publishing such materials.
“Keep on leaking you dirty dogs! When we find you, you will pay a big price,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post last month in response to media reports claiming that some of his aides had advised him against attacking Tehran.
In August, the US president similarly accused leakers of making “treasonous statements,” saying that they were “being hunted down” and that “long term jail sentences will be sought!”
The tirade was prompted by a Washington Post report alleging that Trump was frustrated with US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth for providing misleading information about supposed ammunition shortages, especially with respect to long-range missiles and air defense interceptors.
Trump dismissed the allegations as “completely FALSE,” insisting that the “US has massive amounts of ‘munitions’,” with yet more being produced and supplied, as needed.
The New York Times subsequently reported that the Pentagon had subjected dozens of civilian employees and military officers to polygraph tests in a bid to identify the source of the leak regarding the supposed ammunition shortages.
In April, Trump demanded that the journalist who had reported the details of a rescue mission for the two crew members of the US F-15E Strike Eagle, which was shot down over Iran, divulge their sources or face jail. The US president suggested that the leak had put one of the service members’ lives in danger.
Steadfast Noon brings 17 allies to the exercise – though joining the drills and carrying American bombs are very different commitments
From October 13 to 23, 2026, Italy is hosting NATO’s annual nuclear deterrence exercise Steadfast Noon. The exercise will take place at air bases in Aviano and Ghedi in northern Italy. Flight operations and training involving mock nuclear weapons will take place in designated airspace over the Tyrrhenian Sea and other areas under NATO jurisdiction in Southern and Western Europe. The purpose of these exercises is to prepare NATO aircraft for the potential deployment of US nuclear weapons stationed at European airbases.
This year’s exercise boasts a record number of participants – 17 NATO countries, compared to 14 in 2025 and 13 in 2024. While the complete list of participating nations hasn’t been disclosed, it is confirmed that the US, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, and Türkiye will take part. Romania and Poland will likely provide fighter support and ensure integration along NATO’s eastern flank. New NATO members – Sweden and Finland – are fully engaged in the training missions. Finland may host US nuclear weapons in the future and has already started acquiring F-35 carrier aircraft.
Notably, France does not participate in NATO’s nuclear planning group and is not involved in these exercises, likely due to its own air-delivered nuclear capabilities.
The exercise involves around 70 military aircraft and over 2,000 service personnel. The main focus is on dual-capable aircraft, which can carry both conventional and nuclear payloads. In Europe, this currently includes F-35A Lightning II multi-role fighters, German Tornado IDS strike aircraft, and F-16 multi-role fighters. Under the US Nuclear Sharing program, these European planes are equipped to carry US nuclear bombs. Additionally, Swedish JAS 39 Gripen jets will also be involved in the exercise, although these planes are not equipped to carry American nuclear bombs.
Strategic support for the tactical air units is provided by American B-52H bombers. Air-to-air refueling during the exercises over the Tyrrhenian and Mediterranean seas will be carried out by KC-135 Stratotanker and KC-767A aircraft. Coordination of aircraft operations will be managed by NATO’s E-3A Sentry AWACS aircraft. Logistic support will be provided by Airbus A400M military transport planes.
The official tactical scenario for the exercises is fully classified. However, it can be inferred that the drills focus on the repositioning of nuclear-capable strike aircraft, aerial refueling operations, and coordination among NATO air forces from various countries. Military personnel are being trained to safely transport mock nuclear warheads from underground storage facilities, attach them to aircraft, carry out aerial refueling, and coordinate efforts between air forces and ground services in the event of a nuclear alert. It’s important to note that these exercises use mock bombs rather than real ones; no actual nuclear weapons are mounted on aircraft or involved in the training. All strikes and nuclear weapon deployments are simulated electronically.
What types of nuclear munitions could be involved in the 2026 exercise? It is known that B61-series US thermonuclear tactical bombs are stored in Europe, including at Aviano Air Base.
B61-3 and B61-4 bombs belong to the penultimate generation of nuclear bombs. These are free-fall (gravity) nuclear bombs. Their yield can be adjusted – from a minimum of 0.3 kilotons to a maximum of 45–50 kilotons in TNT equivalent – depending on the mission requirements set before takeoff.
The B61-12 represents the latest modification in the US arsenal. A particular feature of this model is the tail kit produced by Boeing, which transforms a conventional bomb into a guided precision weapon. The high level of precision allows for reduced explosive yield while maintaining destructive power against heavily fortified command centers and other critical targets. Additionally, lowering the yield significantly mitigates collateral radioactive contamination of the surrounding area. The B61-12 is gradually replacing older munitions in the American nuclear stockpile.
The primary delivery systems for B61-12 bombs include US F-16C/D Fighting Falcon fighters, as well as fifth-generation F-35A fighters, which are gradually being integrated into the air forces of European NATO members.
As previously mentioned, Exercise Steadfast Noon takes place regularly. However, given the current geopolitical landscape, any routine military activity takes on added significance and is viewed by observers through the lens of a potential East-West confrontation. On the one hand, NATO emphasizes the defensive nature of these exercises, and there is a relatively small number of participating aircraft – for example, only three German Tornado aircraft. On the other hand, the number of participating nations is steadily increasing, and many NATO countries now possess nuclear-capable aircraft, particularly F-35 fighters. While today, Finland may participate in these maneuvers more as a student and observer, Finnish F-35s could soon be ready to transport nuclear bombs.
There’s a growing sense that this ‘train’ is headed in the wrong direction. And it’s unlikely that the growing number of ‘Chekhov’s guns’ will contribute to fostering lasting peace in Europe. Perhaps it would be wiser for Europe to focus on peaceful initiatives rather than militarization and the proliferation of potential nuclear platforms.
The ANC had failed to finalize online nominations before the August 28 deadline despite uploading documents and paying the required deposits
South Africa’s Constitutional Court has cleared 181 African National Congress (ANC) candidates to contest next month’s local elections, overturning their exclusion over the party’s failure to complete a final online nomination step.
The court upheld the ANC’s appeal against a September 16 Electoral Court ruling that had backed the Electoral Commission of SA’s decision to exclude the candidates in six municipalities. The Electoral Commission of SA, or IEC, rejected the nominations after the ANC failed to complete the final submission step on the commission’s online system before the 5pm deadline on August 28, despite having uploaded the candidates’ details and paid the required deposits.
The six municipalities affected included Port St Johns, Ngquza Hill, Walter Sisulu and Sundays River Valley in the Eastern Cape, Mangaung in the Free State and uMshwathi in KwaZulu-Natal. In Port St Johns and Ngquza Hill, the exclusion had left the ANC with no candidates at all for the November 4 elections.
The matter was heard on Monday by a bench led by Deputy Chief Justice Dunstan Mlambo, which included Justices Rammaka Mathopo, Nonkosi Mhlantla, Nambitha Dambuza-Mayosi, Leona Theron, Andre le Grange and Kate Savage, and Acting Justice Lister Nuku. During the argument, advocate Daniel Berger SC, for the ANC, said the “submit as final” button was a feature of the IEC’s software and not a requirement of the law. “It is not law, and it cannot be brought in through the back door as being incorporated somehow into the regulations,” Berger said.
”It can contain all sorts of mechanisms to administer the elections, but it cannot contain a requirement that invalidates a submission and excludes a party from the elections, a party that has actually uploaded all its documents, and not only that, paid all its deposits,” he added.
Mathopo noted from the bench on Monday that his concern was not only the ANC’s case. ”My worry, it’s not this case itself, it’s the far-reaching implications that a judgment of this court would have, either for the ANC or for the IEC,” he said. ”If it’s for the IEC, for example, the message that will be conveyed would be absent clicking of a button, final submit, you are excluded.”
Advocate Terry Motau SC, for the IEC, told the court that the commission had checked its system and found no glitches, and that the ANC had left its nominations too late. ”It’s not only because a party decides not to contest, a party might have neglected its duties to use a system that was open since June 21 2016 and left it to the last moment and it missed the deadline,” Motau said.
Under questioning from Mathopo, Motau conceded that the requirement to click “submit as final” was not listed in the statute or the regulations, but argued that it was no different from other steps in the system that the ANC had followed without objection. Motau also read out a message the system had sent to the ANC’s representatives before the deadline, warning that their lists had not been submitted as final and had to be before 5pm on August 28 for the party to contest the elections.
Justice Kate Savage put it to Berger during the hearing that it was “quite extraordinary” the ANC had finalised its lists across the country but not in these six municipalities, and that there was no explanation other than gross negligence.
Berger said the ANC had phoned the IEC’s help desk in the last half hour before the deadline to report problems, and that the commission accepted the call had taken place.
The DA, represented by advocate Michael Bishop SC, opposed the ANC’s appeal and backed the IEC.
The lawsuits allege that ChatGPT has encouraged suicide and violence
Eight US states have sued OpenAI, accusing its ChatGPT chatbot of encouraging self-harm and violence, including among children, and misleading the public about its safety.
The states allege that ChatGPT is designed to be excessively agreeable and engaging, gaining users’ trust while reinforcing delusions, encouraging dangerous behavior, and even helping plan mass shootings.
“OpenAI claims ChatGPT is safe while it’s giving dangerous medical advice, encouraging people to hurt others, and coaching people to commit suicide – all while pretending to be their fake friend,” Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said.
Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, West Virginia, Arkansas, Arizona, Idaho, and Montana filed separate lawsuits in state courts on Wednesday. The complaints accuse the company of violating consumer protection laws and creating a public nuisance.
The states seek financial penalties, damages, and changes to ChatGPT. They also want OpenAI barred from developing self-improving AI models unless it can demonstrate that those systems are aligned with human values.
OpenAI spokesman Drew Pusateri defended the company’s age-specific protections, parental controls, and break reminders, saying that “while no system can be perfect, we’ll continue to work with experts to inform our work and build additional safeguards.”
Separately, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) sent civil subpoenas to OpenAI and Anthropic on Wednesday seeking documents about safety incidents and possible consumer protection violations, Axios reported, citing a person familiar with the matter.
The subpoenas reportedly exceed 50 pages each and cover security incidents, safeguards, marketing materials, and privacy policies. The regulator also plans to compel senior AI executives to testify. Neither the companies nor the FTC immediately responded to Reuters’ requests for comment.
OpenAI already faces numerous lawsuits alleging that ChatGPT contributed to suicides, delusions, and violence. Families affected by February’s Tumbler Ridge school shooting in Canada accuse the company of failing to alert police about the shooter’s violent conversations. OpenAI has acknowledged that it considered alerting police but ultimately did not do so before the attack.
Scrutiny has also intensified over AI agents acting outside their intended instructions. Anthropic recently disclosed that its models submitted a false homicide tip to police and incomplete visa applications, while OpenAI investigated its agents accessing outside systems without authorization during testing.
The small Balkan nation, which has endured months of anti-government protests, has been hit by a new wave of student-led rioting
The Ministry of Education building has been set ablaze in Tirana. The Albanian capital is reeling from a third consecutive day of student-led mass protests.
The protests which began in the country this week were reportedly sparked by the ongoing unrest in France and were initially aimed at rising education costs, the poor condition of educational facilities, and widespread corruption.
The unrest promptly grew political and violent, and the protesters are now demanding the departure of socialist Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama as well as the leader of the country’s democratic opposition, Sali Berisha. The two have dominated Albania’s political landscape for about four decades, and both have repeatedly faced allegations of corruption.
The unrest comes on top of months of anti-government protests in Albania, which have mainly revolved around a major luxury tourism development project linked to US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The movement, which has become known as the ‘Flamingo Revolution,’ has been condemned by the prime minister as part of a “hybrid war” waged by the “enemies of Israel and Albania.”
On Wednesday, a large crowd of protesters breached the premises of the Education Ministry, setting the building on fire. Footage from the scene shows the fence of the compound damaged, with a large group of protesters watching black smoke billowing out of the windows.
Violent protests continue in Tirana, while the Ministry of Education building has caught fire.Citizens are demanding the resignation of PM Rama & the removal of opposition leader Berisha-two strongmen who have dominated Albania for nearly 40 years with abuse & massive corruption https://t.co/OXEJbCVwF0pic.twitter.com/wfE4N6SM8d
The protesters have been seen destroying surveillance cameras across Tirana. They justified their actions by claiming the companies operating them have been using “Israeli spyware.”
📌 Student protesters in Albania have destroyed surveillance cameras, accusing companies of allegedly using Israeli spyware
The protesters are demanding better conditions for young people and opposing what they describe as the growing influence of the “Kushner clan” in the… pic.twitter.com/IcdNY5EJ1K
Numerous videos circulating online show riot police brawling with protesters in the streets, unleashing batons, tear gas, and water cannons in an attempt to quell the unrest. A large column of military trucks has been reported entering the capital, potentially indicating the government opted to deploy soldiers onto the streets.
🚨🇦🇱 BREAKING: COLUMNS OF MILITARY TRUCKS ENTER TIRANA, ALBANIA’S CAPITAL
Columns of military trucks have reportedly entered Tirana as tensions continue amid ongoing student protests and wider anti-government demonstrations. https://t.co/JMIgO9GXnQ
The violence follows widespread rioting across the capital on Wednesday, when groups of protesters attacked government buildings, banks, and businesses. At least 89 people, including 61 police, were injured throughout the day, according to the Albanian Health Ministry.
Rama has already refused to step down, insisting that his rule will end solely through a democratic procedure and pointing out that national elections were only held last year. While the prime minister expressed a readiness to discuss issues related to education, he condemned the violence and vowed not to allow the unrest to derail Albania from its path to the “European future.”
The two sides are exploring joint manufacturing and investment projects as trade between India and Tatarstan surged ninefold to $1.09 billion
The push for deeper economic engagement between India and Russia is at the heart of the second Russia-India TIME Business Forum that opened in Kazan on Thursday.
The results of the effort, kickstarted when Russian President Vladimir Putin visited New Delhi in December, are already visible in Kazan, capital of the Republic of Tatarstan. India’s trade with the Russian region is surging, and exceeded $1.09 billion in the first six months of the year – a more than ninefold rise from the same period a year ago. The figure also surpasses the roughly $400 million recorded for all of 2025, according to regional authorities.
Both countries are seeking to expand joint manufacturing and investment projects by capitalizing on this momentum.
India’s ambassador to Russia, Vinay Kumar, said relations with the Russian region have been on a positive trajectory since Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Kazan for the BRICS summit in 2024. He noted the growing trade, the higher number of Indian students and businesses in the region, and the opening of an Indian consulate in Kazan.
“Tatarstan offers opportunities in trade and investment,” Kumar said, adding “mutuality of interest between India and Tatarstan to take the relationship forward is giving an impetus not only to regional ties but also India-Russia relations.”
Following negotiations at the INNOPROM.India exhibition in New Delhi last month, Tatarstan’s investment agency signed cooperation agreements with Indian companies working in artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, biotechnology, and pharmaceuticals.
The discussions mark a shift “from general declarations to substantive negotiations” on production and joint ventures, Tatarstan Investment Development Agency chief Taliya Minullina said ahead of the forum.
Aircraft manufacturing, medical technology, instrument engineering, and food processing are priority areas for joint projects, Tatarstan’s deputy minister of industry and trade, German Lerner, said.
Indian companies could also supply electronic components to Tatarstan’s manufacturers, while Indian cloud provider Bharat AI Cloud has announced plans to open an office in Kazan.
“Our relationship goes deep into history, where our roots intersect,” Lerner said. “It’s not surprising. Trade routes passed through Tatarstan.”
The event has a strong cultural component this year. Alongside an Indian film festival and a musical project titled ‘Purana Symphony’, Tatarstan’s renowned craftsmen are presenting their wares.
“What is very important is that some of them saw similarities with their culture,” Lerner said.
The first TIME forum last year resulted in 19 cooperation agreements involving businesses, educational institutions, and regional authorities.
Workforce cooperation also expanded. Tatarstan issued 978 work permits to Indian nationals during the first eight months of 2026, compared with 665 throughout last year. Earlier this month, Putin signed off on an agreement with India on temporary employment, as Russian companies seek more workers in manufacturing and other industries.
Login
