Normal view
- The Kyiv Independent
- On Borrowed Time: Ukraine's Economy in the War's Fifth Winter – KI Insights monthly briefing
On Borrowed Time: Ukraine's Economy in the War's Fifth Winter – KI Insights monthly briefing
Ukraine is heading into 2027 with a rising fiscal gap. Growth forecasts have been cut, inflation is rising, and the need for external financing seems to just keep going up. The economy is being squeezed by a labor market drained by mobilization and emigration, energy infrastructure has been decimated, and

US midterms: Where key candidates stand on Israel, Gaza and Iran
Washington, DC - The midterm elections in the United States are in full swing, with early voting starting in most states.
The results will set the tone of US foreign and domestic policy for the rest of President Donald Trump's term. Control of both chambers of Congress - the Senate and the House of Representatives - is at stake.
If the Democrats flip one of the two chambers, which are currently under the control of Trump's Republican Party, they can thwart Trump's legislative agenda.
And if they can gain control of the Senate, they can block his judicial nominees. The upper chamber is also responsible for confirming cabinet appointees, ratifying treaties and holding impeachment trials.
There are 35 seats in the 100-member chamber up for grabs in this year's election, which will conclude on 3 November.
The current makeup of the Senate is now 53-47, so the Democrats need to flip four seats without losing any to reclaim the majority in the legislative body.
In most Senate races, the results are all but known before the votes are cast due to the political makeup of the states where the contests are playing out.
Barring a miracle, Republicans will win in Alabama, and Democrats will win in Massachusetts. That leaves a handful of competitive states that will determine the fate of the Senate.
The New Arab looks at the candidates in five key close races and where they stand on the issues.
Michigan (open seat): Abdul El-Sayed (Democrat) v Mike Rogers (Republican)
The Senate contest in Michigan is one of the most closely watched races in the election. Abdul El-Sayed, a progressive public health advocate, is taking on Mike Rogers, a Trump-backed former Congress member.
In recent weeks, Rogers and his allies have tried to focus the race on El-Sayed's Muslim identity, smearing him with baseless accusations of ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Iran.
Trump has repeatedly mocked El-Sayed's name. "His name is actually Abduladadalalala. It's Adulbabababababa Mohammed Al-Sayed," the US president said at a rally last week.
El-Sayed has pushed to refocus the race on the issues - particularly the affordability crisis, tariffs and the rise in the price of gasoline linked to the Iran war and his support for universal healthcare.
The progressive Democrat opposes US aid to Israel and argues that Washington should focus on investing in communities at home.
He has accused Israel of carrying out a genocide in Gaza - an allegation backed by leading human rights groups and United Nations investigators.
"I oppose the illegal and unjustifiable war in Iran and demand an immediate end to the hostilities," El-Sayed says on his platform.
Rogers initially supported the war with Iran, calling the decision to launch the conflict the "right thing to do".
But the former Republican legislator curbed his enthusiasm for the conflict as it dragged on and proved unpopular with voters. "The war with Iran needs to end, and end quickly," he said in a campaign ad in September.
Rogers is a staunch supporter of Israel. "When I get to the United States Senate, I will continue to unconditionally support Israel's right to defend itself," he said earlier this year.
Texas (open seat): James Talarico (Democrat) v Ken Paxton (Republican)
In a sign that highlights the declining popularity of Republicans, Democrats are mounting a competitive Senate challenge in deep-red Texas, which has been a Republican stronghold for decades.
Public opinion polls have shown Democratic State Representative James Talarico neck-and-neck with Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton.
Talarico has focused his campaign on fighting corruption, closing tax loopholes and lowering the cost of living. Paxton has presented himself as a defender of Trump's agenda, emphasising securing the southern border against irregular migration.
On foreign policy, Talarico calls for conditioning US aid to Israel. He broadly backs Israel's right to "defend itself", while focusing his criticism of Israeli atrocities in Gaza and the West Bank on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"As a former teacher, seeing the death and the destruction in Gaza, seeing what’s happening to children in particular, makes me sick to my stomach," he said at a CNN townhall last week.
Talarico has stopped short of calling the atrocities a genocide, saying that the issue is a legal determination that should be made by international courts.
He has pledged to work to "end the forever war in Iran that’s driving up the cost of gas and groceries".
In contrast, Paxton has backed Trump's military action in Iran, but in a recently leaked audio recording he bemoaned the war's impact on gasoline and diesel prices.
"It's the war, it's gas prices, it's diesel," he said when asked about the issues dragging his campaign, according to Axios, which first reported on the leaked remarks.
Paxton is a strong supporter of Israel. As attorney general, he has defended and enforced laws to penalise companies and individuals that boycott Israel.
Maine: Susan Collins (Republican incumbent) v Troy Jackson (Democrat)
Maine generally leans Democratic in presidential elections, but Republican Susan Collins has won five consecutive elections in the northeastern state, earning her a reputation as one of the most tenacious politicians in the country.
This time, Democrats are hoping to use the mounting anger against Trump to finally topple the 73-year-old senator.
But the Democratic push was off to a terrible start after the party's nominee, Graham Platner, stepped down due to allegations of sexual misconduct.
Platner was replaced by former state Senate President Troy Jackson.
Collins, who has shown willingness to break with Trump, has promoted herself as an experienced and hardworking "common sense" leader.
Jackson has focused on his deep roots in the state as a former logger and supporter of workers' rights.
The Democrat agrees that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. "When I'm in the US Senate, I’ll never vote in favour of US taxpayer-funded military aid to Israel," he wrote in a social media post in July.
Collins is an unflinching advocate for Israel and has backed continuing military aid to the US ally, calling herself a "strong supporter" of the assistance, which totals at least $3.8 billion annually.
On Iran, the Maine senator has been a rare Republican dissenter against the conflict, voting repeatedly with Democrats to curb Trump's war powers.
Jackson, however, has argued that Collins' presence in the Senate tilts the balance in favour of Republicans and enables Trump's agenda, including the Iran war.
"Senator Susan Collins says that she voted against [the war] nine times, but she didn’t have the votes," Jackson said during a debate earlier this month.
"Well that sounds like then we probably ought to have Democrats in charge of the US Senate so that we have the votes."
Alaska: Dan Sullivan (Republican incumbent) v Mary Peltola (Democrat)
Alaska is another traditional Republican stronghold where Democrats are making gains and hoping to stage a big surprise.
The race pits Trump-backed two-term senator Dan Sullivan against former Democratic Congresswoman Mary Peltola. The Democratic candidate's campaign slogan is "fish, family, freedom", focusing on lowering costs in Alaska.
Sullivan is running on his record of helping push large tax cuts and "historic investments" in the US military. The senator has voted consistently against Democratic efforts to restrict Trump's ability to continue the war with Iran.
Last week, he appeared to blame the Democrats' energy regulations for the rising fuel prices in an effort to defend the war with Iran.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the conflict in the Middle East is temporary. The true forever war is the national Democrats’ war against Alaska oil and gas and our jobs. That’s the forever war," he said, according to Alaska Public Media.
Peltola has been overtly critical of the war and Sullivan's votes in support of Trump's military campaign in Iran.
"This war is driving up our energy bills and hurting Alaskans with no end in sight," she said earlier this month.
Both Peltola and Sullivan are staunch Israel supporters. Sullivan has voted repeatedly on pro-Israel measures in Congress, including sponsoring a measure to deepen military cooperation with the US ally.
When she served in the House of Representatives between 2023 and 2025, Peltola was one of the most uncompromising pro-Israel Democrats.
In 2024, she joined Republicans in voting to ban then-President Joe Biden from withholding weapons from Israel. She backed a bill to impose sanctions on the International Criminal Court in response to the arrest warrant against Netanyahu.
Ohio: Jon Husted (Republican incumbent) v Sherrod Brown (Democrat)
Former Democratic Senator Sherrod Brown is attempting to make a comeback in the Midwestern state that has been trending in Republicans' favour over the past decade.
He is taking on Jon Husted, who replaced Vice President JD Vance in the Senate after the Trump administration took office last year.
Beyond the single seat, the contest is of symbolic importance. It would restore the Democrats' competitive edge in the Midwestern state and serve as an early dig at Vance, who is expected to run for president in 2028.
Brown has made his opposition to the Iran war a key theme in his campaign.
"Jon Husted has voted 14 times to continue the reckless Iran war as gas and grocery prices continue to rise," he recently wrote in a social media post. "I’ll vote to end the war the first chance I get."
In March, Husted proclaimed that the war was going "much better than anyone thought it would".
But like other Republicans in competitive races, he has tempered his support for the conflict.
"The war needs to come to an end as quickly as possible so that we can lower gas prices," he told Politico earlier this month.
Husted and Brown are more closely aligned when it comes to Israel. Both are strong supporters of the US ally.
Ali Harb is a journalist based in Washington, DC. His work focuses on US foreign policy, elections, and Arab American communities
Follow him on X: @Harbpeace
Edited by Charlie Hoyle
How Sudan’s shift to drone warfare is fuelling a civilian crisis
Outposts, violence, impunity: The anatomy of Israeli settler land grabs
- EUobserver
- Serbia’s election: can a student-led movement of hope overcome Vučić’s hollowed-out political system?
Serbia’s election: can a student-led movement of hope overcome Vučić’s hollowed-out political system?
For years, Serbia’s opposition has struggled to turn public discontent into a credible challenge to Aleksandar Vučić’s political dominance. On Sunday (25 October), a student-led movement that began with demands for accountability after a deadly train station collapse will attempt to do what established opposition forces have repeatedly failed to achieve: translate civic mobilisation into political change.
The upcoming parliamentary elections are about more than the (re)distribution of seats. They represent the endeavour citizens want and need in a democratic society.
For several years now, “the students operate according to the principles of direct democracy,” senior research associate at the University of Belgrade, Vasiljević told EUobserver. They gather in “plenums” and make collective decisions.
The motor behind that movement was anger. The lack of accountability after the collapse of a canopy at Novi Sad railway station on 1 November 2024, which killed 16 people was the main trigger.
Since then, protests have been taken place around in the country. Eventually, they grew into a nationwide challenge to the government. The student movement even marched from Belgrade to Brussels and Strasbourg to appeal to the EU institutions.
“It brought some irreversible changes that will have a lasting impact on society,” said Vasiljević.
And these changes could be now transposed into politics. “The country has been held captive for far too long by one ruling party and, in fact, one ruling elite,” Miloje Savić, a volunteering poll observer, told EUobserver.

For many Serbs, as for Savić, the students’ organisation represent “a tectonic shift in how society is organised and how it should function.”
The Student List, now the electoral vehicle for the mobilisation, has given people frustrated with established politics a new focus for their demands. The main idea being that political participation can be rebuilt from the ground up.
“It is not a good time to be living in Serbia. And during my life, I can’t remember a time when it was,” Ivan Bartoš, a 31-year-old organiser of student protests in Bački Petrovac told EUobserver.
Serbia, as many European countries, is suffering from an ageing population. It brings to the social debate a generational difference. On one side, the middle-aged and “corrupted” regime led by Vučić, on the other, a proposal of change without real political experience.
And the question that is heard in the run-up to the elections is “does Serbia need a professional politician who has been trained for years in kleptocracy, or is society willing to take a risk?”
Vučić’s ‘men in black’?
Yet the movement’s rise has exposed a fundamental tension: society may be changing faster than the institutions through which change must be delivered.
“The institutions have been captured and controlled by the regime. There is not enough institutional space to accommodate these political changes,” Vasiljević said.
Previous Serbian elections have been accompanied by allegations of vote-buying, voter intimidation and ballot-box stuffing. After the last ones, held in December 2023, European MP’s called for “independent investigations into the irregularities”.
Knowing what is at stake, the Student List is trained an unprecedented number of poll monitors (15,000), seeking to protect the vote and document potential irregularities.
Attacks on opposition representatives by groups of unidentified men dressed in black have repeatedly raised concerns during the rule of Vučić’s Serbian Progressive Party (SNS).
The media are not safe either.
This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership
Iran determined to keep uranium amid increased war odds, flurry of meetings
Meta ordered to pay $25 billion over data privacy deception
Meta is finally being forced to pay for its near-decade-old falsehoods about the Cambridge Analytica scandal that saw millions of users’ data harvested for political purposes.
On Wednesday, a judge in New Mexico ordered the social media company to pay a $25 billion penalty following a jury’s determination in late September that the company’s executives broke state laws with knowingly false statements they made in the wake of the scandal.
“The extraordinary number of willful violations found by the jury, the duration and repetition of the conduct, the breadth of subjects on which violations occurred, the involvement of senior Facebook leadership, the size of New Mexico audiences reached, and the clear intentional and systematic nature of Facebook’s repeated misstatements established in the trial record support the highest level of penalty allowed by the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act,” New Mexico State District Court Judge Francis Mathew wrote in a court filing.
To refresh your memory, the scandal involved Cambridge Analytica — a political firm financed in part by pro-Trump benefactors — harvesting private data from tens of millions of Facebook users, which was eventually conveyed to members of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and used for political targeting. To be clear, this case was an entirely separate trial from the other landmark trial Meta lost in New Mexico, which found the company liable for placing profits over consumers and knowingly putting children at risk of harms it knew to exist on its platforms.
As Tech Policy Press reported, the false statements deemed willfully deceptive by the jury include comments from CEO Mark Zuckerberg, former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg and other executives about things like the company’s response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, users’ data protections, and misinformation and hate speech on its platforms.
For example, the statements include comments from both Zuckerberg and Sandberg about when access to users’ private data was closed off. They also include a comment from Zuckerberg in 2017 saying that Meta — then known as Facebook — had “always taken down any post that promotes or celebrates hate crimes or acts of terrorism.” Another comment deemed willfully deceptive came from Zuckerberg in 2020, when he claimed there were no exceptions for politicians who broke the platforms’ rules about content that “may lead to violence or deprive people of their right to vote.” The jury also found willfully deceptive a 2020 comment from former Meta executive Nick Clegg, who claimed that Meta “doesn’t profit from hate” and that the company applied a “zero tolerance approach” to hateful posts on Facebook and Instagram.
Meta, which has allegedly assisted the Trump administration’s efforts to suppress free speech and target critics of federal officials, disputed the jury’s ruling in September, vowing to appeal it and framing its actions as a free speech matter.
As the Santa Fe New Mexican reported: “‘Meta’s platforms are forums for free expression. We have a First Amendment right to manage those platforms in a way we believe best serves the interests of our community,’ the spokesperson wrote in an email. ‘This means prioritizing free speech, protecting our users’ information and giving them control over their data.’”
The post Meta ordered to pay $25 billion over data privacy deception appeared first on MS NOW.
The calendar is now Ukraine’s foe — and so, Ukrainians fear, is Trump
This is the Oct. 21, 2026 edition of “The Tea, Spilled by Morning Joe” newsletter. Subscribe here to get it delivered straight to your inbox Monday through Friday.
“Whether it’s in Ohio in the governor’s race or in our foreign policy, we’re seeing moral depravity play out in real time.”
— Mika Brzezinski, Oct. 21, 2026
Ukraine is bracing for a brutal winter. As frigid temperatures approach, Russia has only escalated its attacks as Vladimir Putin seems emboldened by the American president’s recent turn toward Moscow.
Russia’s arms factories have already made enough missiles and drones to take down Ukraine’s electrical grid, as well as the heating systems that millions of people rely on to stay warm. Left dark and cold, many homes across the country will become deadly.
But as I argue in my latest piece for The Atlantic, three upcoming events that could decide Ukraine’s fate will all take place thousands of miles from Kyiv.
The first is America’s Election Day, now less than two weeks away. Ukrainian leaders fear that if Democrats win one or both chambers of Congress, Donald Trump may abandon them further in those final weeks of full Republican control of Washington.
The second is a proposed summit in mid-November in southern China, where Putin hopes to meet with Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping to plan for ending the war — with no seat at the table for Ukraine.
The third is December’s Group of 20 summit, to be held at, where else, the president’s Miami-area golf club. Trump wants Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy to meet there and agree to a deal, even if it’s a bad one for Ukraine.
What’s behind Trump’s latest anger at Ukraine? As I write:
Trump has demanded an energy cease-fire — he even announced one earlier this month that had no basis in reality — yet has focused his ire entirely on Ukraine’s attacks on Russian oil refineries. He blames those strikes for the rise in energy prices while ignoring the real culprit, Iran’s ability to defy the United States and close the Strait of Hormuz. He’s convinced himself, three people close to him have told me, that Ukraine’s attacks on the refineries are, in part, meant to undermine Republicans’ chances next month — and, by extension, Trump.
The president has ignored Moscow’s attacks on Ukraine’s electrical grid, and Monday, hours after a drone strike on a public park killed six people, including two children, he downplayed its strikes on Ukraine’s cities, declaring that Russia had not “been doing much.” An image of one of the dead children, a 1-year-old killed as she sat in her stroller, was broadcast around the globe.
The calendar is now Ukraine’s foe — and so, Ukrainians fear, is Trump.
Read the full piece here.
MORNING JOE FAMILY MEETING
Every Tuesday at 12 p.m. ET, MS NOW Members can join a live conversation with Joe Scarborough.
If you are interested in asking Joe a question directly over video, please let us know. These questions can be about politics, news of the day, or anything else that’s on your mind!
Participants will need to complete a short pre-interview and be available from 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. ET on Tuesday, Oct. 27, to take part.
If you’re interested, please fill out this form by Friday, Oct. 23. Participants will be notified via email if selected.
CHARTS OF THE DAY


Source: Reuters/Ipsos poll of 1,679 U.S. adults conducted Oct. 16-19, 2026. Margin of error: +/- 2.4 percentage points
WHAT THEY SAID
John Heilemann on the Ramaswamy campaign’s latest ad
“In 35 years, I’ve never seen an ad that crosses more ethical and moral lines of decency than this one. Amy Acton had about a 5-point lead over Vivek Ramaswamy because Ohio voters don’t like him and don’t think he’s a person of principle. An ad this desperate and disgusting is usually a sign a campaign sees the writing on the wall — that they need to do something dramatic to alter the trajectory of the race.”
Jessica Taylor on the midterms
“If Democrats take back the Senate, it would be a historic night — and it’s not out of the realm of possibility. ‘Morose’ is one of the words that comes to mind from some of my conversations with Republicans.”
David Drucker on what comes after the midterms
“Even if Democrats win control of the Senate to go along with the House, the president is still going to have a veto pen. Democrats are going to have to find those areas where they have leverage and power — and then be willing to negotiate with the president.”
STEVE RATTNER’S CHARTS: THE MONEY MACHINE
With two weeks to go, the Democrats’ momentum shows up not only in the polls but also in their candidates’ fundraising, despite a massive Republican advantage in political action committee cash. Democratic candidates are raising money at a pace that has left their Republican opponents far behind — in some Senate races, by a factor of 5 or 10.
The real Republican advantage comes from super PAC money, with one man playing a disproportionate role: Elon Musk. The Senate Leadership Fund, the main super PAC for Senate Republicans, raised $273 million in the third quarter, an unprecedented sum. Of that, $158 million came from Musk, in two checks written in September.

Democratic candidates themselves, on the other hand, have posted far stronger fundraising numbers than their Republican competitors. Democratic House candidates have raised $1.25 billion this cycle to $966 million for Republicans and hold $414 million in cash to the Republicans’ $320 million.

MS NOW
The post The calendar is now Ukraine’s foe — and so, Ukrainians fear, is Trump appeared first on MS NOW.




How Egypt's Saudi pledge aims to curb Israel's Gulf ambitions
Egypt, a regional military power, has pledged to provide all forms of assistance to defend Saudi Arabia amid escalating Houthi attacks from Yemen, in a move aimed at maintaining its strategic position in the Gulf.
But analysts view another geopolitical objective behind the Egyptian support for Riyadh: countering Israel’s bid to play a security role in a region vital to Cairo’s political and economic interests.
On 17 October, President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi said Egypt would take any necessary measures to protect Saudi Arabia if Riyadh requested assistance. He called an emergency parliamentary session to authorise possible troop deployment.
The following day, the National Defence Council, Egypt’s top security body, pledged to provide all necessary and possible support to safeguard Saudi Arabia’s security, stability, and territorial integrity.
The Egyptian pledge came after US President Donald Trump said on 16 October that Israel had been helping Saudi Arabia counter Houthi attacks from Yemen and suggested Riyadh should accept further Israeli assistance.
It followed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s visit to Cairo last month to seek support against the Iran-backed Houthis. The visit highlighted the importance of Egyptian-Saudi coordination on issues affecting the Red Sea and wider regional stability.
For Cairo, which has longstanding strategic ties with Riyadh, the prospect of Israel becoming a more prominent security partner for the kingdom adds urgency to its efforts to reinforce its role in regional security.
“Egypt’s interest lies in doing everything possible to strengthen its ties with Saudi Arabia, or at least to ensure that its relationship with Riyadh is closer than Israel’s,” Ahmed Aboudouh, an associate fellow at Chatham House in London, told The New Arab.
Strengthening ties with Saudi Arabia offers Egypt significant economic and geopolitical benefits as Cairo seeks foreign investment, financial support, and foreign currency. The kingdom is also important for millions of Egyptians working there, whose remittances provide a vital source of foreign currency.
Closer coordination with Riyadh also helps Egypt protect its interests in the Red Sea, particularly shipping through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, a key route to the Suez Canal and a major source of revenue for Cairo.
During Trump’s first term, the US brokered the Abraham Accords in 2020 to normalise relations between Israel and Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia’s neighbours, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain, allowing Tel Aviv to expand its economic, diplomatic, and security partnerships in the Gulf.
The American president has also pushed for normalising ties between Saudi Arabia and Israel, but Riyadh insists that any normalisation depends on resolving the Palestinian issue, including the establishment of a Palestinian state.
If Riyadh accepts any Israeli assistance against Houthi attacks, cooperation in areas such as intelligence sharing and air defence could expand, potentially giving Israel a greater role in Gulf security.
For Egypt, that possibility raises concerns about a changing regional balance in which Israel could become a more influential security partner for Arab states traditionally linked to Cairo.
Cairo's bid to keep Israel at bay
“Egypt would oppose any attempt by Israel to become a player in the Arab world’s collective security, regardless of who was involved, and Saudi Arabia would certainly stand with Cairo. This means keeping Israel out of regional military and intelligence cooperation,” Egyptian military expert Samir Ragheb told The New Arab.
Egypt was the first Arab country to sign a peace treaty with Israel in 1979, following decades of conflict and several wars, but their relations have remained largely cold despite formal diplomatic ties.
The relationship has been marked by mutual distrust, periodic tensions, and regional competition, particularly over Gaza and broader Middle East security arrangements.
Egyptian political analyst Mokhtar Ghobashi said Egypt’s pledge to defend Saudi Arabia could deter Israel from seeking a security role in the Gulf.
“Relying on Israel as a security guarantor for a country in the Arab world, amid divisions and conflicts between Arab states, is an extremely dangerous proposition,” he told The New Arab.
Since the 2020 Abraham Accords, security cooperation between Israel and some Gulf states has expanded, including arms sales and coordination on air and missile defence amid shared concerns over Iran.
Egypt’s support for Saudi Arabia reflects its interest in preserving its regional influence and maintaining a central role in shaping the security arrangements in the Middle East.
Cairo could face greater competition for influence if Riyadh turns to Israel for certain defence capabilities. While this would not necessarily weaken Egyptian-Saudi relations, it could reduce Egypt’s role in shaping the kingdom’s security policy.
The implications extend beyond bilateral relations. Closer security ties between Israel and Saudi Arabia could give Tel Aviv a greater role in shaping regional responses to threats, from Yemen’s Houthis to Iran.
Protecting Egypt's strategic interests
Red Sea security is another concern for Cairo. A broader Israeli security role in the Gulf could give Tel Aviv greater influence over decisions affecting the Bab el-Mandeb, a vital maritime corridor central to Egypt’s national interests.
Aboudouh said another objective behind Egypt’s pledge to defend Saudi Arabia is to protect its strategic interests in the Red Sea and around Bab el-Mandeb.
“Egyptian officials may have concluded that expanding the country’s regional role is now crucial to protecting maritime traffic through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait against any Houthi attempt to exploit a conflict with Saudi Arabia to disrupt shipping, as they have done in the past,” he told The New Arab.
Egypt has been hard-hit by regional instability following Israel’s war on the Gaza Strip and Houthi attacks on shipping in the Red Sea since 2023, losing an estimated around $20 billion in Suez Canal revenues.
Sisi framed Egypt’s potential role in Saudi Arabia as defensive, saying Cairo had no intention of attacking any party but was prepared to defend Saudi Arabia if requested. “We do not want to fight or attack anyone. We will only defend Saudi Arabia,” he said.
Egypt joined the Saudi-led coalition that intervened in Yemen against the Houthis in 2015, but its role remained limited. A deeper commitment now could expose Cairo to a costly conflict, particularly if operations extend beyond the defence of Saudi territory.
It could also strain Egypt’s resources and increase its exposure to instability along the Red Sea.
The extent and form of any Egyptian assistance will therefore be crucial. Intelligence-sharing, logistical support and maritime security cooperation would carry different risks from deploying troops to Yemen.
Cairo may seek to bolster Saudi Arabia’s defences while avoiding involvement in an open-ended conflict.
Mohamed Sabry is an Egyptian journalist based in Cairo with over two decades of experience covering Egypt, regional politics, foreign policy, and diplomacy. His work has appeared in Al-Monitor and InsideOver
Follow him on X: @MohamedSabry079
Edited by Charlie Hoyle
Musk pledges $10bn in SpaceX shares for US children: Who really gains?
Gaza’s hospitals are running out of life-saving fuel – Daily Update

The Houthi war machine is evolving. Can Saudi Arabia keep pace?
The Houthis are seeking to manufacture parts of advanced Iranian-designed medium-range ballistic missiles inside Yemen, according to new research that raises questions about how effectively Saudi Arabia can interrupt the group’s ability to sustain its attacks.
In a report published on 14 October and previewed by The Wall Street Journal, Conflict Armament Research (CAR) identified components associated with the Iranian-designed Kheibar Shekan missile family alongside industrial equipment and raw materials in shipments intended for Houthi-controlled territory.
Shipping documents identified a Chinese supplier, suggesting that the group is expanding its procurement beyond Iran-linked networks.
The findings come as Riyadh faces repeated attacks on airports and other critical infrastructure. The strikes have disrupted aviation and exposed the costs of protecting a vast country against an adversary whose arsenal and methods have developed through years of war.
For Saudi Arabia, the concern extends beyond the specifications of an individual missile. A growing ability to source components, manufacture selected parts and adapt how different weapons are used could make the Houthi strike campaign more difficult to contain.
Beyond imported missile kits
The October report concerns four containers documented by Yemeni authorities in July 2026. They had arrived in Aden’s free zone aboard two vessels in June and October 2025, carrying shipments from China whose intended destination was the Houthi-controlled port of Hodeidah.
The cargo included machined components associated with the airframe and rocket motor of the Kheibar Shekan series, one of Iran’s most advanced and longest-range ballistic missiles, together with materials and machinery potentially useful for manufacturing and testing.
Their presence points towards an effort to produce parts locally, beyond reassembling weapons delivered in separate packages.
“Inspection of the cargo revealed Houthi ambitions to at least partially manufacture medium-range ballistic missiles inside Yemen,” Fabian Hinz, a senior analyst at CAR, told The New Arab. “Whether that effort has succeeded, remains a work in progress or has met major obstacles remains difficult to determine.”
Douglas Barrie, senior fellow for military aerospace at the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), outlined a more limited scenario. “Final local assembly with domestic manufacturing of some components I think is most likely,” he told The New Arab.
The systems involved nevertheless represent a substantial ambition. Iran unveiled the original solid-propellant Kheibar Shekan in 2022, with a reported range of 1,450 kilometres. The missile was first used against targets in Syria in January 2024, and later against Israel and US bases in the MENA region.
CAR identifies several related variants in Houthi service, giving the group access to designs intended for long-range strikes and equipped with manoeuvring features that could complicate interception.
Earlier seizures show that the supply chain encompasses both weapons and the means to assemble or produce them. A shipment intercepted in Aden in August 2025, for example, included drone and propulsion-related equipment and advanced control components, according to US Central Command.
A separate CAR briefing, published in September, described missile kits bearing assembly labels that used Iranian rather than Houthi designations, suggesting they were produced in Iran. Broadening the supplier base would loosen that dependence.
“Sourcing components and raw materials from suppliers beyond Iran-linked networks can reduce dependence and potentially eliminate bottlenecks,” Hinz said. He cautioned that independence depends on the weapons involved: small drones built largely from commercial components are easier to manufacture than systems requiring specialised parts.
“For the more advanced weapons, the Houthis will likely continue to rely on the import of key subsystems, but further developing a domestic capability could increasingly allow for the manufacture of less sophisticated guided weapons. This would reduce dependency on external actors,” Barrie added.
Farzin Nadimi, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute, sees the Chinese supply chain as a substitute for “the Iranian one, which has been severely hampered by the US naval blockade”.
The cargo documented by CAR arrived in 2025, before the current blockade, so such channels were already in use; they are likely to matter more now that Iranian routes are under pressure. Replacement has limits, however. “Houthis still depend on Iran for critical missile subsystems and guidance components,” Nadimi told The New Arab. “The Houthis cannot get those from China.”
Chinese suppliers, in other words, can provide raw materials and machined parts, but not the most sensitive components. Nor is the technology itself new. Kheibar Shekan and Fattah technology, Nadimi said, “has been transferred to Houthis for quite some time now”, though he could not say whether the group has incorporated “the latest upgrade kits”.
Iran unveiled the Fattah, which it describes as hypersonic, in 2023. The new evidence therefore concerns ambitions to manufacture parts locally, rather than the first acquisition of those technologies.
The concern predates CAR’s latest findings. On 11 September 2025, the US Treasury sanctioned Hubei Chica Industrial Co., Ltd., accusing the China-based supplier of coordinating with Houthi procurement operatives to provide chemical precursors used to manufacture ballistic missiles, explosives and other weapons inside Yemen.
The US Treasury also accused China-based Shenzhen Shengnan Trading of shipping dual-use electronics to Houthi front companies.
CAR’s evidence requires qualification. Shipping documents identified a Chinese precision-metal producer advertising custom aerospace components, but investigators have not traced the items with the manufacturer or independently verified the documentation. The findings do not establish Chinese government involvement, production volumes or a link to specific attacks on Saudi Arabia.
For Riyadh, this widens the interdiction challenge to commercial suppliers and intermediaries beyond Iran. It also gives the kingdom an incentive to seek Beijing’s cooperation on export controls and end-use checks.
An evolving strike campaign
The industrial investigation coincides with indications that the Houthis are refining how they employ their weapons. According to the Gulf Research Center, as of 15 October, the Houthis have staged at least 42 attacks on Saudi territory, including nine targeting Riyadh and five targeting energy infrastructure in the Eastern Province. At least one third of these raids involved ballistic missiles.
The Associated Press reported on 12 October that regional officials described drones preceding cruise and ballistic missiles in an attack on Riyadh airport. The sequence suggests an effort to combine weapons with different flight characteristics, although it remains unclear whether the drones acted as decoys.
“Houthis and Iranians have both tested hybrid tactics, and I am sure they compare notes too,” Nadimi told The New Arab.
Iran’s April 2024 attack on Israel combined drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles, while its October 2024 attack relied exclusively on ballistic missiles. The strike on Riyadh airport followed the first pattern.
Mixed attacks require defenders to track threats across different altitudes and speeds, while repeated strikes keep personnel and equipment under pressure. Barrie cautioned that Kheibar Shekan-family missiles must be accounted for even if their actual performance falls short of advertised capabilities, “further complicating the challenges facing a defender”.
CAR’s September briefing identified another operational development: a reconnaissance drone helped cue a close-range ballistic missile against a time-sensitive target. This points to improvements in battlefield targeting, alongside the group’s expanding long-range strike capabilities.
Against Saudi Arabia, repeated attacks on airports and energy infrastructure aim to raise the costs of Riyadh’s intervention in Yemen, pressing the kingdom to scale back support for anti-Houthi forces and ease restrictions on Houthi-controlled ports and airports. The goal is bargaining power, without having to defeat Saudi forces directly.
Inside Yemen, the 15 October attack on Aden, which hit the presidential palace, exposed the internationally recognised government’s vulnerability at its own seat of power, while strikes on Marib appear intended to disrupt preparations for counteroffensives.
In the Red Sea, the threat to shipping gives the Houthis leverage over Riyadh and outside powers weighing intervention, on a trade route made more important by insecurity around the Strait of Hormuz. Their declared blockade of Saudi Arabia ties this maritime pressure to the campaign against the kingdom’s airports.
Together, these operations seek to protect Houthi territorial gains while raising the costs of attempts to reverse them. Greater military reach does not guarantee political concessions, however: attacks causing civilian casualties could instead harden Saudi resolve and draw greater external assistance.
Riyadh's containment dilemma
“They are already changing the battlefield around KSA,” Nadimi told The New Arab. For Saudi Arabia, the challenge is both immediate and cumulative: preventing the next strike while reducing the Houthis’ ability to keep launching them.
ACLED reported on 12 October that Houthi strikes and attempted strikes on Saudi territory had more than doubled over the preceding week. An airport need not be destroyed for airlines to suspend services.
Interception also consumes finite resources. Regional officials have reported pressure on Saudi interceptor stocks during the wider Iran war, making replenishment and outside assistance central to sustaining the defensive effort.
Offensive operations face a different problem: airstrikes can destroy launchers, depots and workshops, but suppressing the campaign means repeatedly locating assets that may be mobile, concealed or dispersed. Nor have Houthi air defences closed Yemeni airspace: CTP-ISW assessed on 15 October that the group’s occasional successful engagements had not significantly disrupted the Saudi air campaign.
Wider procurement networks and partial local manufacturing could make replenishment harder to interrupt, even without making the Houthis self-sufficient, while imported subsystems remain a point of vulnerability.
Riyadh’s challenge is to reduce both the group’s ability to rebuild its arsenal and the political leverage it derives from using it.
Francesco Salesio Schiavi is an Italian specialist in the Middle East. His focus lies in the security architecture of the Levant and the Gulf, with a particular emphasis on Iraq, Iran, and the Arab Peninsula, as well as military and diplomatic interventions by international actors
Follow him on X: @frencio_schiavi
Edited by Charlie Hoyle
US congressional candidate Brad Lander detained in West Bank
How Qatar, Turkiye, Pakistan and Indonesia are deepening defence ties
Are the UK, France being pulled into the Saudi-Houthi conflict?
Israel's occupation, Hezbollah's arms: A looming war in Lebanon?
On 5 October, Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces stopped a van with two people on board at the Dahr al-Baydar checkpoint.
When searched, authorities discovered and then seized about 780 kg of explosives, including TNT and Composition C-4 plastic.
The two people arrested were reportedly linked to Hezbollah. They were tasked with transporting the cargo from the Bekaa region to Beirut.
The reported involvement of Hezbollah members in the explosives seizure prompted a wave of accusations from the group’s political rivals, with some suggesting they could be used for internal political assassinations.
Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea called the seizure “the most dangerous incident in years”, saying the weapons were probably meant for use inside Lebanon.
Kataeb leader Samy Gemayel wrote they were probably intended for a new wave of assassinations like those between 2004 and 2008, including that of former prime minister Rafic Hariri in 2005.
Lebanon’s prime minister, Nawaf Salam, also noted that C-4 had been used in previous assassinations and promised a full investigation.
However, on 15 October, Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah acknowledged that the vehicle and its cargo belonged to the group. He denied allegations of an assassination plot and stated that the explosives are part of the capabilities Hezbollah uses against Israel, demanding the return of the shipment.
On the same day, US Secretary of State Marc Rubio reportedly called Lebanon’s President Joseph Aoun, urging him not to return confiscated explosives to Hezbollah.
Hezbollah’s demand for the return of the explosives has further strained its relationship with a government that has banned the group’s military activity and is pushing to disarm it.
Israel's occupation creates openings for Hezbollah to rebuild
The discovery of explosive materials comes as Israel continues to occupy swathes of southern Lebanon and launch near-daily strikes despite a US-brokered ceasefire agreed in June.
Hezbollah has halted its attacks since then, but the seizure of explosives points to efforts to rebuild its military capabilities as the risk of renewed US-Iran conflict threatens to reignite the Lebanese front.
It is not uncommon for Hezbollah to use ceasefire windows to rebuild its capabilities following a conflict with Israel.
Between the November 2024 ceasefire that ended the Israel-Hezbollah war linked to Gaza and March 2026, reports indicate that the group has rebuilt its command structure and rearmed with assistance from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
David Wood, senior Lebanon analyst at the International Crisis Group (ICG), said that Israel’s continued occupation and attacks in Lebanon also contribute to the conditions that enable the group’s rebuilding.
“While it might be true that Hezbollah continues to operate militarily, despite the Lebanese government wanting to have a state monopoly over arms, it would be much harder for Hezbollah to do that if Israel were more willing to grant actual concessions as part of its negotiations with Lebanon and to create a viable and fair security arrangement between the two countries,” he told The New Arab.
The US-brokered framework signed in June between Lebanon and Israel has yielded limited results. Lebanon demands an end to Israeli attacks and occupation, the release of detainees, and the return of the displaced. Israel ties these conditions to Hezbollah’s disarmament, which the group rejects.
Israel has continued its military operations in southern Lebanon, occupying more than 600 square kilometres of Lebanese territory while conducting near-daily airstrikes, artillery fire, and home demolitions.
It has mostly levelled 48 of about 60 occupied southern Lebanese towns and villages. In September, Israeli forces took control of the strategic Ali al-Taher ridge near Nabatieh. They previously captured Beaufort Castle and crossed the Litani River.
Lebanon’s Health Ministry says more than 4,300 people have been killed since 2 March, following Hezbollah’s entry into the wider US-Iran war. Nearly 9,000 have been killed since 2023. Almost 330,000 people remain internally displaced.
Nicholas Blandford, a non-resident senior fellow with the Atlantic Council’s Middle East Programmes, told The New Arab that daily shelling and drone surveillance are ongoing, along with efforts to prevent reconstruction south of the Litani River, even outside the occupied zone.
“So in effect, the Israeli occupation extends far beyond where they are physically deployed. It's been quite intense over the last month,” he said.
Israel is also escalating threats to expand its southern Lebanon occupation. Last week, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz warned that Lebanon would lose Nabatieh and the Litani area to permanent Israeli control if Hezbollah joins Iran in attacking Israel.
A renewed Iran war could draw Lebanon back into conflict
In fact, US President Donald Trump is weighing fresh strikes against Iran, with Israel reportedly pushing for renewed hostilities. Iran is likewise preparing for war, and the conflict in Yemen further fuels regional escalation.
RANE’s lead MENA and defence analyst Freddy Khoueiry explained that repeated interceptions of weapons transfers in Syria and recent seizures of Hezbollah-linked material inside Lebanon show that the group is "clearly attempting to reconstitute parts of its military capability" to rebuild supply lines and replenish stock.
“Hezbollah is likely attempting to restore enough capability to at some point defend against a potential Israeli preemptive campaign and at the same time preserve the option to participate in another regional conflict involving Iran,” he told The New Arab.
For example, Khoueiry explained that seized TNT and C-4 could be used in explosive-drone payloads, rocket and missile warheads, and roadside bombs, mines and demolition charges against Israeli forces in southern Lebanon if conflict resumes.
Dual-use items like fibre-optic cables for drones could enter Lebanon through standard commercial channels, providing Hezbollah with an alternative route to Syria.
Hezbollah may be prioritising experimenting with and expanding the use of low-cost, fibre-optic-guided FPV drones, heavily deployed against Israeli troops in southern Lebanon before the June ceasefire, as they offer a cheap, effective, and hard-to-intercept option.
On the ground, the presence of Israeli troops in southern Lebanon may give Hezbollah an opening to use guerrilla tactics, such as small units staging hit-and-run attacks from familiar terrain. Its drone operations there could also expand the pool of trained drone operators.
Wood said that while Israel has vast military superiority, Hezbollah, this year, “has still managed to make a nuisance of itself”, demonstrating that “while it can't win a military victory over Israel, it can still inflict casualties”. Hezbollah drone attacks have reportedly killed at least 12 Israeli soldiers.
However, what Hezbollah’s role would be if the US and Israel resume strikes on Iran remains to be seen.
Blandford said that Hezbollah’s involvement would depend on Iran’s ability to absorb renewed US and Israeli attacks.
“The Iranians may conclude that if they can absorb fresh Israeli and US strikes, they don’t need to involve Hezbollah,” he said. However, if Iran deems additional pressure necessary, it may activate Hezbollah to engage Israel along the border, stretching and diverting Israel's resources.
Khoueiry further explained that Hezbollah’s weakened capabilities and fragile domestic position may limit its initial involvement, though opening a Lebanese front could pressure Israel and strengthen Hezbollah’s and Iran’s negotiating leverage.
“Hezbollah could specifically seek to link pressure on Israeli military presence inside of Lebanon and potentially northern Israel again to demand an Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, while Tehran could again attempt to incorporate the Lebanese front into a broader regional ceasefire or negotiating framework,” he said.
However, other kinds of pressures are also likely to shape Hezbollah’s calculations. The Shia community, estimated at 32% of Lebanon’s population, has borne much of the war’s human cost during the war. Last week, Hezbollah announced plans to financially help families in Lebanon whose homes were destroyed or rendered uninhabitable.
Polls diverge on Shia support for Hezbollah’s weapons, with a May poll finding that most respondents opposed disarmament and a September survey finding that most favoured placing their weapons under state control, reflecting the complexity of the group’s relationship with its constituency.
Wood said that Hezbollah weighs the suffering of its constituency but, at the same time, also weighs its deep alliance with Iran.
The group also argues that disarmament would leave the Shia community and Lebanon “wide open to Israeli abuses,” and at times, it “has used those factors to justify its decision to enter conflict in Lebanon, in the knowledge that the Shia will first and foremost pay the price”.
Blandford also argued that if Hezbollah loses Shia support, “then the game is over.”
“It doesn't matter how many weapons or how much money the Iranians give Hezbollah; if they haven't got the support of the Shia community, it's finished.”
Dario Sabaghi is a freelance journalist interested in human rights
Follow him on X: @DarioSabaghi
Edited by Charlie Hoyle
The Memo: Zelensky looks for way back from brink with Trump, to little avail

The Memo: Zelensky looks for way back from brink with Trump, to little avail
