Watch: Ancient dinosaur footprints unearthed at British quarry site

-

October 14, 2025

Kremlin welcomes Trump's focus for peace deal in Ukraine — The comment comes after a Russian drone attack was launched against Ukraine's second largest city, Kharkiv

Night in Kharkiv: sirens, glass, and the uneasy promise of talks

They woke to the sound of glass. Not the slow, sleepy rattle of a city shifting gears at dawn, but the violent shatter of windows and the metallic groan of hospital doors being forced open under blinking emergency lights. Outside, whole blocks were black—streetlamps dead, apartment windows dark—while the wind carried the thin, unmistakable smell of burned electronics and scorched insulation.

“We pulled blankets over the patients and moved them down the corridor by flashlight,” a nurse at Kharkiv’s main hospital told me, her voice raw with exhaustion. “Fifty people had to be evacuated in the middle of the night. You don’t prepare for that—no sheet exercise covers a night like this.”

That hospital was one of several targets in a wave of overnight strikes that sent drones and glide bombs into the city, officials said, wounding seven people and shattering windows across wards treating endocrine and other chronic conditions. More than a hundred patients were moved to safety after the attack, according to regional authorities—an emergency ballet in the dark, staged by exhausted staff with nothing but urgency and resourcefulness to guide them.

Between ceasefires and new threats: a fragile diplomatic opening

At the same time, in a very different theater of geopolitics, the Kremlin publicly welcomed a U.S. president’s offer to focus on brokering peace—on the condition, officials implied, that Washington use its leverage with Kyiv. The message was oddly domestic in tone: now that one war appeared to be cooling, the Kremlin suggested, perhaps the world could turn its attention to another.

“If a ceasefire in Gaza allows for real negotiations elsewhere, we are ready for talks,” a Russian government spokesperson told reporters, an olive branch wrapped in a warning. “But peace cannot be imposed; it must be negotiated with the parties who are actually fighting.”

The timing is combustible. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was preparing to fly to Washington to press for more military assistance as Russia continued to hammer at Ukraine’s power grid, infrastructure, and frontline logistics. The same day Kharkiv’s hospital windows exploded inward, Kyiv said a UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) convoy in the Kherson region was hit—one truck burned, another badly damaged, and two left intact—drawing condemnation from Ukrainian diplomats and fresh warnings about the shrinking space for aid delivery.

What’s at stake in the corridors of power

The conversations expected in Washington were to be consequential: Kyiv is seeking wider-ranging, longer-range weaponry to blunt Moscow’s aerial campaign—systems that could strike strategic targets at distances previously off-limits to Ukrainian forces. There is talk, even suggestion from the U.S. side, that long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles might be a possibility—a consideration that many strategists say would be a major escalation and a complicated diplomatic choice.

“Giving Kyiv the ability to strike deeper into Russia would change the bargaining calculus,” a European security analyst told me. “It could coerce Moscow to negotiate, but it could also harden positions—and that risk cannot be understated.”

For ordinary Ukrainians living under nightly outage warnings and winter fears, it’s not abstract policy calculus. “When they cut the power, they cut our lives,” said a shopkeeper in Kharkiv’s industrial quarter, rubbing his hands against the chill. “You can’t cook, you can’t keep medicines refrigerated, the kids can’t study. Talk of missiles feels far away until your boiler fails.”

Electric winter: a tactic that targets civilians

Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022, long-range strikes on energy infrastructure have become a grim seasonal reality. Power plants, substations, and gas facilities have been repeatedly struck, leaving million-plus populations to endure rolling blackouts in the dead of winter. Utility workers—heroes in reflective vests—splice cables in the middle of the night, trying to coax warmth back into apartments across cities where balconies are draped with blankets to trap heat.

“This is a war that targets the foundations of daily life,” a humanitarian coordinator who has worked in eastern Ukraine told me. “When you take away heat and water, you are weaponizing winter.”

Those strikes do more than freeze radiators. They strain hospital oxygen supplies, sabotage small businesses that cannot afford diesel generators, and send ripple effects into agriculture and food storage. In recent months, Ukrainian officials have said long-range strikes have also degraded Russian oil production in border regions—an indirect counterpunch as Kyiv’s drone and missile capabilities extend farther than before.

Between diplomacy and escalation: the Tomahawk question

Would supplying Tomahawks open a path to peace—or a road to a wider confrontation? It’s the question that hung over this week’s diplomacy. Tomahawks are precise and powerful, able to strike beyond Russia’s immediate border. For some advocates in Kyiv and abroad, they would be leverage: a way to impose costs, to make a blockade of strategy untenable.

“Weapons change options, they don’t create peace on their own,” said an arms-control specialist in Brussels. “They can buy space for negotiation, but only if there’s a political vision to use that space.”

Zelensky framed the moment bluntly on X: as one conflict ceases, another must not be allowed to ossify. “It is important not to lose the momentum for advancing peace,” he wrote. “The world must force Moscow to sit down at the table for real negotiations.”

Frontline life: aid convoys and the small rituals of survival

On the ground in Kherson oblast, where a UN convoy was struck near Bilozerka, people spoke of the logistics of survival as if reciting grocery lists. “We trust those blue trucks,” said a volunteer who helps load supplies. “They bring food for old men who cannot leave their cellars. When they’re hit, it’s not abstract—it’s the breakfast for a grandmother who depends on that bread.”

Ukrainian officials called the attack on the convoy a violation of international law—another sign, they said, of the indiscriminate nature of the offensive. International humanitarian organizations have repeatedly warned that attacks near supply lines and convoys choke off life-saving aid at precisely the moment winter approaches.

Over a hundred hospital patients evacuated in Kharkiv after windows shattered during overnight strikes.
Seven people were reported wounded in the Kharkiv attack.
One vehicle in a UN OCHA convoy burned and another damaged near Bilozerka in Kherson region.

What if peace is negotiable? What if it isn’t?

As diplomats trade notes and leaders weigh the unthinkable—supplying longer-range missiles, pushing for ceasefires, or pressing harder for talks—the people I spoke to live in the tension between hope and fatigue. “We are tired of both answers,” said an elderly teacher who has lived through Soviet times and three years of war. “We are tired of headlines that promise solutions and then turn into more nights like last night.”

So where does that leave us—the global audience reading from comfortable time zones, sipping coffee while the sky over another city is lit by flare and fire? Do we push our leaders for risk-taking that might shorten a war? Do we demand caution to prevent escalation? There are no pure answers, only trade-offs that real people pay for with their warmth, medicines, and sleep.

In Kharkiv, a child drew a sun on a blackout-stained windowpane the morning after the raid. It was childish, stubborn, hopeful—an ordinary act of resistance. It’s worth asking: if you were in power tomorrow, what would you do to keep that child warm tonight and bring everyone to the negotiating table tomorrow?

Madaxweynaha Somaliland oo si maqaam saraysa loogu soo dhaweeyay Adis Ababa

By

-

October 14, 2025

Nov 14(Jowhar)-Madaxweynaha Somaliland, Cabdiraxmaan Maxamed Cabdillaahi Cirro, iyo wafdi uu hoggaaminayo ayaa maanta gaaray magaalada Addis Ababa, caasimadda dalka Itoobiya, kaddib martiqaad rasmi ah oo uu ka helay Ra’iisul Wasaaraha Itoobiya, Abiy Axmed.

Javier Milei flies to White House seeking a vital political lifeline

By

-

October 14, 2025

Argentina's Milei heads to White House for lifeline — With Javier Milei's disapproval ratings rising, the leader is seeking help from a powerful friend (file pic)

The Visit That Could Rewire a Country: Javier Milei at the White House

There is a certain electric hush that follows an Argentine leader when he steps off the plane in Washington. That hush is part curiosity, part calculation — a measure of what his visit might mean for markets, for alliances, for the everyday life of people who live with pesos and mortgage payments and grocery lists.

Today, President Javier Milei finds himself at the center of such a hush. He arrives at the White House not as a tourist soaking up the monument-lit Mall, but as a leader whose political fortunes and an economy’s fragile stability now pivot on an unusually public show of support from President Donald Trump and his administration.

A bailout in the spotlight

The headlines are blunt. The United States has signaled a pathway to provide up to US$20 billion in support to Argentina, a move Washington framed as an effort to stabilize markets and prevent an acute liquidity squeeze. It is the kind of intervention that makes investors breathe easier and makes critics in Buenos Aires bristle — an unmistakable statement that Argentina’s economic fate is being watched and, to some degree, managed beyond its own borders.

“Argentina faces a moment of acute illiquidity,” said Scott Bessent, a US Treasury official, when the package was announced. “The US Treasury is prepared, immediately, to take whatever exceptional measures are warranted to provide stability to markets.” The news produced a visible uptick in Argentine bonds and equities — a temporary balm for a country that has been burning through foreign exchange reserves to defend the peso.

That defense has not been cheap. In recent weeks Argentina reportedly spent more than US$1 billion to prop up the peso — a stopgap many economists describe as unsustainable. Which raises the question: is Washington buying time? Or is it buying influence?

Politics at a crossroads — October 26 looms

The timing of this financial lifeline cannot be separated from politics. On 26 October, Argentines will vote in crucial legislative midterms: about half the Chamber of Deputies and a third of the Senate are up for election. The results will determine whether President Milei can press ahead with a sweeping agenda of fiscal austerity and market-oriented reforms — or whether he will face a legislative gridlock for the next two years.

“If he loses Congress, those reform blueprints collect dust,” said María Silva, a Buenos Aires-based political analyst. “If he wins, the country could see dramatic, rapid change — for better or worse.”

What Milei is asking for — and what the US might expect

Milei has portrayed himself as a crusader against what he calls the old political caste and inflationary mismanagement. He’s a libertarian firebrand who promises austerity, privatization, and a smaller state. But delivering those promises requires more than rhetoric; it requires congressional votes and breathing room in foreign exchange markets.

“They know we are a true ally,” Milei told a radio audience before boarding for Washington, framing the support as an ideological and strategic partnership. In recent public moments, President Trump has praised Milei’s efforts, calling them “fantastic” and comparing their shared mission to clean up inherited economic “messes.” “We’re backing him 100%,” Trump has said in private meetings and public remarks.

In Buenos Aires cafés and neighborhood kiosks, reactions vary. “If Washington puts money on the table, that’s good for my small business,” said Carmen, who runs a bakery in Palermo. “But will prices stop going up? That’s the test.”

Others, like teacher Rodrigo Alvarez, sounded a different note: “We can’t sell sovereignty for a bailout. There needs to be transparency about what is being negotiated.”

Geopolitics in the background

There is more than domestic politics at play. Argentina sits on resources the world increasingly prizes — most notably lithium, a mineral central to electric vehicle batteries and renewable-energy storage. Before Milei’s ascent, Argentina had been deepening ties with China, a major consumer of lithium and a strategic partner for many Latin American states.

Speculation has swirled in Argentina: what, if anything, might Washington want in return for its financial help? Will backing come with strings attached? Will it tilt Argentina further toward the US orbit, at the expense of relations with Beijing? Milei’s government has been careful in public statements; his office said the leaders would discuss “multiple topics.”

Why this matters beyond Argentina

What unfolds in Washington and Buenos Aires is not merely a bilateral drama. It is a test of how modern financial diplomacy operates when a major power opts for a highly visible, targeted intervention. It is a lesson in how domestic politics — legislative math, voter sentiment, and campaign headlines — can reshape macroeconomic lifelines.

For global investors, the mechanics are straightforward: stability at the currency and bond levels reduces risk premia, lowers borrowing costs, and can quiet capital flight. For voters in Argentina, the stakes are visceral: jobs, pensions, the price of a kilo of meat, the safety of savings held in pesos.

“We must ask: stability for whom?” said Professor Elena Morales, an economist at the University of La Plata. “If the only form of stability is austerity that deepens inequality, the social and political costs may be enormous.”

The human weather of economic policy

Walk the streets of Mendoza or La Boca and you can feel the weather of this crisis. A vendor selling choripanes jokes nervously about “pesoophobia” — the anxiety that comes with each devaluation. An elderly woman in a government clinic asks why her pension buys less each month. A taxi driver in Córdoba counts out notes, glancing at his phone for exchange-rate updates.

These are the people who will live with, or suffer from, the results of deals struck in high-ceiling rooms in Washington. They will be the first to notice changes in subsidies, in public services, in the availability of foreign currency for imports of medicine and machinery.

Questions to sit with

Can a foreign-led financial backstop buy a government the political capital it needs — or will it inflame nationalist opposition?
Is this a short-term stabilizing move, or the opening chapter of a longer geopolitical reorientation?
Who bears the immediate cost of reform: taxpayers, bondholders, or future generations?

These are not rhetorical flourishes; they are the contours of choices that will define Argentina’s near-term future.

Final note — the rhythm of risk and hope

Milei’s visit to the White House is a moment of high drama. It offers the promise of a breathing spell for an economy under pressure, a bridge to steeper reform, and a reminder of how intertwined domestic politics and global power play have become. But it also raises deep ethical and democratic questions about sovereignty, accountability, and the distribution of costs and benefits.

As markets cheer or fret and as campaign flyers multiply ahead of 26 October, ordinary Argentines will keep living their lives — sipping mate on balconies, catching a bus to work, counting pesos in their wallets. They will be watching, too. And so should we.

What would you do if your country was offered a lifeline that might come with strings? Would you trade a measure of control for the chance of stability? Think about it. Because these are not abstract questions for a faraway capital — they are the kinds of choices that shape everyday lives, across Latin America and beyond.

French PM Lecornu Seeks Survival in Crucial No-Confidence Vote

By

-

October 14, 2025

French PM Lecornu hoping to win no-confidence motion — French Prime Minister Sébastien Lecornu is looking to get the fiscal deficit down in the budget

France on Edge: A Prime Minister’s Plea, Parliament’s Knife-Edge, and a Country Waiting

There is a particular hush in the corridors of power in Paris the morning a prime minister must plead for his political life. The air tastes faintly of espresso and rain, the kind of ordinary Parisian morning that, if you squint, could belong to any other day. But behind the ornate doors of the Assemblée Nationale, the stakes feel anything but ordinary.

Sébastien Lecornu, at just 39, is preparing to address deputies with a single aim: persuade enough lawmakers to grant him a stay of execution. If he fails, France could be hurled into a fresh round of political uncertainty — a prospect that has both markets and citizens watching, and waiting, with something close to dread.

Why One Speech Matters

Lecornu is not merely giving a policy presentation. He is performing a political miracle, trying to bridge yawning ideological divides in a fractured legislature. Since last year, France has been governed by a tautrope of minority administrations, trying to force through deficit-cutting budgets while a parliament split into three hostile blocs — the left, the right and an empowered center — watches every move like a hawk.

The immediate question is simple: will enough members of the Socialist group refuse to back no-confidence motions tabled by both the far-left and the far-right? Around 25 Socialist deputies hold the keys. Twenty-five votes, and a country’s immediate future clicks one way or the other.

“We are at the seam of something that could reshape Parisian politics for years,” said Julien Marceau, a veteran political analyst in Lyon. “This isn’t just about a budget. It’s about trust, about the social contract between elected officials and citizens who are exhausted by change and yet still demand fairness.”

A Budget, a Battle, and a Billion-Euro Squeeze

At the heart of the fight is a brutal arithmetic. Lecornu’s plan reportedly aims to tighten the belt by more than €30 billion next year, with an eye toward dragging the public deficit down to roughly 4.7% of GDP. In a country that spends heavily on social protection and public services, such cuts are not abstract fiscal policy — they alter lives, services and expectations.

For many on the left, the fiscal goal is not the problem; the route to get there is. The Socialists have made clear their demands: reverse parts of President Emmanuel Macron’s pension overhaul — which in 2023 raised France’s statutory retirement age to 64 — and consider measures aimed at “fiscal justice,” including proposals to tax the super-rich more aggressively.

“If the government insists on hitting working households first, it will meet resistance,” said Amélie Dubois, a union organizer who has spent months in strikes and rallies. “People remember the days of long strikes and street battles, and they’re not eager to go back. But they also remember being told sacrifices were necessary. It’s a matter of who bears them.”

Politics as Theatre — and Danger

There is theatre to this moment. Lecornu resigned, was reappointed, and reshuffled a cabinet that looks strikingly similar to the one he had for a mere 14 hours — a surreal loop that has left commentators describing the scene as political theater. Yet beneath the drama lies a real possibility: if Lecornu’s government falls, President Macron would likely have little choice but to call early legislative elections. That means a national campaign — with huge costs, both financial and social — at a moment when Europe faces economic strain and geopolitical tension.

“Snap elections would be a high-risk gambit,” said Prof. Ingrid Kessler, a European politics scholar at Sciences Po. “They could either break the deadlock by producing a clearer majority, or they could deepen fragmentation and hand the keys to extremes. For investors, for foreign partners, for Italians and Germans watching, unpredictability is never welcome.”

What People on the Street Say

Outside the parliament, life goes on in contradictory ways. A boulangerie on Rue de l’Université fills with commuters debating the headlines while a grandmother boards a tram, shopping bag in hand. A market vendor near the Seine shrugs when asked about the parliamentary drama.

“Politics is for the people who live in Westminster and Washington,” he says with a laugh, “but when my pension gets smaller or bread gets more expensive, then it’s my problem too.”

Young Parisians, many of whom mobilized against the pension reforms, are divided. Some say the left must stick to principle and topple what they see as an unjust government. Others fear the chaos snap elections would bring — and the possibility that a more radical right could fill the void.

Possible Outcomes — and Why They Matter Globally

The next 48 hours could unfold in different ways. Here are the broad possibilities:

Lecornu secures enough Socialist abstentions or support and narrowly survives the no-confidence votes — continuing a fragile, coalition-less administration.
Lecornu loses the vote, prompting Macron to call early legislative elections — a fresh national campaign that could reconfigure power across France, possibly boosting extremes.
In an unlikely compromise, new negotiations produce a revised budget and concessions on pension policy and taxation — but such deals are notoriously fragile.

Each path carries consequences beyond France’s borders. The country is the eurozone’s third-largest economy; political instability can ripple through markets, unsettle investors, and complicate European Union fiscal coordination. It also tests a broader global trend: many democracies are seeing centrist coalitions strained between populist impulses and technocratic governance. How France navigates this moment may offer lessons — or warnings — to other nations.

Questions for the Reader — and for France

So what do you think? Should a government pushing austerity measures cling to power if it loses the trust of key parliamentary partners? Or is it preferable to risk fresh elections, even if they usher in political uncertainty? These are not merely academic puzzles. They ask us to balance accountability, stability, and the social choices societies are willing to make.

On the floor of the Assembly, voices will rise, papers will shuffle, and cameras will roll. Outside, Parisians will argue and shop and keep living. But in the days to come, as deputies vote and politicians negotiate, every choice will reverberate — in homes, in markets, and in the trust of a nation watching itself decide what kind of future it wants to build.

“A country is more than its headlines,” mused Claire Fournier, a retired teacher who plans to watch the vote on television. “It is a hundred small compromises, many fights, and the hope that leaders will listen. Tonight, I hope they will.”

Lessons from Puntland: Leadership, Democratization, and Political Partnership in Somalia’s Evolving Landscape

By

-

October 14, 2025

Introduction: In Somalia’s complex and often volatile political and security environment, Puntland State emerges as a remarkable example of resilience, pragmatic leadership, and forward- looking governance.

Hamas Releases Hostages; Trump Calls It a ‘Tremendous Day’

By

-

October 14, 2025

Hamas frees hostages, Trump hails 'tremendous day' — Donald Trump signed a document on the ceasefire deal with Egypt, Qatar and Turkey

When the Last Buses Rolled: A Fragile Dawn Between Two Broken Cities

There are moments that feel too big for breath. In Tel Aviv’s Hostage Square, a crowd that had been carrying grief like a stone in their chests finally let it fall. Men and women shouted, hugged, and sobbed into the cooling air as news spread that the last living Israeli hostages had crossed out of Gaza under a ceasefire deal.

“I couldn’t tell if I was laughing or crying,” said Yael Ben-Ami, who had slept in a folding chair near the square for days. “When the buses came, it was as if the city exhaled for the first time in a year.”

The military confirmed it had received 20 people who were known to be alive — the final living captives from the wave of abductions that shattered the country on 7 October 2023. That attack left 1,200 Israelis dead and 251 people seized, a wound that reshaped politics, families, and the map of daily life across Israel.

The other side of the road

Less than a hundred and fifty kilometers away, in Khan Younis, a different kind of jubilation unfolded. Buses bearing freed Palestinian prisoners rolled into the courtyard of Nasser Hospital, their arrivals greeted by a sea of waving flags, shouts, and tears.

“It’s a day full of joy and a day full of mourning,” whispered Um Ahmad, clutching a faded photograph of a son she had not seen in years. “We celebrate their return, but we bury so many others in our hearts. Gaza is broken.”

Under the first phase of the ceasefire, Israel agreed to release some 1,700 detainees seized in Gaza and about 250 Palestinians from its prisons — nearly 2,000 people in total. The exchange had been negotiated by a quartet of mediators led by the United States, with Egypt, Qatar and Turkey playing central roles.

A summit, a spectacle, and a signature

At almost the same moment celebrations and grief rippled through streets and hospitals, President Donald Trump stood before Israel’s parliament and later chaired a summit in Sharm el‑Sheikh, presenting the deal as the beginning of a new era.

“The skies are calm, the guns are silent,” he told a packed Knesset chamber. “The sun rises on a Holy Land that is finally at peace.” He then flew to Egypt to preside over a session attended by more than twenty leaders, signing a document that the mediators said sealed the first phase — a fragile, reversible accord, and yet a necessary one.

Large billboards along the way to the conference center in Sharm el‑Sheikh portrayed smiling leaders with the slogan “welcome to the land of peace” — an image at odds with the rubble-strewn streets that still define much of Gaza’s coastline and the displaced neighborhoods of southern Israel.

Numbers that don’t fit into hands

Facts are blunt instruments for feelings. Official tallies and estimates try to measure horrors: 1,200 Israelis killed in the 7 October attacks; 251 abducted; Gaza’s death toll reported in the tens of thousands — figures that strip the names from lives but insist on the scale of suffering. Israeli bombardment and ground operations left whole swathes of Gaza as wasteland; some tallies cited in recent weeks put Palestinian deaths into the tens of thousands.

Aid agencies warn of an unfolding humanitarian catastrophe; hundreds of thousands remain displaced, famine lines are forming, and hospitals stand empty of basic medicines and fuel. “We must get shelter and fuel to people who desperately need it and massively scale up food, medicine and other supplies,” UN regional aid chief Tom Fletcher urged, echoing the assessment of NGOs on the ground.

The unsettled business of bodies, governance, and retribution

The exchange did not, and could not, erase all debts. Israel still seeks the recovery of the remains of 26 hostages believed to have died and remains uncertain about the fate of two others. Hamas said recovering some bodies would take time because burial sites are not always known; it handed over a handful of remains this week, underscoring the slow, wrenching work ahead.

Political and security questions loom even larger. Who will govern Gaza? Who polices its streets? Can an armed group that led a cross-border attack be expected to disarm and dissolve into a political movement? These are not academic doubts. Immediately after the partial Israeli pullback, Hamas fighters carried out a security sweep in Gaza City that left dozens of members of a rival faction dead — a brutal reminder that power vacuums invite violence.

“A ceasefire without clarity on governance is like a house built without foundations,” said Dr. Laila al‑Sayed, a political analyst in Beirut. “If there is no credible plan for policing, justice, rebuilding and inclusion, the next eruption is already being sown.”

Regional ripples

This conflict never stayed inside one territory’s borders. Over the past year it spilled into regional skirmishes — naval exchanges, drone strikes, and a string of retaliatory actions involving Iran-backed groups, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, and even strikes aimed at rolling back Houthi activities tied to Yemen. Trump and other leaders raised the possibility of broader diplomatic breakthroughs, even suggesting the unthinkable: a future thaw between Israel and Iran.

“Wouldn’t it be nice?” Trump asked at the Knesset — a rhetorical flourish, yes, but also an invitation to imagine a Middle East re-knitted from old blood. Is such an ambitious peace plausible, or merely a hopeful veneer over months of mutual fear and deadly cycles of revenge?

Faces, not statistics

Despite the high politics and the world leaders’ photos, this story is about people who returned home carrying small suitcases and large silences. Two released Israeli hostages waved from a van, one forming a heart with his hands; families in Tel Aviv stared at phone screens as messages lit up from loved ones. In Gaza, freed detainees posed in buses and flashed victory signs, while masked fighters lingered at hospital exits — a visible sign of the threads that remain uncut.

“I didn’t sleep all night,” said Viki Cohen, whose son Nimrod was among the released. “It’s a strange happiness. We don’t know what comes next, but for the first time in months I can breathe for him.”

And some moments offered small human proofs: a doctor freed from a prison sentence stood by his mother in Ramallah, their faces wet with both relief and uncertainty. “We hope that everyone gets freed,” he told a small cluster of reporters. It is a sentiment that translates across checkpoints, languages and politics — hope for a return to ordinary life.

What now? Questions for the reader

What does peace look like after such a rupture? Can the release of hostages and prisoners be the seed from which broader reconciliation grows, or will it be papered over until the next atrocity? How do societies rebuild trust when the memories of assault and siege remain so fresh?

As you read these words, consider the costs not captured by casualty figures: the children who grew up in shelters, the parents who learned to navigate a world measured by sirens, the markets that closed and may never reopen. Consider also the people who are now back with their families, learning to sleep without wonder and prayer turning into routine.

A fragile beginning

The buses have rolled, the signatures are on paper, and the squares are quieter. But the dawn is fragile. This is a pause, not a permanent state. The world will watch whether aid reaches starving families in Gaza, whether those remains are returned with dignity, and whether a political roadmap emerges for Gaza’s governance that both protects civilians and prevents a future spiral of violence.

For now, strangers exchanged embraces across lines that once felt impenetrable. For a few hours, a sun did rise over a land long lit by explosions; people who had been separated by barbed politics and barbed wire found each other again. The rest — rebuilding homes, healing hearts, and designing a structure in which both Israelis and Palestinians can live without fear — remains to be written. Will the next chapters bring repair or more ruin?

Apple unveils major new renewable energy projects across Europe

By

-

October 14, 2025

Apple announces new European renewable energy projects — The new projects are in development across Greece, Italy, Latvia, Poland and Romania

Sun, Wind and Silicon: Apple’s Quiet Rush to Green Europe

There’s a curious kind of hush that settles over a field the instant solar panels are planted or a wind turbine’s blades begin to trace the sky. It’s not silence so much as potential — the sound of energy being retuned from fossil rhythm to a cleaner beat. In the coming years, that hush is going to spread across swaths of Europe as Apple breaks ground on a new wave of solar and wind farms in Greece, Italy, Latvia, Poland and Romania, and switches on a freshly completed array in Spain.

The company says these projects will collectively add some 650 megawatts of renewable capacity to European grids — the equivalent of powering hundreds of thousands of homes at peak. Apple projects the farms will generate over 1 million megawatt-hours of clean electricity on its behalf by 2030, a figure that anchors the tech giant’s broader pledge to ensure the energy used to charge devices is matched by clean electricity.

More than a press release: why this matters

Numbers can feel abstract. But the context helps. In 2024, Apple estimated that energy used during product use — the power needed to charge iPhones, Macs and the like — made up roughly 29% of its greenhouse gas footprint. That’s not trivial. It means that, even if a device is made in a facility powered by renewables or repaired in a low-carbon shop, the day-to-day act of plugging in still leaves a mark.

“When we talk about climate responsibility, we can’t stop at factories,” said an Apple sustainability lead in a briefing noted by staff. “We have to follow the product into the home, into the pocket.” Whether that line rings as sincere corporate ambition or carefully staged PR depends on whom you ask. But it is undeniably true that corporate deals to build new renewables are a fast route to adding clean capacity to grids.

On the ground: landscapes and voices

Walk the routes where these projects will rise and you see Europe’s mosaic: sun-washed olive groves gracing a Greek valley; limestone fields in southern Italy; pine-scented, mossy lowlands in Latvia; broad agricultural plains in Poland; and rolling Transylvanian foothills in Romania. Each place brings its own history and sensitivity around land, livelihoods and energy.

“We’ve had chats at the café about it,” said Maria Papadopoulos, a retired teacher from a village outside Thessaloniki who says she used to pick olives in groves now eyed for panels. “People worry about the view, about their vineyards, but we also want jobs for our grandchildren. If panels can bring steady work and keep the lights on at school, that’s welcome.”

In northern Italy, Luca Bianchi, a renewable-energy engineer with a local cooperative, paints a different picture. “We’ve learned how to site things carefully. Roof arrays, agrovoltaics that pair crops with panels — there are hybrid solutions. It’s not a one-size-fits-all story.”

Latvian mayors, Polish grid operators and Romanian environmentalists will all watch closely as the projects move from contracts to concrete. “Communities want benefits and respect,” said Ilze Ozola, who runs a small municipal office in Latvia. “If we get investment, local jobs and protect our forests, the mood changes fast.”

Voices of caution

This optimism sits alongside concerns. Environmental groups have repeatedly flagged the energy hunger of the tech sector — especially data centres — as a growing problem. In Ireland, for example, more than 80 data centres consume around 22% of the nation’s electricity, a proportion set to rise as demand for cloud services and AI computing expands. That concentrated demand has sparked debates over whether local grids and communities can shoulder the load.

“It’s great to fund green projects,” said Dr. Aneta Kowalska, an energy analyst in Warsaw. “But the bigger question is systemic: are we pairing supply with smarter demand-side policies? Are we modernising grids, investing in storage, and making sure communities aren’t left to trade daylight views for dirty power?”

Corporate climate pledges meet local realities

Apple’s announcement sits inside a larger corporate trend: major technology firms signing power purchase agreements (PPAs) for wind and solar to offset or directly supply their operations. The logic is straightforward — if you can put money behind new clean generators that might not otherwise be built, you both lower your carbon footprint and help scale renewables.

Still, history offers cautionary tales. In 2018 Apple shelved a planned €850 million data centre in Athenry, County Galway, after years of legal challenges. Local concerns over water, landscape and consent can stall — and sometimes stop — projects, showing that community trust is as crucial as the capital stack.

“Back then, people felt left out of the conversation,” recalled Sean Murphy, an Athenry resident. “If companies want local buy-in now, they need to show respect — jobs, transparent impact assessments, real community funds.”

Connecting the dots: grids, storage, and the next decade

Generating 650 megawatts of capacity is only half the picture. Integrating that energy into national grids — balancing intermittent sun and wind with demand spikes from homes and data centres — requires modern transmission, smarter pricing, and storage solutions. Without those pieces, new renewables can sit idle at dawn or push down prices during midday and leave shortages at night.

Globally, data centres are estimated to use roughly 1% of electricity — a small slice on paper but a rapidly growing one in regions with heavy data investment. Europe’s energy transition can absorb that growth, experts say, but only if policy supports storage, cross-border grid links, and demand-response programs that encourage shifting consumption to sunny or windy hours.

What to watch next

How quickly the new farms reach operation and how much of their output is directly contracted versus fed into national grids.
Whether Apple and partners invest in storage (batteries or other forms) to firm intermittent generation.
Community benefit agreements — job guarantees, local infrastructure funds, or land-use compromises that show tangible local gains.

Beyond press statements: a challenge to readers

We can all be seduced by tidy headlines: “Tech giant goes green.” But real change is messy: legal fights, landscape trade-offs, nights when clouds hide the sun and turbines whisper to stillness. So here’s a question for you, the reader: when a global company erects a field of panels near your town, what would convince you it’s worth it? A community fund? Local employment guarantees? Guarantees that farmland won’t be permanently lost?

These projects are more than corporate logos on a map. They are the latest chapter in a story about how modern societies power themselves, who benefits, and who bears the costs. If they are done well — with thoughtful siting, community participation and an eye to the grid’s future — they could be a real step toward cleaner, fairer energy.

If they are rushed or used as a green sheen while energy demand keeps growing unchecked, they will be another lesson in how good intentions collide with complex systems. The hush of a new solar field is promising. Let’s make sure it grows into something more than quiet energy: a force for community resilience and a practical answer to climate urgency.

Madaxweynaha Somaliland Cirro oo safar ugu ambabaxay dalka Itoobiya

By

-

October 14, 2025

Nov 14(Jowhar)-Madaxweynaha Mamulka Somaliland Cabdiraxmaan Cirro iyo wafdi uu hoggaaminayo ayaa saaka u duulay dalka Itoobiya, iyadoo Wasaaradda Arrimaha Dibedda ee Somaliland ay Af-amxaari ku shaacisay in ujeedada socdaalka ay tahay iskaashi dhinacyada amniga iyo dhaqaalaha.

Madaxweyne Cagjar oo shaaciyay saamiha DDS ee dakhliga shidaalka deegaanka laga soo saarayo

By

-

October 14, 2025

Nov 14(Jowhar)-Madaxweynaha Dawlad Deegaanka Soomaalida Itoobiya, Mustafe Muxumed Cumar, ayaa shaaca ka qaaday in Soomaalida deegaankaasi ay heli doonaan boqolkiiba 50 (50%) dakhliga ka soo xarooda shidaalka laga soo saaro gudaha deegaanka.