Benin authorities say military thwarted coup attempt overnight

December 7, 2025

Benin government says armed forces foiled coup attempt — Soldiers went on state television to announce that a military committee led by Colonel Tigri Pascal had taken over and was dissolving national institutions

Dawn Gunfire, State TV and a Country Holding Its Breath: Inside Benin’s Foiled Coup

At first light in Cotonou, a cadence of shots cracked the usual Sunday rhythm — the clatter of motorbikes, the distant call to prayer, the vendors arranging their stalls at Dantokpa market. People paused, looked up, and then did what people do in cities that have learned caution: they shuffled toward radio and television, toward neighbours’ doorways, toward the small truths that anchor a community in an uncertain morning.

By mid-morning, the startling image of uniformed men had flooded state television: at least eight soldiers, faces set, rifles at their sides, announcing the dissolution of national institutions, the suspension of the constitution and the closure of borders. “The army solemnly commits to give the Beninese people the hope of a truly new era,” one of them declared on air, speaking of fraternity, justice and work as if reciting a national pledge.

Hours later, Interior Minister Alassane Seidou appeared on the same network and told the nation the plot had been thwarted. The minister’s calm, measured voice — an attempt to return the country to its ordinary pulse — was underscored by practical reassurances: go about your business, police have deployed to key intersections, normality will return. A government spokesperson confirmed arrests linked to the bid.

What Really Happened This Morning?

The details are still being sorted, but a skeletal timeline is emerging.

Early morning: gunfire reported in several neighbourhoods, including near the president’s residence.
Soon after: a group of soldiers briefly took control of the state broadcaster and read a statement announcing a takeover.
Within hours: loyalist forces regained control, broadcasting resumed, and authorities announced arrests connected to the attempt.

“It was surreal,” said Narcisse, a furniture salesman in Cotonou who asked to be identified only by his first name. “I heard the shots around 8.00am. I brought the sofas inside and closed up. People were in the streets whispering. Now it’s calmer, but you can still feel the unease.”

The Echoes of a Troubled Region

Benin’s scare cannot be read in isolation. Over the past decade, West Africa has been a testing ground for an uneasy pattern: civilian governments challenged by military actors citing insecurity, corruption or national decline.

Since 2020, Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso have all seen coups; Guinea and Guinea-Bissau have also experienced ruptures. The ripple effects are as political as they are human. Families flee violence; markets lose confidence; international partners scramble to respond. Regional bodies — notably ECOWAS and the African Union — swiftly condemned the attempt in Cotonou, framing it as yet another threat to fragile democratic advances in the region.

“You can’t separate national politics from regional currents,” said Amadou Diop, a Sahel analyst based in Dakar. “What happens in one capital resonates across borders — security forces talk to one another, grievances are shared, and opportunists see openings.”

Security Concerns, Political Tensions

The soldiers who spoke on air referenced deteriorating security, particularly in northern Benin, and invoked the “neglect of our fallen brothers-in-arms.” The country has, after all, been confronting a new reality: jihadist violence spilling south from Mali and Burkina Faso.

In April, the government publicly acknowledged a devastating attack that killed dozens of soldiers — an assault it attributed to a group affiliated with Al Qaeda. Those losses have reverberated. For many Beninese, the questions are raw: are the forces we trust able to defend us? Who protects the protector?

“Our communities in the north have lived with fear. Farms lie abandoned. Children don’t go to school,” said Mariam Ade, a teacher from a town near the border with Burkina Faso. “When soldiers die and families get no support, anger grows.”

The Politics Behind the Guns

Security aside, political tensions have been simmering. President Patrice Talon — in power since 2016 — has been praised for economic reforms that helped push Benin’s growth into single-digit territory after years of sluggish performance. At the same time, critics accuse his administration of tightening its grip on state institutions.

In recent months, Benin adopted a new constitution that created a Senate and extended presidential terms from five to seven years. Finance Minister Romuald Wadagni has been selected as the ruling coalition’s candidate for the upcoming April election, a vote that would mark the end of Mr. Talon’s current tenure but under circumstances critics say favor the incumbent bloc.

“Constitutional change is a legitimate part of politics,” said Professor Hélène Kpatindé, a political scientist at the University of Abomey-Calavi. “But when reforms are rushed and opposition voices feel marginalized, the avenues for peaceful contestation narrow. That creates fertile ground for those who believe a rifle can reset the scales.”

Indeed, the opposition Democrats party, founded by Mr. Talon’s predecessor Thomas Boni Yayi, saw one of its potential presidential candidates barred over what the courts said was insufficient backing. To many on the streets of Cotonou, those judicial decisions feed a sense of injustice.

Voices from the Ground

Across town, a pastor named Father Kossi stood outside a small church, the fragrance of incense mixing with the morning sun. “People looked to the heavens today,” he said. “We pray for peace and for leaders of conscience. Violence solves nothing.”

A market woman, Awa, folded her hands over her basket of peppers and smiled tightly. “We want stability,” she said. “We want to sell, to send our children to school. Guns scare customers away.”

A European diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said embassy staff had warned nationals to stay home when gunfire was reported near the presidential residence and commended the swift response by loyalist units.

Questions That Outlast the Headlines

What happens next matters not only for Benin but for West Africa’s democratic trajectory. Will the arrests lead to prosecutions and a transparent accounting? Will political doors be opened to the opposition so citizens can choose without coercion? Will the government address the security vacuum in the north that prompted the coup plotters to invoke their dead comrades?

“A foiled coup is not an answer,” said Amadou Diop. “It’s a symptom. The work now is to stitch back trust in institutions, to show citizens that constitutional politics can deliver security and justice. Otherwise, the cycle repeats.”

After the Shock

For now, Cotonou is tentatively returning to its rhythms: buses hum, markets reopen, churches and mosques resume their services. But there is a new layer in the city’s conversation — in the hair salons, cafés and on the radio. People ask the same question: what price for peace?

As night falls, the lights along the lagoon shimmer and the city exhales. The day’s gunfire becomes a story told with new details, shape and consequence. The story of Benin’s foiled coup attempt is not finished — it will be written in courtrooms, parliamentary chambers and in the slow, stubborn rebuilding of public trust.

So I ask you, reader: when institutions wobble, what do we owe one another as citizens — to demand justice, to protect the vulnerable, and to insist that change come through ballots rather than bullets?

Netanyahu and Trump to discuss Gaza plan’s second phase

hanad

December 7, 2025

Netanyahu to discuss second phase of Gaza plan with Trump — Civil Defence workers use an excavator to search for the remains of victims in the rubble of a destroyed building in the Bureij refugee camp, central Gaza

On the Edge of a Plan: Jerusalem’s Waiting Game for Gaza’s Next Chapter

Jerusalem in late autumn carries a particular hush — a city where the call to prayer threads through morning traffic and Orthodox prayers ripple down alleys of the Old City. It is also a place where negotiations look like a game of patience and power, and where the lives of people who never sought headlines are quietly rearranged by diplomatic timetables.

That hush was punctuated this week by an unusually candid moment. Standing outside the Prime Minister’s Residence, Benjamin Netanyahu sounded cautiously optimistic about the “second phase” of a high-stakes American plan to end the fighting in Gaza — and then, as if reminding listeners of the brittle reality, he listed the knots still waiting to be untied.

“Phase two is close,” he told reporters alongside Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, “but the timetable, the forces, the details — they remain open questions.” Then, speaking of an invitation extended by the White House, Mr Netanyahu said he would carry those questions to Washington and discuss them with US President Donald Trump at the end of the month.

What the “Second Phase” Promises — and Why It’s Fragile

The blueprint, as described by officials involved, is straightforward in theory and fiendishly complicated in practice: Israel would pull back from more of Gaza; a transitional authority would be installed to govern; Gaza would be demilitarised and Hamas disarmed; reconstruction efforts would begin, and a multinational security presence would stand watch.

Under the first phase of the plan — tied to the release of hostages and detainees — Israel retained control of some 53% of Gaza’s territory, a point Netanyahu emphasized as a necessary security measure. The multinational coordination centre established in Israel is meant to shepherd the transition, but those who track the process say it has, so far, moved at the pace of a hesitant relay team.

“There are practical questions we cannot finesse,” Mr Netanyahu said. “What will be the timeline? Which forces will come in? Will there be international forces? If not, what are the alternatives?”

Territorial control: Israel retained control of 53% of Gaza during the first phase.
Casualties since the truce: Gaza’s health ministry reports 373 Palestinians killed since the ceasefire began; Israeli officials report three soldiers killed by militants during the same period.
Hostages and remains: The handover of the final hostage remains — those of an Israeli police officer from the 7 October clashes — remains pending.

Voices from the Ground: Fear, Hope, and Frustration

In the cramped neighborhood of Mea She’arim, an elderly man named Avi sat outside a bakery and watched the smoke of a wood-fired oven blur the skyline. “We want peace,” he said. “But peace that means safety. Not promises.” He tapped his chest. “We need guarantees.”

Across town in West Jerusalem, a Palestinian pharmacy worker, who asked not to be named for fear of repercussion, folded a receipt into her pocket and offered a quieter assessment: “People here are tired of the same horizons. We need hospitals, schools, electricity. Not just troops coming and going.”

Experts warn that the human stakes behind the political language are enormous. “This is a junction where security logic collides with humanitarian urgency,” said Dr. Leila Haddad, a Middle East analyst who has followed Gaza reconstruction efforts for two decades. “The longer we wait for a clear, enforceable multinational presence, the more reconstruction stalls — and the more fertile the ground for renewed militancy.”

Germany’s Calculus — and the Global Ledger

Chancellor Merz spoke with measured urgency. Germany, he said, is prepared to assist in rebuilding Gaza — but Berlin wants clarity about what Washington will commit before it writes its own checks or sends engineers and money into a landscape still dotted with uncertainty.

“Phase two must come now,” Merz told reporters. “But we need to know: Who is on the ground? What is the mandate? Without answers, there is no responsible way for us to proceed.”

Those words reflect a wider European dilemma: nations want to help, but many are loath to assume responsibility for security tasks they cannot fully control. The idea of a multinational force — whether European, Arab, or a NATO-style coalition — has proven thorny: who leads it, under whose rules does it operate, and how long does it stay?

The Uncomfortable Middle: Ceasefire, Violations, and the Hard Work of Trust

The ceasefire that began in October has, at times, resembled a fragile glass bowl balanced on a table: whole, but under constant strain. Both sides have accused the other of violations. Israel says it conducts strikes to fend off attacks or to destroy militant infrastructure; Palestinian authorities tally civilian casualties and warn that reconstruction cannot begin in earnest until safety is secured.

“You cannot rebuild on the basis of a handshake,” said an unnamed Israeli security official. “You need boots, data, verifiable weapons caches, and a regional commitment that this won’t be a brief pause before the next eruption.”

On the other side, Gazans who returned to pick through rubble have spoken of small joys and persistent fears. “I planted tomatoes on the roof this week,” said Amal, a schoolteacher who returned to Gaza City to see what was left of her home. “The plants drink the same water, the sun is the same, but the nights are different now. We wake at every sound.”

Beyond Gaza: A Regional Chessboard

Netanyahu mentioned another strand of conversation he intends to bring to the White House: the push to normalise relations with Arab and Muslim states. “There’s a path to broader peace with Arab states,” he said, “and possibly a workable peace with our Palestinian neighbours.” Yet he insisted Israel would press to retain security control over the West Bank — a non-starter for many Palestinians.

Donald Trump, Mr Netanyahu noted, has reportedly assured Muslim leaders that Israel would not annex the West Bank — a remark that adds yet another layer to the negotiation. The question of political annexation remains alive and unresolved, even as diplomats convene.

What Comes Next — and What We Should Watch For

So where does this leave ordinary people who are not diplomats or generals? With questions that demand answers, and hard ones at that.

Will a multinational force arrive with a clear mandate and the logistics to disarm militant groups? Will reconstruction cash arrive along with accountability to ensure it reaches hospitals, not bunkers? Can a transitional authority govern without being perceived as an occupying force?

We should watch for three signals that would show tangible progress:

A signed agreement specifying the mandate, composition, and duration of any international security force;
Rapid deployment of humanitarian reconstruction resources, coupled with transparent oversight mechanisms;
Concrete commitments from regional states — not just statements of intent — to support a sustainable political settlement that respects Palestinian rights and Israeli security concerns.

Readers, ask yourselves: What would you accept as a fair trade-off between security and sovereignty? How much confidence do you place in international forces and diplomatic guarantees?

The answers matter, not just for policymakers, but for the father planting tomatoes on a rooftop in Gaza, the Israeli grandmother watching the news with dread, and the diplomats who are now, quietly and urgently, trying to stitch together a next chapter. In Jerusalem, that work is underway; but whether it will bring healing or a protracted intermission depends, as always, on the messy arithmetic of trust, deterrence, and the human need for normalcy.

U.S. Signals Deal to End Ukraine War Is Very Close

hanad

December 7, 2025

US says deal to end Ukraine war 'really close' — Ukrainian rescuers walk past a heavily damaged train station building in the town of Fastiv, Kyiv yesterday

On the edge of a deal: how two sites stand between peace and more war

There are moments in diplomacy that feel less like negotiations and more like the final, breathless minutes of a marathon. Last week, in an auditorium beneath the California sun, a veteran of American interventionist wars — a man who once led troops across continents — told an audience that the effort to stop the fighting in Ukraine had reached “the last 10 metres.” His shorthand was ordinary; the consequences are anything but.

Keith Kellogg, the outgoing U.S. special envoy on Ukraine, told attendees at the Reagan National Defense Forum that only two issues remained truly thorny: the territorial fate of the Donbas and the status of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. Settle those, he argued, and “the rest of the things will work out fairly well.” It was the kind of line that excites negotiators and terrifies civilians.

A quiet but explosive geography

The Donbas — a patchwork of mined fields, shattered factories and stubborn towns — has been the epicentre of this long, grinding contest since 2014. Russia formally annexed Crimea that year, and the region of Donetsk and Luhansk has been contested even longer. When a full-scale invasion began in February 2022, the fighting metastasized: today, Russia holds roughly one-fifth of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea and large swathes of eastern and southern regions.

That reality is central to every conversation about surrender, compromise or a frozen line on a map. “If you cede Donetsk without proper consent, you don’t so much solve the war as invite a later, deeper one,” says a Ukrainian legal adviser in Kyiv who has followed negotiations closely. “A handover without a legitimate referendum is a legal abyss.”

Across the line in towns that have known only warfare for a decade, opinions are not monolithic. “My mother remembers Soviet times fondly,” says Olena, a teacher from a small Donbas village now under Ukrainian control, nursing a thermos of black tea in a Kyiv flat. “But she also remembers the shelling. People are tired. We want peace. But not at the cost of our freedom.”

The heart of the matter: Zaporizhzhia

More than any headline-grabbing clause about troop positions, however, it is the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant that haunts negotiators. The plant — the largest in Europe by capacity — sits under Russian control and has been a recurrent flashpoint for months. A power plant is not merely an industrial asset; it is a potential disaster in a conflict zone.

“You can bargain territory, you can bargain ceasefires,” says Dr. Marie Koumbis, a nuclear safety expert and former IAEA inspector. “You cannot afford to gamble with a reactor’s safety culture. Any ambiguity about operational responsibility is dangerous.”

Kellogg’s assessment that resolving these two nodes could unlock broader progress is not naïve. But Russian officials have signalled they expect significant rewrites to the U.S. drafts. Yuri Ushakov, a longtime Kremlin aide, said Moscow wants “serious, radical changes” — though he did not specify them. That vagueness is, in itself, a negotiating tactic.

Intermediaries in the Kremlin corridors

Diplomacy took an unusual detour last week when two figures from the private sector — along with a high-profile presidential son-in-law — met with President Vladimir Putin. Long nights of Kremlin hospitality followed; public comment was thin but pointed. Moscow’s readout said “territorial problems” were discussed. Washington’s readouts were, until now, cautious and measured.

“Back-channel talks are necessary; they’re also risky,” notes Andriy Petrov, a retired European diplomat who has watched many rounds of peace talks in his career. “They can move the needle, but they can also create the illusion of progress without guarantees.”

Casualties, calculations and leaked drafts

Amid all the negotiating theatre, the human ledger is grim. Kellogg described the toll as “horrific,” citing — controversially — more than two million dead and wounded on both sides. Independent verification of such totals is elusive; both Moscow and Kyiv guard their figures closely. Yet even conservative tallies speak to a conflict that has left cities, families and livelihoods shattered.

Complicating the diplomatic picture was the emergence of a leaked document of U.S. draft proposals. The 28-point outline alarmed many in Kyiv and across Europe because, critics argued, it seemed to accommodate some of Moscow’s central demands — including limits on Kyiv’s military posture and the effective recognition of Russian control over substantial swathes of land. That leak illustrated an inescapable truth: once a draft enters the public realm, it shapes perceptions and politics as much as it shapes negotiations.

New U.S. framing, and Moscow’s cautious welcome

In parallel with the back-and-forth over a settlement, Washington shifted language in its latest national security strategy, removing a clause that had described Russia as a “direct threat.” The Kremlin, predictable in its relief, called the change “a positive step” and said Moscow would study the document closely. The move signals possible openings for limited cooperation on issues like strategic stability — arms control, nuclear risk reduction — even as fighting continues on the ground.

“Words matter in international diplomacy,” says Emily Rourke, an analyst at a strategic think-tank. “Labeling a state a ‘threat’ locks you into certain policies. A sliding scale of language gives diplomats more flexibility, at least on paper.”

Winter, power and the grind of strategy

Winter is never just a season in this conflict; it is a weapon and a test. Russian forces have broadened long-range strikes on power, heating and water infrastructure in recent months, a campaign designed to sap morale and disrupt civilian life as temperatures fall. Overnight strikes hit central cities, including Kremenchuk, leaving neighborhoods without heat and water and local officials scrambling to assess damage.

“We will restore everything,” the mayor of Kremenchuk posted on social media after a strike that blacked out parts of the city. His pledge, sincere and defiant, echoes from municipal halls across Ukraine: repair, restart, survive.

On the ground, people improvise. A baker in Kharkiv swaps ovens on his route to serve communal bread. An electrician in a Black Sea port works 16-hour days to link backup generators as diplomats debate clauses in conference halls thousands of miles away. These are the small acts that stitch life back together while states haggle over maps.

Where do we go from here?

So what should we expect next? Negotiators, intermediaries and weary residents all hope for de-escalation. But hope will not hold a line on a map. Peace, if it is to be durable, will require more than signatures and press conferences: enforceable mechanisms, credible local buy-in, and safeguards for nuclear facilities.

Would you trade land for peace? Would you accept a frozen conflict if it spared another winter of blackout-strewn nights? These are not academic questions for the families whose windows show a streetlight blown out by the last strike.

For now, the deal — if deal there will be — rests on two stubborn fulcrums: the contested earth of Donbas and the reactors of Zaporizhzhia. Resolve those poorly, and the rest could unravel. Resolve them well, and a weary region might finally begin the slow work of rebuilding, remembering, and returning home.

Whatever comes next, the human stories will remain: teachers serving tea, mayors counting the cost, diplomats pacing corridors, and civilians asking the simplest of questions — when will it end?

Gunmen open fire at South African bar, 12 people killed

hanad

December 7, 2025

Mass shooting at South African bar leaves 12 dead — The shooting took place at an illegal bar in Saulsville township, 18km west of Pretoria

At Dawn’s Edge: A Small Township, a Shebeen, and a Massacre That Left a Community Shaken

When the sun had barely found the rooftops of Saulsville, the township west of Pretoria, the air still hung with the last traces of night—cooked maize, diesel from the taxis, the faint hum of distant radio. And beneath it all, a silence that felt wrong. Plastic chairs lay overturned. Beer bottles glinted like glassy teeth in the dust. Blood had already been swept into rainwater drains where it would go, for now, unnoticed.

By the time police and ambulances arrived, the numbers made the silence a headline: 25 people shot, 12 dead. Among them, three children—the youngest only three years old—were pulled from the chaos. Ten people died at the scene in Saulsville; two more succumbed later in hospital. Fourteen others survived but were wounded, some critically. The assault, authorities say, involved three gunmen who stormed the illegal liquor outlet—locally called a shebeen—at about 4:30am and opened fire on a group of people drinking inside and around the premises.

Scenes from the Aftermath

“I saw men running, others trying to pick up children while bullets kept coming,” said Miriam, 34, who lives two streets away from the shebeen. “We run to help—what else can we do? But there were babies and blood and crying, and when the police came, they started sealing everything like it was something that belonged to someone else.”

Residents described a surreal early morning: neighbours spill out in nightshirts, cigarettes dangling, faces streaked with tears and dust. A local pastor set up blankets in a taxi rank and began offering comfort and water. Shopkeepers were late to open, staring at the cordon tape. “This place is where people come to forget, even if only for a little while,” said Sipho, a 27-year-old mechanic. “Now people are asking: forget what?”

Shebeens, Shadow Economies, and Social Fault Lines

Shebeens are a fixture in South African townships—informal, often unlicensed bars that serve as social hubs, safety valves, and sometimes economic necessities. For many, they are more than places to drink: they are living rooms, community noticeboards, stages for local music. For law enforcement, however, illegal liquor outlets present a recurring hotspot for violence, an observation police have repeatedly made.

“We are having a serious challenge when it comes to these illegal and unlicensed liquor premises,” police told local media after the attack, noting that many mass shootings occur at such locations and that innocent bystanders frequently become collateral victims. Authorities launched a manhunt for three suspects, but as of the latest reports no arrests had been made and the motive remained unclear.

Why the Violence Keeps Coming

This massacre is the latest in a string of mass shootings that have left South Africa reeling. The country of roughly 63 million people is grappling with entrenched violent crime that experts link to a complex mixture of poverty, deeply unequal opportunity, entrenched organized-crime networks, and a proliferation of illegal firearms. Police data released for a recent six-month period showed that some 63 people were killed each day between April and September—an alarm bell for a society still wrestling with the legacy of apartheid’s spatial and economic injustices.

“When communities lack formal economic opportunities, informal economies thrive,” explained a criminologist at a South African university who asked to remain anonymous. “Those spaces—like shebeens—become nodes where social life and criminal opportunity intersect. Add illegal firearms into the mix, and the potential for mass harm escalates.”

South Africans are permitted to own licensed firearms for personal protection—many do—but the number of illegal guns on the streets is widely believed to be far larger, fed by past smuggling networks, raids, and illicit trade. In townships where poverty bites hardest and policing is often uneven, this creates a powder keg: conflicts that might have been contained in other settings erupt into deadly violence because of the easy availability of high-powered weapons.

Voices from Saulsville: Anger, Grief, and Resilience

Grief here is public and raw. Neighbours gathered, speaking in low tones, some in Zulu, some in English, some switching mid-sentence. “We bury one another too soon,” said Thandi, a 58-year-old grandmother. “I have lost cousins to this kind of shooting. You think your child is safe in his small yard, but the bullets don’t read addresses.”

Others called for practical steps. “Shutting down shebeens might seem like a quick fix,” said Morena, a young community organizer, “but you must remember people work there, small traders sell food nearby, and sometimes it’s the only heated room in winter. We need policing that is smarter, not just tougher. We need outreach, youth programs, real economic investment.”

In the wake of the killings, community leaders demanded more presence from police—not just sirens and statements, but sustained engagement, patrols, and resources for trauma counseling. Local volunteers started making lists of the wounded and offering transport to distant hospitals, because the nearest clinics in the township are small and already overburdened.

What This Means for South Africa—and the World

When a country’s streets are punctuated by shootings like this, the consequences ripple outward. Families left with the sudden absence of breadwinners, children who now absorb another layer of trauma, businesses that lose customers and employees—these are slow-moving impacts that deepen inequality and undermine trust in institutions.

But there is also a political dimension. South Africa’s struggle with crime plays into debates around policing, gun control, corruption, and social policy. It forces policymakers to reckon with the uncomfortable truth that legal restrictions on firearms will only go so far if illegal markets remain unchecked and social grievances unaddressed.

Globally, the story speaks to a pattern seen in many unequal societies: when economic marginalization coincides with weak state capacity and entrenched networks of illicit trade, ordinary life becomes more dangerous. It is a reminder that development isn’t only about GDP growth; it is also about safe public spaces and accessible social services.

After the Screams: Questions We Have to Ask

How do you dismantle a network of illegal arms without first cutting the demand? How do you regulate informal economies without destroying livelihoods? How do you offer justice when the motive is unknown and suspects remain at large?

These are the hard questions policymakers, police, and communities must answer together. For residents of Saulsville the questions are immediate: who will watch the children now, how will funerals be paid for, who will clean the stains from the chairs and floors and carry on as if nothing happened? For the nation, the urgency is different but no less pressing: reduce the daily toll of violence, rebuild trust, and create alternatives so that late-night conversations and laughter in shebeens do not end in tragedy.

“We are not asking for miracles, only for safety and dignity,” Miriam said, wiping her face with the back of her hand. “If we can’t sit somewhere without fear, what kind of country are we building?”

As the town mourns, investigators continue to piece together the timeline: surveillance footage, witness statements, forensic evidence. The manhunt for the three suspects is under way. Meanwhile, in living rooms and on stoops, people tend to one another in practical ways—preparing food, organizing transport, nursing wounds that are not just physical. The headlines will move on in time. The people of Saulsville will not.

Drone Strikes on Sudanese Kindergarten and Hospital Leave Dozens Dead

hanad

December 7, 2025

Drone strikes on Sudan kindergarten, hospital kill dozens — Sudanese women who fled El-Fasher wait to receive humanitarian aid at camp for displaced people (file image)

Bombed Playground: A Kindergarten, a Hospital — and a Country Unraveling

There are sights that refuse to leave you: a tiny shoe on scorched earth, crayons melted into the dirt, a stroller turned on its side like a blown-over toy. In Kalogi, a town in Sudan’s South Kordofan, those images are now seared into the memories of people who once woke to the call to prayer and the clatter of market life, not the whine of paramilitary drones.

On a dry Thursday, according to local officials reachable only through a fragile Starlink link, three strikes ripped through Kalogi. First the kindergarten, then the hospital, and then — mercilessly — a third strike as family members and neighbours rushed in to pull children from the rubble. The head of the local administrative unit, Essam al-Din al-Sayed, told reporters the pattern bore the mark of an attack meant to inflict maximum human suffering.

Numbers that don’t add up — and the silence that grows between them

In the fog of war, figures become battlegrounds of their own. UNICEF’s office in Sudan reported that more than 10 children between the ages of five and seven were killed. The foreign ministry aligned with the army released a much higher toll: 79 dead, including 43 children. Independent verification remains agonizingly difficult — communications are sporadic, humanitarian access is tightly restricted, and security is far from assured.

“Killing children in their school is a horrific violation of children’s rights,” said Sheldon Yett, UNICEF’s Representative for Sudan, in a statement that echoed around humanitarian circles. “All parties must stop attacks on civilians and allow unfettered access for aid.”

There is a grim arithmetic at play: since the conflict erupted in April 2023, tens of thousands have died and nearly 12 million people — roughly a quarter of Sudan’s population — have been forced from their homes. In just the past month, the United Nations says more than 40,000 people fled Kordofan alone as fighting intensified. These are not abstract statistics. They are children who no longer go to school, farmers who no longer sow, markets that lie empty at dawn.

Who attacked Kalogi — and why this region?

Local officials blamed the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), the powerful paramilitary group that has been at the centre of Sudan’s catastrophe, and its ally, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N) faction led by Abdelaziz al-Hilu. The RSF, which has been waging an offensive across western Sudan in recent months, seized El-Fasher in October — the army’s last big foothold in Darfur — and appears to be pushing eastward into the oil-bearing Kordofan states.

Military analysts say the RSF’s strategy is to sever the army’s defensive arc around central Sudan and to position itself to contest major cities, including Khartoum. “Control of these towns chokes off supply lines,” said one regional analyst who monitors military movements in Sudan. “It’s about logistics, but also symbolism: seize the towns and you seize legitimacy in the eyes of some locals.”

Oil, alliances, and the geopolitics of a collapsed state

Kordofan’s soil is not just sand and seed; it is economically strategic. Oil fields dot the wider region, and whoever controls transport routes and pumping stations wields leverage far beyond the town square. International mediators — the United States, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt — offered a truce plan that the RSF said it would accept in November. Yet even with diplomatic manoeuvring, there has been little on-the-ground de-escalation.

“There is no sign of de-escalation,” UN human rights chief Volker Türk warned, noting “clear preparations for intensified hostilities” that threaten an already long-suffering people. The lament is not merely about broken ceasefires. It is about a broader failure of international systems to protect civilians when formal governance collapses and irregular forces carve up territory.

At the heart of Kalogi: faces, voices, and the ragged courage of survival

Amina, who taught at the kindergarten hit in the first strike, speaks in a voice threaded with disbelief and raw grief. “They were coloring,” she says. “One little boy asked me if the planes were angels. I told him they were not. The next minute the roof came down.” She pauses, and a long silence fills the line. “We have no hospitals left that we trust.”

Dr. Mustafa — a surgeon who asked to be identified by his first name only — recounted hauling children into a tent outside a shattered hospital ward. “We had four stretchers and a bucket of antiseptic,” he said. “We worked until our hands trembled. We tried to stop the bleeding, to stop the sound of crying. What we couldn’t stop was the fear in the mothers’ eyes.”

These are the testimonies that anchor the wider geopolitical narrative in human terms. They remind us that war is not a chess game of generals, but a daily grind of survival, where civilians watch passports burn and recipes are shared to stretch a bag of grain over a family of seven.

What this means for humanitarian aid — and for the wider region

Humanitarian agencies are sounding the alarm. Blocked roads, denied visas, and insecurity make it near impossible to reach many enclaves around Sudan. Aid workers say the destruction of medical facilities and schools multiplies suffering in ways that will last for generations: untreated injuries lead to disability; missed education becomes a permanent scar.

“Once a school is bombed, children stop learning — and the social fabric frays,” said a humanitarian coordinator who has worked in Sudan for nearly a decade. “You don’t just rebuild walls. You try to rebuild trust.”

Nearly 12 million people internally displaced or forced to flee since April 2023 (UN estimates)
More than 40,000 people fled Kordofan in the past month alone (UN)
Tens of thousands killed since the conflict began (various humanitarian sources)

Beyond Kalogi: a warning from history

When violence repeatedly strikes schools and hospitals, it is not accidental. Targeting civilian infrastructure has become a hallmark of some modern conflicts. It is strategic cruelty: break the social institutions and you break the community. The international community’s attempts at mediation, fragile and halting, face the harder task of not just stopping guns but restoring institutions.

Is that even possible when entire cities have been reshaped by displacement and trauma? How do you reconstruct a classroom where a child died clutching a math book? These are questions that transcend Kalogi and speak to conflicts from Syria to Ethiopia, from Yemen to parts of the Sahel.

What we can watch for — and what we must demand

Keep an eye on three things: humanitarian access (are aid convoys allowed in?), independent verification (can reporters and watchdogs enter to confirm claims?), and the care of survivors (are hospitals resupplied, are children offered psychosocial support?). If these fail, then the numbers we are seeing today will be the quiet prelude to a deeper collapse of social life in affected regions.

We are watching lives being unmade in real time. The question for readers — and for the world — is whether we will let these events pass as distant tragedies or whether we will demand stronger protections for civilians, better mediation, and swift aid corridors so that no child dies alone under a sky once known for its morning call to prayer and the tender chaos of playground laughter.

In Kalogi, neighbors gather to bury the dead, to barter for disinfectant and to sort through what remains. They are telling the same story told across war zones: in rubble, small acts of compassion persist. As one local elder put it between sips of sweet tea, “We are broken, yes. But our hands still reach out to each other.” What will our hands reach out to do?

US lays out plan to redirect Europe’s trajectory

hanad

December 7, 2025

US sets out stall for correcting 'Europe's trajectory' — According to US President Trump's National Security Strategy, the main problem to be addressed by the US in Europe is 'civilisational erasure'

The New American Playbook for Europe: A Cultural Compass or a Cold Strategic Compass?

On a gray morning in Dublin, a bartender wipes a glass and shrugs at the headline on his phone: “U.S. Unveils New Security Strategy — Europe in the Crosshairs.” Around him, the pub smells of peat and wet coats, and patrons debate politics the way people breathe — without thinking, until a crisis requires the lungs to work harder.

This latest American strategy — which landed in policy circles like a thunderclap — does something different from the last several decades of U.S. foreign policy. It speaks less of hardware and alliances and more of histories, families, cultural inheritance and national character. It frames Europe’s most urgent vulnerabilities as cultural rather than merely military or economic. That shift has ripples, and they extend far beyond Brussels and Washington: into kitchen tables, university lecture halls, border checkpoints and voting booths.

What’s in the Document — and Why It Feels Different

The paper reads like part geopolitical roadmap and part civics sermon. Instead of a string of military deployments and trade initiatives, it foregrounds themes like identity, demographic trends and “cultural resilience.” It urges the United States to nudge — and sometimes pressure — European nations to “reclaim” a particular sense of themselves, to reverse migration flows, and to shore up what the authors call national “character.”

“This is not a minor course correction — it’s a reorientation of the terms we use,” said a senior analyst at a Washington-based strategy institute. “Foreign policy used to default to alliances and economics. This one defaults to civilization and culture.”

For many readers, the language is jarring. It carries with it echoes of debates that have roiled Europe’s politics for a decade: populist calls to restore national pride, anxieties about migration and identity, and the rise of political movements that insist culture must be central to statecraft. For others, it appears as an American attempt to shore up fragile allies and to preempt geopolitical shifts.

Scenes from the Continent: How Ordinary People See It

In central Warsaw, a baker named Anna K. glances up from the oven: “We want peace, and we want to care for our neighborhood,” she says. “But we don’t want strangers deciding how we remember our past.” Her words cut to the heart of the document’s proposal — that memory and tradition are strategic assets.

Siobhán Murphy, a history teacher in Galway, worries about external influence in domestic debates. “There’s a taste of patronizing paternalism,” she said. “If Washington starts telling Dublin which parts of its history to love, that’s worrying.”

Meanwhile, a Brussels policy aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, described an unusual combination of gratitude and unease in European capitals: “We welcome support against coercive forces, but we bristle at cultural prescriptions.”

Numbers That Ground the Conversation

Statistics make the stakes tangible. Europe is aging: the median age across the European Union is roughly in the early 40s and the fertility rate sits well below the replacement mark (the EU average hovers near 1.5 children per woman). Populations are shifting as migration reshapes cities and regions. At the same time, the transatlantic economy remains a giant: trade and investment flows between the United States and Europe represent significant portions of global commerce, and Europe still houses many of the world’s leading research institutions and cultural landmarks.

These demographic and economic facts are precisely why the strategy sees cultural and population trends as strategic concerns. The argument goes: if identity shifts, then political preferences, alliances and defence commitments might too.

Policy Priorities — A Shortlist with Big Consequences

Here are the main policy thrusts the paper advances — summarized from the document’s core arguments and the discussions it has provoked:

Encourage European nations to strengthen national identity and cultural institutions as a bulwark against outside influence.
Support policies that slow or reverse certain migration trends, described in the document as a matter of demographic and strategic risk.
Push Europe to assume greater responsibility for its own defense and reduce dependence on external guarantees.
Promote commercial and cultural ties with nations in Central, Eastern and Southern Europe to build aligned blocs.
Deter further expansion of alliance structures where expansion could draw the United States into conflicts peripheral to core American interests.

Why This Matters: The Geopolitical Stakes

At first glance, this may seem like an intra-European argument amplified by American diplomats. But the document carefully links cultural trajectories to geopolitical outcomes: which way a country leans nationally could determine whether it views the U.S. as a partner or as an alien actor, whether it sees Russia or China as the primary threat, and whether it will commit to collective defense.

“We have to treat culture as infrastructure,” a European political scientist told me. “Infrastructure decays slowly but collapses quickly if neglected.” That metaphor explains why the strategy is pressing for proactive policies — cultural investments, education and media support — not just tanks and tariffs.

Critics, Allies, and the Risk of Misreading Intent

Not everyone accepts the premise. Civil society groups warn that framing migration as a civilizational threat fuels exclusion and xenophobia. Human rights advocates note that demographic change is a global phenomenon tied to economics and family policy more than to conspiracies. “If a strategy prescribes who counts as ‘European’,” said an NGO director in Berlin, “it’s skating on thin ice toward discrimination.”

Conversely, leaders of nationalist parties in several European countries have greeted the strategy with optimism, seeing validation of arguments they have long made: that nations should prioritize cultural cohesion and protect borders.

Where This Fits in a Bigger Picture

Ask yourself: what is the role of foreign policy? Is it to secure strategic advantage in a world of great-power rivalry, or to export particular ideas about what constitutes a nation? The answer is both — and therein lies the tension. After decades of debates about globalization, free trade and multilateral institutions, this document pivots the conversation back toward nationhood and cultural continuity.

That pivot is not confined to Europe. The strategy folds other regions into its logic: a renewed focus on the Americas’ sphere of influence, a tougher stance on China’s economic reach in Asia, and a shift in Africa toward investment rather than ideological reform. But it is Europe — with its dense history, powerful institutions and transatlantic ties — where the strategy’s cultural arguments feel most combustible.

Final Thought: A Continent Between History and Strategy

Standing in a museum in Paris last week, watching children sketch soldiers and saints, I couldn’t help but think about the strange alchemy of history and policy. Nations are made of stories as much as they are of arsenals. The new American strategy treats those stories as strategic assets to cultivate or defend.

That raises a question for readers everywhere: do we want geopolitics to be about material interests alone, or are our histories and identities legitimate objects of international strategy? The answer will shape not only diplomatic cables in Washington, but kitchens in Dublin, schools in Warsaw, and neighborhoods across Europe for decades to come.

1...161718...186 Page 17 of 186