Nov 09(Jowhar)-Wada hadalo hordhac ah oo maalmihii lasoo dhaafay ka Socday Magaalooyinka Muqdisho iyo Nairobi ayaa Keenay in ay Caawa magaalada Nairobi ee Dalka kenya ku kulmaan Gudoomiyihii Hore ee Baarlamanka Soomaaliya Mohamed Mursal iyo Madaxweynaha Koonfur Galbeed Cabdi casiis Laftagareen.
Somaliland oo war kasoo saartay qorshaha maxaabiis is-dhaafsiga ee Waqooyi Bari
Nov 09(Jowhar)-Xukuumadda Somaliland ayaa maanta sheegtey in uu meel wanaagsan marayo qorshaha siideynta maxaabiista ku kala xidhan Laascaanood & Hargeysa, tan oo imanaysa xilli xalay uu maamulka Woqooyi-bari Soomaaliya magacaabay Guddiga Nabadda & Wadaxaajoodyada oo kuwo la mid ah ay hore u samaysay SL.
Xisbiga RPP oo madaxweyne Geelle u doortay inuu noqdo musharraxa doorashada soo aocota
Nov 09(Jowhar)-Xisbiga talada dalka Djibouti haya ee RPP ayaa si rasmi ah madaxweyne Ismaaciil Cumar Geelle ugu doortay in uu noqdo musharraxa xisbiga ku metelaya doorashada la filaya in ay dalkaas ka dhacdo bisha April ee sannadka 2026-ka.
Dowladda oo sheegtay in sarkaal Shabaab ah ay ku dishay gobolka Bakool
Nov 09(Jowhar)-Dowladda Somalia ayaa sheegtay in Hawlgal qorsheysan oo xalay ka dhacay tuulada Abal oo qiyaastii 21KM uga beegan koofurta magaalada Xuddur ee xarunta gobolka Bakool lagu khaarijiyay hoggaamiye sare oo ka tirsanaa Shabaab oo lagu magacaabi jiray Maxamed Cabdi Maxamed Nuur (Goofoow).
Tornado Rips Through Southern Brazil, Killing Six and Injuring Hundreds
Dawn After the Rage: A Southern Brazilian Town Picks Up the Pieces
When the storm passed, it left a hush that felt louder than the thunder. In Rio Bonito do Iguaçu — a town where the rhythm of daily life is set by cattle calls, chimarrão breaks and the slow turning of seasons — whole roofs lay like discarded hats on the street. Trees were sheared in half, power lines snapped and cars sat twisted beneath the weight of fallen corrugated iron. The sky was a bruised, indifferent blue. People moved through the wreckage as if in slow motion, cataloging losses and calling out names to see who had come through the night.
Officials in Paraná have confirmed that six people died and 437 were treated for injuries after a tornado, accompanied by fierce winds and heavy rain, tore through the state late yesterday. Nearly 1,000 residents have been displaced, forced into makeshift shelters in schools and community centers. The nearby city of Guarapuava also reported damage.
Winds that Moved Like a Living Thing
“It sounded like a freight train that didn’t stop,” said Maria dos Santos, a grandmother who watched the roof of her house lift and peel away. “I grabbed the children and we hid under a mattress. When we came out, there was nothing where we had left everything.”
The Paraná Meteorology and Environmental Monitoring System measured the winds at between 180 and 250 km/h — roughly 110 to 155 miles per hour. Those kinds of gusts obliterate roofs, shatter windows, and snap the steel bones of buildings. Civil defence reports say more than half of Rio Bonito do Iguaçu’s urban area suffered roof collapses and multiple structural failures.
Roads are blocked by fallen trees and debris; power and telecommunications lines are down in several neighborhoods. Rescue workers have been forced to move slowly and cautiously, cutting through twisted metal to reach people trapped in their homes.
On the Ground: Rescue, Relief, and the Human Thread
By morning, the town’s small gym was overflowing with blankets, water bottles, and the smell of hot coffee. Volunteers from neighboring municipalities arrived with pickup trucks, bringing food and chainsaws. “There is a rhythm to the rescue,” said João Pereira, a volunteer firefighter from Guarapuava, wiping sweat and sawdust off his brow. “You work in pulses: search, stabilize, comfort. Then you start again.”
Federal officials have promised support. Institutional Relations Minister Gleisi Hoffmann said she and acting Health Minister Adriano Massuda would travel to the area to coordinate relief and reconstruction efforts. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, writing on X, expressed condolences and pledged ongoing assistance: “We will continue to assist the people of Paraná and provide all the help needed,” he wrote.
Yet federal pledges are only part of the story. In towns like Rio Bonito do Iguaçu, community solidarity is the first line of defense. Neighbors who lost roofs set up tarps side by side. The parish priest opened the rectory to families who had nowhere else to go. An elderly man who survived the storm but lost his home refused to go to a shelter until younger neighbors packed “what little remains” into a truck to keep watch on his property.
Voices from the Ruins
“I have lived here forty years,” said Marcelo Alvarez, a schoolteacher, his boots sunk in mud outside the half-collapsed primary school. “We know storms. But not like this. Houses here are meant to shelter a family for generations. When the roof goes, the memory goes with it.”
“We need blankets, baby supplies, medical attention,” added nurse Camila Ribeiro, who has been working 18-hour shifts in the temporary clinic. “People have cuts, broken bones, shock. The physical injuries are visible. The shock is deeper.”
Where This Fits Into a Larger Weather Picture
South Brazil is no stranger to violent storms. The plains and plateaus of Paraná and neighboring Rio Grande do Sul can become a perfect stage for tornadoes when cold fronts from the south collide with warm, humid air moving up from the tropics. Locals have long told stories of sudden, fearsome winds — but scientists say the conditions that produce these events appear to be shifting.
“We are seeing not only more intense storms but also a broader season for severe weather,” said Dr. Larissa Moreira, a climatologist at a federal university in Curitiba. “That is consistent with the warming and increased moisture in the atmosphere. It doesn’t mean every storm is caused by climate change, but it is a backdrop that amplifies the risk.”
For policymakers, the challenges are immediate and structural. How do you rebuild homes that can withstand stronger winds? How do you reinforce critical infrastructure, like power lines and water systems, in places where municipal budgets are already stretched thin? How do you ensure that early-warning systems reach the elderly and isolated?
Immediate Needs — and Hard Questions
- Emergency shelter and medical care for nearly 1,000 people displaced
- Restoration of power and communications lines to reopen the town’s lifelines
- Clearing of roads to allow aid and reconstruction crews to move freely
- Psychological support and long-term housing plans for those who lost their homes
“This is not just bricks and tiles,” said social worker Ana Fonseca as she distributed thermoses of hot mate to shivering families. “Homes hold relationships, recipes, a grandmother’s sewing box. Rebuilding must respect that.”
What This Asks of Us
When disasters like this land far from the world’s busiest news cycles, they ask something quiet and persistent: will we remember the lives disrupted and the promises made when the cameras leave? The answers are not simple. They require political will, civic investment, and the patience to rebuild in ways that are resilient and humane.
As Rio Bonito do Iguaçu moves from rescue to recovery, the town’s story will become a test case. Will rebuilding prioritize speed or strength? Will federal and state money be coupled with community voices? Will small towns receive the kind of planning and infrastructure investment the age of extreme weather demands?
Look at the faces in that gym — a grandmother holding a thermos, a young firefighter with splinters in his palms, a schoolteacher staring at the ruins of a playground — and ask: how do we build a future that keeps these people safe? How do we honor not just the dead and injured, but the lived-in places that gave people belonging?
In the end, recovery will be slow. It will be dotted with victories: a roof replaced, a child returning to school, a power line reconnected. It will also require a longer conversation about climate, community and the kinds of investments that let small towns stand up to storms that are changing in size and temper. For Rio Bonito do Iguaçu, and for places like it across the world, that conversation begins now.
Syrian president lands in United States, state-run media confirms
Arrival in a New Chapter: Syria’s Contested Turn from the Shadows
The plane slid down the tarmac like a story finally finding its landing. Cameras flashed. A handful of diplomats stood clustered beneath the jet bridge, their expressions a careful mix of curiosity, calculation, and something that looked very much like relief. When Ahmed al-Sharaa stepped into the bright, refrigerated air of the arrivals hall, he carried more than a passport and a shortlist of talking points—he carried an idea that for years had been more whispered rumor than policy: that enemies can, under pressure and with incentives, become partners.
To many around the world, the arrival reads like a diplomatic plot twist. Washington’s recent decision to take Mr. al-Sharaa off its terrorism blacklist and the subsequent lifting of some UN-led sanctions have turned a long, bitter chapter of isolation into an improbable opportunity for engagement. Tomorrow he is scheduled to meet at the White House—a meeting that would have seemed unthinkable not long ago. The optics are unmistakable: a symbol of rapprochement at a time when the Middle East still bears the fresh scars of brutal conflict.
From Rebel Command to State Leader: A Journey That Sparks Unease and Hope
When the uprising that altered Syria’s trajectory finally toppled Bashar al-Assad late last year, it gave rise to a swarm of new political actors—some pragmatic, some radical. Al-Sharaa, formerly a commander whose umbrella once included groups with extremist links, has in recent months worked hard to rebrand his coalition and present what his aides call a “post-conflict” Syria.
“We know the past,” he told a small circle of journalists en route to the U.S., eyes steady, voice quiet. “But we are not defined by it. We want schools open, trade flowing, children playing in parks again.”
His words will be tested against a mistrustful world. Human-rights groups, survivors of sieges, and Syrians who fled years of horror are watching closely. “For many of us, this is not just geopolitics,” said Nour Haddad, a teacher now living in Beirut who lost relatives in the fighting. “It’s about accountability. Rehabilitation can’t be just symbolic. We need truth, justice, and rebuilding.”
What the U.S. decision signals
The State Department said that recent steps taken by al-Sharaa’s administration—cooperation on searches for missing Americans, and commitments to destroy remaining stockpiles of chemical weapons—helped pave the way for delisting. Diplomats speak of a strategic pivot: from containment and maximal pressure to calibrated engagement designed to stabilize a fractured country and combat a resurgent ISIS.
“This is about reducing threats, not rewarding past crimes,” said Daniel Myers, a former foreign-service officer who advised on counterterrorism policy. “If you can incentivize local actors to convert their energy into governance, that can seal off space that extremist groups exploit.”
On the Ground: Damascus, Markets, and Everyday Life
Walk through a Damascus neighborhood now and you will encounter contradictions stitched together like a patchwork quilt. In the afternoon, children play soccer in cracked courtyards while satellite dishes tilt toward distant broadcasts. Down a narrow lane, the smoke of grilled kebabs curls past a shop selling ancient prayer beads. The Umayyad Mosque’s minarets keep their long habit of calling people to prayer; people respond in a chorus that carries across the city’s uneven stones.
“We are tired of wars,” said Rasha al-Khatib, a bakery owner near al-Hamidiya market, kneading dough as if shaping the future with her hands. “If this meeting means a stable life for my son—if he can study and not march—that’s what matters. But we want security to be real, not just a new slogan.”
Local merchants, aid workers, and ordinary citizens speak of practical concerns: electricity, safe drinking water, schools, and jobs. Reintegrating former fighters into civilian life will require honest investments—both money and institutional capacity. The World Bank and humanitarian agencies estimate that Syria’s reconstruction needs could range in the tens of billions of dollars, with millions still displaced internally and across borders. Accurate numbers shift daily, but conservative estimates put the figure of displaced Syrians—both refugees and internally displaced—in the single-digit millions, and the human cost remains raw and ongoing.
Military Bases, Humanitarian Hubs, and the New Geometry of Power
One detail that leapt from closed-door briefings into public conversation: plans for a U.S. military facility near Damascus. Officials describe it as a coordination hub—part humanitarian logistics, part observatory to monitor the delicate frontier between Syria and Israel. To supporters, such a presence can deter new violence and facilitate aid distribution. To skeptics, it risks entrenching foreign footprints on sovereign soil.
“If any base is built to protect convoys, inspect weapons, and keep the peace, I would back it,” said Rana Saeed, a nurse who volunteers at a clinic for displaced mothers. “If it’s a political chess piece, then what are we building it for?”
Hard trade-offs ahead
Rehabilitation is never clean. There are trade-offs: security for liberty, amnesty for accountability, stability for ideal justice. Policymakers point to precedents and pitfalls from around the world: Colombia’s slow peace with the FARC, the uneasy reintegration of Northern Irish militants, DDR programs in West Africa—each a mix of partial success and lingering grievances.
Experts insist on three non-negotiables: transparent judicial processes for serious crimes, credible disarmament and demobilization programs, and enough economic opportunity to make a civilian life plausible. “If fighters see zero prospects outside of armed groups, the cycle will restart,” warns Professor Lena Haddad, who studies post-conflict societies. “The incentives must be sustained and authentic.”
What Does This Mean for the World—and for You?
As the world watches a visitor once cast as an enemy step into presidential corridors of power, we should ask ourselves some uncomfortable questions. Can diplomacy truly transform violent histories? Is a pragmatic bargain with men who have complex pasts morally defensible if it saves lives and re-open schools? Who gets to write the story of reconciliation—and whose voices will be left out?
These aren’t hypothetical musings. They are choices with real human consequences. A single wrong policy could reignite conflict; a well-crafted strategy could usher in a fragile, vital peace.
- What’s at stake: humanitarian access, counterterrorism gains, long-term reconstruction costs.
- What’s needed: transparent justice mechanisms, robust aid funding, and community-led healing programs.
- What could go wrong: impunity, inadequate reintegration, and renewed radicalization if opportunities are hollow.
Final Notes: The Human Weather of a Nation in Transition
There is an old Syrian proverb: “A wound can be healed, but the scar will always be there.” As Ahmed al-Sharaa boards his plane for the White House, he carries the weight of those scars—and the fragile promise of repair. Whether they will stitch the country together or merely bandage it for a moment depends not just on what happens behind closed doors in Washington, but on whether Syrians themselves are given the space to heal, remember, and rebuild.
So, as you read the headlines tomorrow, ask yourself: who benefits from this pivot? Who pays the price? And perhaps most importantly, how do we, as global citizens, support processes that make peace possible without sacrificing the demands of justice? The answers will shape more than Syria’s future—they will tell us what kind of diplomacy the 21st century will tolerate and what kind of humanity it will demand.
Jubbaland, Puntland iyo Madasha Samatabixinta oo ku heshiiyay qaab-dhismeedka golaha cusub
Nov 09(Jowhar)-Guddiyo farsamo oo ka kala socday Dowlad-goboleedyada Jubbaland iyo Puntland, iyo sidoo kale Madasha Samatabixinta Qaranka oo maalmihii lasoo dhaafay ku shirayay magaalada Nairobi, ayaa lagu soo waramayaa inay gaareen is-afgarad buuxa oo ku saabsan qaab-dhismeedka golaha cusub ee horey loogu dhawaaqay.
U.S. Judge Rules National Guard Deployment to Oregon Illegal
When Soldiers Walk the Streets: A Portland Verdict and a Country’s Unease
Portland is a city that wears its contradictions on its sleeve: rain-darkened bridges, artisanal coffee shops, and a fierce streak of civic defiance that meets you in neon signs and guerrilla art. Last week, a federal judge pulled the curtain back on another contradiction—one with far-reaching implications for how the United States uses force within its own borders.
U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, in a sweeping 106-page opinion, found that President Donald Trump unlawfully directed National Guard troops into Portland to respond to unrest sparked by immigration-enforcement actions. It is a rare judicial rebuke that reverberates far beyond Oregon’s rain-slick streets: a court declaring that the executive branch had overstepped a line most Americans assumed still existed.
What the Ruling Says—and What It Means
Judge Immergut’s ruling concludes that the administration lacked “a lawful basis” to claim there was a rebellion in Portland or that federal law could not be executed without invoking extraordinary powers. In her words, the disturbances were “small-scale, isolated, disorganized” and had largely fizzled by the time the president ordered troops in late September.
“There was no evidence these small-scale protests significantly impeded the execution of any immigration laws,” she wrote—pointing to the difference between localized clashes and the constitutional emergency that would justify such a military intervention. The ruling effectively blocks the White House from deploying troops to the city under the emergency authority it cited.
The Legal Backdrop: Posse Comitatus and the Insurrection Act
The dispute turns on a centuries-old tension in American law. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 established a plain principle: the U.S. military should not serve as a domestic police force except in tightly specified circumstances. The Insurrection Act provides those narrow carve-outs—situations such as invasion or rebellion where the president can call the military to restore order.
But what qualifies as a rebellion? How much unrest is “enough” to justify soldiers on city streets? Those are questions that have rarely been litigated in modern times, and this case will push them toward sharper definition. The administration has signaled it will appeal; the Ninth Circuit is already involved, and the legal contest could ultimately land before the Supreme Court.
Voices from the Ground
Walk through downtown Portland and the arguments stop being abstract. At a shelter near the Willamette River, volunteers hustled coffee to demonstrators and shared stories of nights when armored federal vehicles idled near a courthouse. “We’ve been protesting ICE raids for weeks,” said Marisol Vega, a community organizer. “There were tense moments, yes. But sending soldiers felt like an escalation designed to terrify people, not to protect them.”
A local small-business owner on Ankeny Street, who asked to be identified as Tom, said, “We’ve seen protests before, but this was different—troops in fatigues at intersections, people nervous to go outside. That’s not how you de-escalate a democratic disagreement.”
From the other side, a White House statement—issued by spokesperson Abigail Jackson—argued the president acted within his authority to “protect federal officers.” “President Trump will not turn a blind eye to the lawlessness plaguing American cities,” the statement read. “We expect to be vindicated by a higher court.”
Legal scholars weigh in with more measured language. Professor Lena Harrington, a constitutional law expert, told me, “Courts are being asked to reconcile the framers’ distrust of standing armies with a modern state’s duty to protect federal property and officers. This case forces a lawsuit into a debate that arguably should have been resolved by clearer statute or legislative oversight years ago.”
Why Portland Matters to the National Conversation
This is not just a local dispute. It sits at the intersection of three fault lines in American politics: the scope of executive power, the role of the military at home, and tensions around immigration enforcement that have spilled into the streets across the country.
In recent years, federal deployments—whether National Guard units in natural disasters or limited military assistance during unrest—have become more common. Yet there remains public wariness about soldiers acting like police officers. A 2023 Pew Research poll (the most recent comprehensive survey on civil-military relations) found that a majority of Americans oppose using the U.S. military to operate in domestic law enforcement roles, except in “very limited” circumstances such as major terrorist attacks or invasions.
When the White House ordered troops to Portland and other cities, it did so in the context of a campaign push on immigration. The administration has pushed for an aggressive uptick in deportations and enforcement actions—policies that have prompted protests wherever raids have been reported. The city sued in September, arguing that the federal government exaggerated sporadic violence to justify invoking emergency powers intended for far more grave threats.
Inside the Courtroom: Competing Narratives
During a brisk three-day bench trial, narratives clashed. Justice Department attorneys depicted a scene of federal agents under siege, echoing presidential descriptions of a “war-ravaged” city. Oregon and Portland lawyers countered that episodes of violence were isolated, and that local police had effectively contained them.
Judge Immergut sided with the latter view, concluding the federal response amounted to an overreach. “The occasional interference to federal officers has been minimal,” she wrote—framing the administration’s actions as an expansion of authority not supported by the facts on the ground.
What Comes Next?
The administration is likely to appeal, and the case will wend its way through appellate courts. For many observers, the larger stakes are the precedents that could be set: will future presidents be constrained by the same narrow reading of emergency powers, or will a broader interpretation prevail?
I asked streetside protester Malik Thompson what he feared most. “If you let the president send troops when he says a city is chaotic, what’s to stop that from happening anywhere?” he asked. “Tonight it’s Portland. Tomorrow it could be another city where people are exercising their right to be heard.”
The question challenges readers everywhere to reflect: what balance do we want between security and civil liberties? How should a democratic society respond when federal authority and local governance collide?
Final Thoughts: A City That Reminds Us of Democracy’s Fragility
Portland’s neon signs are still glowing. Coffee shops still steam. The bridges still arch across the Willamette. But the ruling by Judge Immergut has left a mark, a legal bookmark that reminds us how fragile the boundaries are between military power and civilian life.
Whatever the appellate courts decide, the case has already forced a national conversation we’ve been skirting for too long—a conversation about when the uniform of a soldier should stand on an American street corner, and who gets to decide.
As you read this, consider your own city: would you be comfortable seeing military vehicles roll past your local library or community center? If not, what changes would you support to ensure those lines are protected?
- Key fact: Judge Immergut’s opinion is 106 pages and found the federal action unjustified under the emergency authority invoked.
- Legal context: The Posse Comitatus Act generally bars federal military involvement in domestic law enforcement; the Insurrection Act provides narrow exceptions.
- Next steps: The administration is expected to appeal; the Ninth Circuit is currently involved, and the dispute could reach the Supreme Court.
Portland is both a place and a question. Its streets are where America’s practical limits of power and the ideals of civic life confront one another. This ruling is not an endpoint so much as an invitation—to think, to argue, and to choose what kind of democracy we want to live in.
UN cautions of escalating violence looming in Sudan
On the Edge of Silence: Sudan’s Fragile Pause — and the Threat of a Darker Storm
Late one night in Khartoum, a woman I met over a chipped cup of sweet tea paused, listening to the city’s uneasy breath. “We sleep with our shoes on,” she told me, rubbing her palms together as if to warm a memory. “Not because it’s cold — because you never know when someone will have to run.”
That image — a small ritual of preparedness carried out in the shadow of distant explosions — feels like the new normal across large swathes of Sudan. After more than two years of pitched combat between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF), negotiators in Washington, Jeddah and Abu Dhabi unveiled a truce plan that the RSF says it accepts. Yet the United Nations, aid groups and many residents say the ground tells a different story: forces are moving, drones are buzzing, and people are still fleeing.
Between a Paper Promise and the Rattle of Artillery
“There is no sign of de-escalation,” UN human rights chief Volker Türk warned, painting a grim picture that aid workers and civilians recognize all too well. Satellite imagery analyzed this week by Yale University’s Humanitarian Research Lab shows roads choked, checkpoints hardened and at least one major civilian escape route blocked near the city of El-Fasher — the Darfur capital whose fall to the RSF two weeks ago shocked observers.
El-Fasher was once home to roughly 260,000 people. The United Nations estimates about 70,000 have fled to nearby towns such as Tawila, but tens of thousands remain unaccounted for. Médecins Sans Frontières’ newly elected president, Dr. Javid Abdelmoneim, put it bluntly: “We have seen perhaps 5,000 come out toward Tawila. Where are the others? That is our deepest fear.”
Those fears are not idle. NGOs say satellite photos reveal suspected mass graves and credible reports of mass killings, sexual violence and widespread looting as the RSF consolidated control over all five state capitals of Darfur. In the capital, Khartoum, residents reported a string of blasts, power cuts and the buzzing of reconnaissance drones. In the northern railway town of Atbara, anti-aircraft guns were said to have shot down several drones before dawn, sending smoke rising over the eastern skyline.
Numbers That Won’t Fit on a Page
The statistics flatten faces into digits, but they also insist on a scale we cannot ignore: the fighting, which erupted in April 2023, has killed tens of thousands, pushed nearly 12 million people from their homes, and triggered a hunger crisis that is swallowing families whole.
- Displaced: Close to 12 million people uprooted — internally displaced or seeking refuge across borders.
- Hunger risk: The Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) warns that Dilling is at risk of famine; Kadugli is already teetering on that grim line.
- Urban contraction: El-Fasher’s population went from roughly 260,000 to a fraction, with only about 70,000 confirmed as displaced to nearby towns.
Numbers like these demand not just humanitarian response but also political imagination. What looks like a potential truce on a paper schedule could become either a breathing space for diplomacy — or a strategic pause where one side reorganizes for a more devastating push.
The Truce Proposal: A Credible Lifeline or a Strategic Ploy?
The ceasefire framework, reportedly proposed by the United States along with Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt, is said by a senior Saudi official to call for a three-month halt to major operations and the opening of talks in Jeddah. The RSF publicly announced its acceptance; the government, backed by the Sudanese army, has not formally replied.
“Talks are only meaningful if both sides have the capacity and the will to stop killing people,” said an aid coordinator who has worked in Sudan since 2019. “A signed document won’t stop a drone from being launched at midnight.”
Some analysts view the RSF’s acceptance as cosmetic. “It’s a PR move,” said Cameron Hudson of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “After El-Fasher, the RSF likely wants to reframe itself as a responsible actor, even as allegations of atrocities pile up.”
Yet the geopolitical landscape is messy. The UAE has been accused of supplying arms to the RSF — allegations it denies — while the army has received backing from Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and reportedly influenced ties with Turkey and Iran. When regional patrons are part of the chessboard, local ceasefires can bear the fingerprints of foreign calculation as much as local desire.
On the Ground, People Simply Want to Survive
In El-Obeid, a key crossroads linking Khartoum to Darfur, residents describe a city braced against a new offensive. “We keep hearing a distant drone, then the radio warns of incoming,” said a teacher there. “There is this awful rhythm: shelter, count the doors, check on neighbors, wait.”
In Dilling, where the RSF reportedly shelled a hospital, killing and wounding medical staff and destroying radiology equipment, an elderly mother named Fatima whispered, “We have nothing left in the clinic but hope.” The Rome-based IPC’s declaration that Dilling faces a risk of famine turns a tragic phrase into urgent policy need: without corridors for food, medicine and safe passage, starving populations become yet another casualty of political stalemate.
Why the World Should Care — and What It Can Do
Sudan’s collapse is not contained. It ripples across the Sahel, threatens migration routes into North Africa and Europe, and fuels extremist recruitment in fragile regions. A hunger crisis here is a global moral test. How will world powers reconcile their strategic interests with the immediate needs of civilians? How do donors, regional governments and international institutions prevent a humanitarian vacuum from becoming a vacuum of governance and dignity?
There are pragmatic steps the international community can push for:
- Open and monitor humanitarian corridors with neutral observers and secure ceasefires where necessary.
- Insist on transparency around any truce terms, including independent verification and accountability mechanisms for alleged war crimes.
- Scale up food, water and medical aid now — not as an afterthought when famine is declared.
“People are starving without headlines,” said an NGO director in Khartoum. “Donors respond to attention. We need steady funding that isn’t tied to the news cycle.”
What Comes Next?
As the RSF claims it accepts the ceasefire and Khartoum’s skyline sizzles with drone strikes, the question for ordinary Sudanese is painfully simple: will the truce mean space to rebuild lives, or will it be a lull before another wave of violence? Will the international community turn its diplomatic muscle into a real shield for civilians, or will diplomacy be narrowed to the interests of external patrons?
When I left the tea shop, the woman with the shoes by the bed smiled sadly. “We hope,” she said. “That’s what keeps us breathing.”
Hope is fragile. It needs more than words. It needs safe corridors, verified pauses in fighting, and enough food and medicine to make a promise to survive worth keeping. If the world is watching — and it must — then watching must become acting. Otherwise, the shoes by the door will remain filled with the weight of fear, and the quiet that follows the latest explosion will be only the breath held before another fall.
James Watson, DNA double helix pioneer, dies at 97
James Watson: The Man Who Coiled Our Genetic Story — and the Shadows That Followed
When I first walked the lane that leads to Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the harbor itself seemed to breathe—salt air, gulls, and the briny echo of long Atlantic tides. The lab’s brick façades sit like an old, stubborn book on the edge of Long Island: revered, complicated, and full of margins where messy human stories are written. James Dewey Watson, one of the book’s most dramatic authors, has died at 97. His passing closes a life that helped rewrite biology and, in later chapters, forced science to wrestle with its own conscience.
How a Twisting Ladder Changed Everything
In 1953, on a spring morning in Cambridge and a basement bench crowded with papier-mâché models, Watson and his collaborator Francis Crick revealed an image that no one would forget: DNA as a double helix, a spiraling ladder that encoded life. The paper, published in Nature that April and May, was short on words but vast in consequence. It explained how genetic information could be copied, and from that simple mechanism exploded modern molecular biology.
“It was like being given the Rosetta Stone of life,” recalled a retired geneticist I spoke to, pulling at the thread of memory. “We could finally read — in a way we never could before.”
The discovery rippled into medicine, agriculture, forensic science, and beyond: DNA fingerprinting became an investigative mainstay in the 1980s, genetically modified crops reshaped agriculture, and by the turn of the millennium the international Human Genome Project — which Watson helped direct from 1988 to 1992 — banked a near-complete map of the roughly 3 billion base pairs that make up the human genome. That map, first released in draft form in 2000 and more fully in 2003, launched an era of personalized medicine and genomic research that still accelerates today.
From Cold Spring Harbor to Cambridge to Copenhagen: A Life of Restless Curiosity
Born in Chicago on April 6, 1928, Watson took to science early. A scholarship to the University of Chicago and a PhD from Indiana University by age 22 set him on a trajectory across continents — Naples, Copenhagen, Cambridge. The story of the double helix is as much a tale of geography as intellect: X-ray diffraction images produced by researchers at King’s College London, including Rosalind Franklin, provided the crucial clues; Watson and Crick’s modeling work at Cambridge put the pieces together.
“The image of that helix changed how we think about inheritance,” said Dr. Ana Morales, a molecular biologist who now works in the same lab on Long Island. “You can trace a line from Watson and Crick’s model to gene therapies and CRISPR technologies being explored in clinics today.”
Celebration. Complication. Controversy.
Watson shared the 1962 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins. It was a recognition of world-shifting work. In later years he taught at Harvard and transformed Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory into an international hub for molecular biology. He traveled, lectured, and in 2013 even returned to Dublin to unveil a sculpture in the Botanic Gardens celebrating the 60th anniversary of the discovery.
And yet, the man who explained the molecule of inheritance became a lightning rod for controversy. In 2007, remarks he made about race and intelligence provoked outrage, cost him his administrative post as chancellor and pushed him out of public life. He apologized, but the rupture was deep. In 2020, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory severed his ties and removed his emeritus status after repeated inflammatory statements.
“We celebrate scientific achievement, but we must also hold scientists accountable for how they speak about people,” said Dr. Emily Zhou, a historian of science. “Watson’s case forced institutions to confront their values and the limits of celebrity in science.”
Rosalind Franklin and the Uneven Ledger of Recognition
No account of Watson’s story feels complete without Rosalind Franklin. Her X-ray diffraction images at King’s College produced the data that made the double helix visible. Franklin died in 1958, four years before the Nobel was awarded; the prize cannot be given posthumously and is limited to three recipients.
“We lost a brilliant scientist too early,” said Maeve O’Connor, who helped organize the Dublin commemoration in 2013. “Her legacy reminds us that scientific credit is not just about experiments but about power and who gets to tell the story.”
Local Color: Long Island’s Harbor of Science
Cold Spring Harbor, a town of sailboats and narrow streets, knows the sensations of legacy and reinvention. Locals still point to the lab’s doors with a complex pride; schoolchildren on field trips press their faces to classroom microscopes and imagine themselves unveiling something that will change the world. On summer evenings the harbor glints and someone will often say, half in jest, that the salt air somehow sharpens the mind.
“He put our little village on the map,” said Frank Larkin, a lifelong resident who runs the bait shop near the marina. “But people remember more than the science now. They remember the man.”
What Watson’s Life Asks of Us
Watson’s story is not a simple parable of genius rewarded. It is a knotty human story: triumph braided with error; discovery and divisiveness; a brilliant mind that produced transformative knowledge and remarks that harmed public trust and marginalized people. How should history weigh a life that altered the course of medicine but also left wounds?
Consider these facts:
- The Nature paper that announced the double helix was published in 1953.
- Watson, Crick, and Wilkins were awarded the Nobel Prize in 1962.
- The Human Genome Project, for which Watson served as a director at the NIH, mapped roughly 3 billion DNA base pairs and issued an initial public draft in 2000.
Beyond the Headlines: Ethics, Power, and the Future of Genetics
Watson’s life prompts a larger question about science in society: who gets to decide how discoveries are used and who gets to speak for the community? From precision medicine to gene editing technologies like CRISPR, the power of genetics continues to expand. That power brings hope — for new therapies — and a responsibility to ensure equity and avoid repeating the mistakes of the past.
“Science can illuminate some of our darkest mysteries, but it can’t excuse cruelty or prejudice,” Dr. Zhou said. “If we want science to serve humanity, the community around science must be diverse, accountable, and humane.”
Final Notes — A Life in the Balance
James Watson’s obituary will be complicated: it will list the Nobel, the helix, the lab, the map of the human genome. It will also include apologies, censure, and bitter debate. Perhaps the most honest way to remember him is to hold both truths: that he helped open a door to understanding life’s code, and that his words and actions later raised painful questions about how scientists wield authority.
As the harbor tide lifts and lowers at Cold Spring Harbor, the community there — and the global scientific family — will continue to navigate the currents Watson helped create. How we steward the science he helped unlock, and how we reckon with the human costs of his public life, remain decisions for our generation.
What do you want the next chapters of genetics to look like? That question feels both personal and universal — and it is one Watson’s life forces us to ask.
Trump says US seized oil tanker off Venezuela’s coast
The Day the Tanker Stopped: Oil, Power and the Rising Temperature in the Caribbean
There are moments when a single act — a rope tossed,...
US to screen social media histories of all international travelers
When Your Instagram Becomes a Visa Question: A New Era of Border Screening
Imagine packing for a trip to New York — the suitcase half-zipped,...
Dog’s blunder lets bull and horse wander into Australian home
When a Steer Walked Into the Living Room: A Darwin Tale That’s Equal Parts Domestic Comedy and Cultural Snapshot
Imagine coming home to find a...
Egypt Challenges Labeling of Iran Fixture as Pride Match
When Pride Meets the Pitch: A World Cup Match That Refuses to Be Just a Game
On a late-June afternoon in Seattle, the air will...
Trump Announces US Seizure of Oil Tanker Off Venezuela Coast
When a Tanker Vanishes: Oil, Power and the Rising Tide off Venezuela
There are moments when the roar of an engine and the flash of...