Former Zelensky aide rejects corruption accusations as groundless

By

-

May 13, 2026

Ex-Zelensky aide says corruption allegations 'unfounded' — Andriy Yermak dismissed corruption allegations as 'unfounded'

In the Dock and on the Frontline: Ukraine’s Two Unfinished Stories

The courtroom clock clicked like a metronome over a country that has learned to measure time in sirens and summonses. On a rainy morning in Kyiv, Andriy Yermak — once the closest aide to President Volodymyr Zelensky — stood under the scrutiny of judges, cameras and a public hungry for answers. He told the court, and a nation watching from phones and kitchen tables, that the accusations against him were “unfounded.”

“As a lawyer with more than 30 years of experience, I have always been guided by the law,” Yermak wrote on Telegram after the hearing. “Now I will likewise defend my rights, my name, and my reputation.” It was a line delivered with the calm of someone used to the glare of public life, but the circumstances could not have been more combustible: a high-profile resignation in November 2025 after a dramatic raid on his home, and prosecutors alleging he played a role in siphoning roughly 460 million hryvnias — about €8.9 million — through an organized group tied to luxury development projects.

Operation Midas and the politics of wartime corruption

The probe, dubbed Operation Midas, has been described by investigators as sweeping and meticulous. Prosecutors say the money was funneled into construction projects on the so-called “Dynasty” cottage site, and that the scheme included other notable figures such as former Deputy Prime Minister Oleksiy Chernyshov and businessman Timur Mindich.

“The individuals who used funds for the construction of objects on the territory of the ‘Dynasty’ cottage site… planned to carry out further actions aimed at legalising such property,” a prosecutor told the court. The words were clinical, the implications seismic. For Ukrainians, corruption is not an abstract concept; it is a thread that still frays the fabric of democratic reform and foreign assistance.

“Corruption is the second front we fight,” said Olena Kovalenko, a civil-society activist who helped organize the 2014 Maidan protests. “When guns are firing at one border and kleptocrats steal from the other, the suffering is doubled.”

Anti-corruption agencies, born from the ashes of the 2014 uprising, have long been Ukraine’s bulwark against elite capture. Yet last summer the government attempted to curb the independence of those very institutions — a move that sparked rare and vocal protests during wartime and led Kyiv’s Western backers to demand a rollback. “When you attack anti-corruption bodies, you do not just weaken institutions; you erode international trust,” a European diplomat told me off the record.

Voices in the city

Outside the courthouse, the mood was a strange alloy of weary cynicism and cautious hope. A middle-aged woman selling knit scarves near the Maidan, who only gave her name as Marta, rolled her eyes. “We have seen so many promises. I want to believe in justice, but I also want my son to come home.” Her son, like many, is serving on the frontlines.

A legal scholar at Kyiv’s national university, Dr. Ihor Melnyk, suggested the spectacle reflects deeper institutional growing pains. “This is the state trying to assert that no one is above the law, even if that someone used to be the president’s right-hand. It’s messy. But it is a necessary mess,” he said.

Ceasefires, drones, and diplomatic fog

While the courts held their drama, a different kind of theatre played out in the skies. Days after a three-day ceasefire announced by US President Donald Trump — an extraordinary diplomatic interlude in the worst European war since 1945 — the quiet shattered. Both Moscow and Kyiv accused each other of violations; by dawn the truce had unraveled into fresh strikes. Ukraine reported more than 200 attack drones launched overnight, damaging power infrastructure and killing at least one civilian. Moscow countered that it had downed 27 Ukrainian drones.

“The humanitarian ceasefire is over. The special military operation is continuing,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in Moscow, employing the language of a state at war with a narrative of inevitability. Yet when President Vladimir Putin suggested over the weekend that the conflict might be “heading to an end,” his own administration dialed back the optimism. “There are no specifics,” Peskov said. “The president said that work has been done in a trilateral format…but at the moment it is not possible to speak about any specifics.”

It is a kind of diplomatic ambivalence that leaves ordinary people stranded between hope and habit. In Nikopol, a frontline city along the Dnipro River that has become familiar with evacuation orders, families with children were told to leave parts of the city. “We packed what we could in two bags and took the bus,” said Oleksandr, a father of three. “You can live without radios, but not without your children.”

When peace becomes a word, not a plan

Talks to stop the fighting have sputtered for months amid broader regional tensions, not least the escalating conflict in the Middle East that has diverted diplomatic bandwidth. Mr. Zelensky insists Russia must make the first move. “Russia itself chose to end the partial silence that had lasted for several days. Overnight, more than 200 attack drones were launched against Ukraine,” he said, pointing a finger at Moscow.

But Moscow’s position — that Kyiv must yield on ground it still holds in the east — remains a nonstarter for Ukrainian negotiators. The gulf is not just a matter of territory; it is about identity, sovereignty and a postwar settlement that would not leave Ukraine weakened or divided.

“Any peace that is imposed without justice will be a short-lived peace,” said Maria Sanchez, a conflict-resolution expert at a European think tank. “Peacemaking needs credible guarantees, reconstruction funds, and mechanisms that prevent a return to the conditions that led to war.”

What both stories tell us

At first glance, a corruption trial and a breakdown of a ceasefire are discrete events. Viewed closely they are converging narratives about trust — in governments, in institutions, in the international system. They ask uncomfortable questions: Can a nation wage an existential war while repairing the rot inside? Can international partners commit billions in aid when domestic oversight is fragile?

Consider these facts that help frame the stakes:

Prosecutors allege about 460 million hryvnias (€8.9m) were laundered through a network tied to luxury construction projects.
Anti-corruption bodies in Ukraine were established after the 2014 Maidan uprising and have become central to foreign aid and domestic legitimacy.
The conflict has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and forced millions to flee their homes — an ongoing humanitarian crisis with regional and global ripple effects.

What comes next is as much a moral question as it is a strategic one. Will Kyiv follow through with transparent, demonstrable justice? Will Moscow offer a realistic path to peace beyond vague hints? Will the international community sustain pressure and support, or will geopolitical distractions win out?

“Peoples’ patience is not infinite,” Marta the scarf seller warned as she folded her wares. “We can forgive, but we will remember.”

Where to from here?

Maybe the most humane response is to hold both tensions at once: demand accountability and demand peace. Both are non-negotiable if Ukraine is to rebuild not just its cities and infrastructure, but the faith of its people in the state itself.

How do you imagine justice and peace being balanced in a country at war? What would you prioritize if you had to choose? The answers are not simple, but they are the work of societies, not just courts or battlefields. And until those answers emerge, Ukrainians will continue to live — courageously, stubbornly — in the space between sirens and subpoenas.

Xogaha ka cusub kulanka Xalane ee dhinacyada Soomaalida iyo safiirada Mareykanka iyo UK

By

aden

-

May 13, 2026

May 13(Jowhar) Barqanimada maanta ah xayndaabka Xalane ayay Hoggaamiyayaasha Golaha Mustaqbalka & Madaxweyne Xassan Sheikh ku yeelan doonaa wada hadalo ku sal go’an geedi socodka doorashooyinka dalka iyo sidii Is faham looga gaari lahaa, iyadoo isku keenida ay leeyihiin Reer Galbeedka, shirkuna ku qabsoomayo xarunta JOCC.

Continue

Climate experts forecast a surge in extreme weather during 2026

By

hanad

-

May 13, 2026

World will overshoot 1.5C temperature rise goal, UN says — The UN says the world is facing warming of around 2.5C

Smoke on the Horizon: Why 2026 Feels Like a Year the Planet Didn’t Mean to Make

Walk outside in many parts of the world this spring and the air greets you differently: thicker, warmer, carrying the acrid tang of burned forests. It’s a smell that lingers on clothes and in memory, a small, stubborn proof that something bigger is unfolding. Scientists who spend their lives parsing satellites and sea charts are now saying out loud what many people already suspect in their bones — 2026 could be one of the warmest years on record, possibly the warmest, and we are walking into a season of weather extremes that feels, increasingly, unprecedented.

“We are watching compound risks stack on top of one another,” says a senior climate researcher I spoke with in Geneva, voice tight with concern. “Warmer oceans. A brewing strong El Niño. Wildfire fuel already primed by drought in places that should be damp. The system is not linear — it amplifies.”

Numbers That Won’t Comfort You

Data rarely makes for a good bedside story, but these figures are urgent: more than 150 million hectares burned in the first four months of 2026, according to consolidated analyses from climate monitoring groups — roughly 50% higher than the recent average and double the area burned in the same period of 2024. Sea surface temperatures are flirting with all-time highs, and the tropical Pacific is showing the telltale signs of a strong El Niño forming — a naturally occurring shift that tends to reshape rain belts, dry out some regions and drown others.

Put those facts together and a simple, terrifying logic emerges. El Niño can nudge weather on a continental scale; add nearly 1.5°C of global warming to that natural variability and you are likely to see floods, droughts and fires in combinations that modern human societies have not had to manage before.

Heat: The Invisible Killer

Too often, heat’s toll is invisible in the same way slow rot is. It doesn’t make as dramatic a headline as a hurricane’s landfall, but its losses pile up quietly — and unevenly. According to public health experts, official tallies place heat-related deaths at about 546,000 annually, but many researchers argue this is an undercount: cardiovascular collapses, strokes, and respiratory failures triggered or worsened by heat are often misclassified.

“Heat breaks down the body the way salt breaks down iron — slow, relentless, and cumulative,” says an epidemiologist who studies climate impacts on vulnerable populations. “People working outdoors, the elderly, communities with limited access to cooling are on the front lines.”

The public health consequences of smoke from wildfires are equally stark. Tiny particles — PM2.5 — generated by huge, smoldering blazes penetrate deep into lungs and bloodstream. A 2024 Lancet analysis estimated roughly 1.53 million deaths each year are linked to wildfire-related air pollution, more than four times previous estimates. In Australia’s 2019 bushfires, 33 people died in the flames but hundreds more died from the smoke. Research after California’s 2025 blazes found nearly a 50% increase in short-term mortality associated with smoke exposure beyond direct fire fatalities.

Where the Fires Are—and Why They Matter

It’s tempting to think of wildfires as a problem for remote hinterlands, but the truth is more insidious. Rainforests that used to be buffers against burning — the Amazon, parts of Southeast Asia, pockets in Oceania — are showing signs of seasonal drying. For people who live nearby, this is not an abstract climate chart headline; it is a local emergency.

“We always had wet seasons that put out the fires. This year, the rains came late,” a community leader from a riverside Amazonian town told me on a crackly phone line. “Children cough at night. Elders can’t breathe. The wolves of the air are the smoke.”

When normally damp ecosystems become tinderboxes, we lose more than trees. We risk carbon sinks that have taken millennia to form; we endanger biodiversity that cannot be quickly replaced; and we choke cities and rural towns alike with toxic haze. The ripple effects reach agriculture, tourism, and local economies — and they are deeply unequal. Lower-income populations, often with the least political voice, bear the brunt.

El Niño: The Natural Wild Card That’s Now Playing With a Loaded Deck

El Niño is cyclical. It has happened for centuries. Normally, people adapt, plan, and ride out the changes. But what happens when a strong El Niño arrives on top of an atmosphere and ocean already recharged with heat? “It’s like stacking one disaster on another,” says an atmospheric scientist in California. “The patterns of rainfall and drought can shift by hundreds of kilometers; regions that are normally wet can be drought-prone this year, and vice versa.”

That mixing of natural variability with human-made warming is what worries scientists most. “El Niño on its own is disruptive,” the scientist explains. “El Niño plus 1.5°C is potentially catastrophic for some regions. We have good reason to expect record-breaking rains, and record-breaking dry spells, both in places they haven’t historically been so extreme.”

Politics, Promises, and the Pause That Frustrates

There is also a political dimension to this moment. Some climate advocates and researchers watching policy trends say promises have softened in recent years — targets reframed, timelines relaxed, urgency dialed down. Meanwhile, the physics of the planet doesn’t negotiate.

“You can’t put off what is physical,” says a policy analyst who worked on international climate negotiations. “Trust between nations, and between governments and citizens, is deeply tested when commitments wobble at the very moment that the planet starts showing its teeth.”

What Can Be Done — and What We Already Know

There are no silver bullets, but there are well-worn tools that work: rapidly cutting fossil fuel combustion, electrifying transportation, insulating homes, investing in early warning systems, and protecting forests and peatlands that store carbon. Technology helps. Policy helps. Public awareness helps. But the window for avoiding the worst outcomes narrows by the year.

Accelerate emissions reductions: the science is clear — to stop compounding extremes, we must move away from fossil fuels at speed.
Invest in resilience: heat action plans, cooling centers, better air quality monitoring, and healthcare systems prepared for smoke and heat emergencies.
Prioritize justice: those who have contributed least to the warming are often the ones who suffer most. Policy must reflect that reality.

Look Up, Then Act

So what should you do as a reader? Start with awareness. Check local air quality indexes. Keep an emergency kit ready. If you vote, vote with a long-term horizon. If you work in business or local government, push for plans that reduce risk now while shrinking emissions tomorrow.

And remember that this is not a drama with a single villain. It is the sum of centuries of choices, politics, and technological pathways. We can choose different ones now. We can let the invisible costs — the heat deaths, the smoke-related illnesses, the lost forests — count in our decisions.

“I am not a fatalist,” a 62-year-old farmer in Indonesia said as the smoke drifted over his coffee plot. “I know the soil remembers rain. But I need help to plan for seasons that no longer stay where they used to.”

That is the heart of the matter. The climate does not wait for us to get our politics right. It responds to physics and heat. Our task — practical, moral, urgent — is to match that reality with action that is faster, fairer and more relentless than the flames on the horizon.

Lebanon reports 380 killed in Israeli strikes since ceasefire

By

hanad

-

May 13, 2026

Lebanon says Israeli strikes have killed 380 since truce — Israeli strikes on Lebanon have killed 380 people since a ceasefire in the Israel-Hezbollah war began on 17 April

Along the Litani and the Yellow Line: Lebanon’s Wounds After a Fragile Ceasefire

There is a strange silence in southern Lebanon that does not mean peace. It vibrates with the memory of engines and alarms, with the echo of ambulances that once raced through olive groves toward makeshift hospitals. Since the truce that took hold on April 17, Israeli strikes have continued to fall on towns and roads — and Lebanon’s health ministry now counts 380 people killed and 1,122 wounded in that period alone.

Those figures, announced by Health Minister Rakan Nassereddine at a crowded press briefing, sit heavy on the page: they are part of a broader tally that stretches back to the opening of hostilities on March 2. The ministry says the total toll from Israeli strikes stands at 2,882 dead — including 279 women and 200 children — and thousands more injured. Among the dead are 108 emergency and health workers; 16 hospitals have been damaged, officials say.

“It feels like a ledger of grief,” a nurse in the southern town of Tyre told me on the phone, her voice raw. “We treat the living and bury the dead. The ambulances are for the wounded — not targets.” She asked not to be named. Her words echoed Nassereddine’s blunt accusation: that attacks are striking medical vehicles and workers, contrary to Israeli claims that ambulances and clinics have been militarised.

The geography of a tense pause

In south Lebanon, a faint line on many maps has become a psychological boundary. Israel’s so-called “yellow line,” drawn roughly 10 kilometres north of the UN-recognised blue border, is where Israeli troops say they have been operating — well beyond their own declared limits and into the valleys and rivers that knit rural life together.

Over the past week, Israeli forces said they carried out a days-long raid along the Litani River, clearing what they called “terrorist infrastructure” and seizing tunnels, weapons depots and launchers. Photos released by the military showed soldiers moving across a river bridge and armored vehicles hugging the riverbank; Lebanese officials and local residents — including people from the outskirts of Zawtar al-Sharqiyah — reported exchanges of fire.

“We woke to the sound of helicopters,” recalled Rami, a farmer who tends citrus trees near the Litani. “The kids sat on the roof and watched tanks. The animals were terrified. It’s not the sound of war so much as the routine of it now.”

Israeli statements say more than 100 targets were struck in the operation and that “dozens” of Hezbollah fighters were killed. Hezbollah, for its part, insists its operatives are counted among official government casualty figures and denies allegations it is using ambulances as cover. The truce brokered by Washington explicitly allows Israel to respond to “planned, imminent or ongoing attacks,” language that has left enough ambiguity for both sides to claim moral justification.

At ground level: stories you won’t see in briefs

Walk through the streets south of the Litani and you will find tea shops with broken windows and coffee cups collecting dust; men who once argued over football scores now speak only of missing relatives. In a clinic that still functions beneath a tarpaulin, a volunteer medic, Leila, held up a chart of the wounded.

“We have every kind of injury: shrapnel, burns, chest wounds,” she said, smoothing the paper with a thumb. “Children come with nightmares and we stitch their bodies and try to stitch their minds. People think a ceasefire is a pause for breathing. For us it has been a day-to-day fight for survival.”

These human stories are set against stark numbers. The Lebanese ministry breaks down recent casualties to include 39 women and 22 children since April 17; 249 medical workers have been wounded since March. Such figures give scale to the grief, but they cannot capture the smell of a hospital corridor after a midnight strike or the small kindness of neighbours sharing bread.

Law, trauma, and theatres of justice

While these scenes play out in villages, another drama is unfolding in Israel’s legislature. In a rare cross-party consensus, the Knesset approved a law to create a special military tribunal to try militants captured during the October 7 attack that killed at least 1,200 Israelis — the deadliest assault on Jews since the Holocaust, officials say. The law passed with 93 votes in favour.

The tribunal will preside over hundreds of cases and could even apply the death penalty in the most grievous charges — an option that has not been exercised since 1962, when Adolf Eichmann was executed. Supporters argue the court is a necessary mechanism to process trauma and restore a battered legal order. Critics warn of the dangers inherent in a military court trying politically charged crimes.

“Accountability is essential,” said an international law professor based in Jerusalem, speaking on condition of anonymity. “But the risk is that trials could become instruments of catharsis rather than instruments of justice. Due process must not be the casualty of grief.”

Who pays the price — and who makes the decisions?

The violence has not been contained to tidy headlines. It feeds broader debates about proportionality, the laws of war, and the responsibilities of outside powers. Lebanon’s leaders have called on the United States to press Israel to halt strikes that have intensified even as talks are due to resume in Washington this week. The stakes are high: a misstep could reopen a much larger front.

And then there is Gaza. The campaign that followed October 7 has left the strip in ruins; Palestinian health authorities and international monitors report tens of thousands of deaths — a figure that is itself contested but impossible to ignore when you walk past piles of rubble and see lines of displaced families clustered around UN tents.

What does justice look like in a landscape that feels both juridical and medieval? Who counts as a combatant and who as a civilian? When a hospital is damaged or an ambulance struck, how do we untangle the fact from the allegation?

These questions matter because the answers will shape policy, accountability, and the future of a region that has been living with layered conflicts for decades. They matter because for every statistic, there is a name and a life interrupted.

Invitation to reflect

As readers, as observers, we are often offered summaries: ceasefire in place, talks ongoing, numbers tallied. But behind each line on the spreadsheet there is a neighbour grieving, a child carrying a bandage, a doctor choosing which patient to treat first. If you could sit with any one of them for an hour, what would you ask?

Maybe we should start by asking how to make peace feel less like a temporary reprieve and more like a durable promise — one that protects ambulances and clinics, that honours due process without spectacle, and that recognizes the dignity of every civilian on both sides of an invisible border.

Since March 2: Lebanon reports 2,882 killed by strikes, including 279 women and 200 children.
Since the April 17 ceasefire: 380 killed and 1,122 wounded in Lebanon, per the health ministry.
Health workers killed: 108; hospitals damaged: 16.
Israel: Knesset passed law to create a military tribunal for October 7 attackers (93–27 vote).

These are facts we can verify. But the deeper truth is lived in kitchens and clinics and in the quiet places where people stitch their lives back together. If the ceasefire is a bridge, it is fragile. We must walk it carefully — with attention, with empathy, and with an insistence that human lives be the measure of success.

UN Warns Strait of Hormuz Blockade Could Push Millions Into Hunger

By

hanad

-

May 13, 2026

Millions face hunger risk over Hormuz blockage, warns UN — The strategic waterway has been effectively blocked since 28 February

When a narrow waterway threatens the world’s dinner table

From the deck of a battered fishing boat off the Strait of Hormuz, the horizon looks like any other: gulls wheel, the sun shards across a slow swell, and tankers—huge, indifferent—trace steel veins through blue. But beneath that ordinary seascape is a pressure point that can rearrange the lives of farmers in Kenya, rice-planters in Bangladesh, and market stall owners in Lagos. A blockage here is not just geopolitical theatre. It is the fragile hinge between seed and harvest for tens of millions of people.

“If the strait stays closed to fertilisers, we’re talking about a humanitarian storm of a scale we haven’t seen in years,” Jorge Moreira da Silva, head of the UN task force created to keep fertilisers moving, told reporters recently. “We have weeks, not months, to act.”

Why a choke point matters

The Strait of Hormuz is only 21 miles at its narrowest, but it funnels an astonishing share of the world’s energy and agricultural inputs. Roughly one in three tonnes of fertiliser—ammonia, urea, sulphur and other raw materials—moves through these waters in a typical year. When those flows stop, planting calendars collide with shipping schedules, and fields lie fallow not for want of rain but for lack of nutrients.

“Fertiliser isn’t glamorous. People don’t clap for it. But when it goes missing, yields collapse,” explains Dr. Leila Rahman, an agronomist who has worked with smallholder cooperative projects across East Africa. “Imagine removing a critical ingredient from a recipe and expecting the cake to rise. That is what a month-long delay can do to a planting season.”

The clock is running

The UN task force leader warns of a grim arithmetic: without a targeted corridor to let fertilisers and related materials through, an estimated 45 million additional people could be pushed into hunger and even starvation. That would be layered on top of a world already juggling chronic food insecurity—where hundreds of millions live on the knife-edge of not having enough to eat—and marked by lingering price volatility since the shocks of 2021–22.

Moreira da Silva says a pragmatic, limited solution is possible. “If we can move just five standard vessels a day laden with fertiliser materials, we can avert the worst outcomes for farmers around the world,” he told diplomats. “Operationally, we can be running the mechanism in seven days. Politically, we’re still waiting for will.”

Faces of the crisis: farmers, fishers, and market vendors

On the ground, the worry is not abstract. In a dusty market in Kisumu, Kenya, Amina, a smallholder who grows maize on a two-acre plot, described the squeeze. “Last year my harvest was just enough to sell some and keep the children fed through school,” she said. “If the fertiliser doesn’t arrive soon, I cannot plant. Then I don’t eat, and I don’t have money for tuition.”

In the port city of Bandar Abbas, local stevedores watched news feeds and compared them to their weekly wage slips. “We load what the world wants. If the ships stop, we stop,” said Reza, a longshoreman, shaking his head. “A lot of families depend on this—both here and in the places where the cargo goes.”

These personal anecdotes map onto heavy numbers. The UN’s humanitarian apparatus has been sounding the alarm not only about immediate hunger but about cascading impacts: reduced harvests leading to higher food prices, more pressure on social safety nets, and increased displacement as rural communities seek opportunities in already-crowded cities.

The geopolitics behind the barges

At the heart of the stoppage, according to UN officials, is a political stand-off. A major regional power has restricted traffic through the Strait in retaliation for a conflict that erupted late in February. Washington, Tehran, and several Gulf oil and fertiliser producers are entangled in the negotiations. While multiple countries have signalled support for a UN-managed transit mechanism, a handful of pivotal players have not yet signed on.

“This isn’t just a shipping problem; it’s a governance problem,” said Ambassador Sofia Martins, who has been shuttling between capitals to drum up backing for the UN proposal. “We can build safe lanes, we can inspect cargoes, we can create guarantees. What we lack is the political consensus to put it into practice.”

Why the delay matters now

Farming calendars do not wait for diplomacy. In several African and Asian nations, planting windows close within weeks. Seeds need fertiliser soon after they emerge: late applications or shortages can cut yields by 20–40 percent, a hit that translates directly into household food insecurity.

Even if ships were allowed passage tomorrow, island-like realities would persist: ports would be congested, cargo would be rerouted, and it would take three to four months for global supply chains to recalibrate, the UN noted. For millions of small-scale growers, that lag could be the difference between a manageable bad year and a devastating drop in food production.

Economic ripple effects

Markets already react to fear. After the fertilizer price shocks following the Russia–Ukraine war in 2021–22, many governments began to scramble—subsidies, rationing, stockpiles. Those same fragile policy responses could be overwhelmed if supplies tighten again. Fertiliser price spikes don’t just hit large commercial farms; they squeeze smallholders the hardest, because these farmers cannot hedge or buy in bulk.

“When prices jump, you see a two-tier response,” says Omar El-Khoury, an economist focused on commodity markets. “Wealthier producers absorb costs or purchase alternatives; poorer farmers skip inputs, reduce plantings, or switch to lower-yield crops. The net result is lower global supply and higher prices for everyone.”

What a solution could look like

The UN task force’s proposal is straightforward: a narrowly tailored corridor that allows fertiliser and its raw materials—ammonia, urea, sulphur, and related chemicals—to transit under agreed inspections and safeguards. It’s not a political endorsement of any party in the conflict; it is a targeted humanitarian measure meant to separate food security from geopolitics.

“Humanitarian access must be insulated from the battlefield,” argued Moreira da Silva. “We are not asking for a ceasefire; we are asking for an exception—an operational corridor to prevent mass hunger.”

Yet legality and logistics remain tricky, and as long as principal actors equate such a corridor with strategic advantage, momentum stalls. In the meantime, donors and aid agencies warn they may be forced to ramp up costly emergency food assistance—an outcome Moreira da Silva described as the inevitable fallback if the corridor is not established.

Questions to sit with

What does it mean, in a globalised world, when a few miles of sea can shape who eats this year and who goes hungry? How do we balance legitimate security concerns with a collective moral obligation to protect those who grow and depend on food? And perhaps most pressingly: if a narrow corridor can be carved out for oil or munitions, why not for the very stuff that keeps people alive?

There are no easy answers. But there are choices. Diplomacy can be nimble when pressure is applied; logistics can be creative when partners cooperate; and markets can be stabilised when uncertainty is replaced by clarity.

“It may sound bureaucratic to ask for a shipping lane,” said Dr. Rahman, “but people’s plates are on the line. That is as urgent as anything a diplomat does in a summit room.”

Closing thought

Look at a map of the Strait of Hormuz. It is a narrow, strategic seam, a pulsing artery for global trade. Now imagine its pulse slowing. The distant clatter of a tanker becomes the sudden hush of a harvest lost. The question for leaders, and for each of us as citizens of a connected world, is simple: will we treat a corridor for fertiliser as a pragmatic humanitarian tool, or will politics once again override the hunger of millions? Time, as the UN has warned, is not on our side.

EU Moves Forward with Long-Delayed Sanctions on Israeli Settlers

By

hanad

-

May 12, 2026

EU agrees long-stalled sanctions on Israeli settlers — EU officials said seven settlers or settler organisations will be blacklisted

After years of delays, the European Union has finally taken a step forward in applying sanctions on Israeli settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The move comes as a response to the continued expansion of settlements in these occupied territories, which the EU considers to be illegal under international law.

Continue

Greenland PM: Talks with US Still Yield No Deal

By

hanad

-

May 12, 2026

No deal yet in US talks, says Greenland PM — US President Donald Trump wants to open three military bases in southern Greenland

On the Edge of Ice and Influence: Greenland’s Future, Negotiated on a Global Stage

There is a kind of light in Nuuk that catches you by surprise: as the sun hangs low in spring, it turns the fjord into molten silver and sets the weathered wooden houses ablaze in colour. Down by the harbour, a woman in a bright red anorak hauls a net from a small trawler, her hands sure and quick despite the cold. She is one of about 56,000 people who live on an island the size of Western Europe — a place whose very vastness has lately placed it at the centre of geopolitics.

Talk of bases and bargaining chips has become ordinary here in a way it never used to be. For months, Greenland’s government has been in discussions with Copenhagen and Washington over what role the island might play in a rapidly changing Arctic — whether that will mean deeper defence cooperation, expanded military presence, or a new configuration of autonomy and responsibility. Officials say progress has been made. But as one Greenlandic politician put it at a recent press event, “We are negotiating, but there is no deal yet.”

Why Greenland matters

To the naked eye, Greenland is an icon of raw nature: 2.16 million square kilometres of ice and rock, a coastline carved into a maze of fjords, and a people whose lives are attuned to the seasons. Beneath that ice, geologists long suspected — and recent surveys increasingly confirm — a trove of mineral wealth, from zinc and rare earth elements to uranium and other resources that the world will prize as demand for clean technologies surges.

But the calculus isn’t only economic. Strategists from Washington to Beijing now watch Arctic sea lanes open as the climate warms, while satellites and early-warning systems have made the High North a zone of significant military interest. The United States already operates Pituffik — better known internationally as Thule Air Base — in northern Greenland, established in the early 1950s as the Cold War settled into place.

“Greenland is not a relic of the Cold War; it is the front line of a new strategic era,” said Dr. Emilie Sørensen, an Arctic security analyst at the Copenhagen Institute for Polar Research. “Shorter sea routes, untapped resources, and the increasing competition among major powers mean that what happens here has global consequences.”

Negotiations under the northern sky

The 1951 defence agreement between Denmark and the United States — refreshed in subsequent decades — allows the U.S. scope to expand military infrastructure on the island, provided Copenhagen and Greenland are informed. That legal framework underpins current talks. Washington, seeking to consolidate its position in the north, has discussed the possibility of additional bases in southern Greenland to supplement Pituffik in the north.

Greenland’s leaders are walking a careful line. “We have always been willing to shoulder more responsibility for security,” said a Greenlandic official at a press conference. “But our only demand is respect — respect for our rights, for our environment, and for our people.”

Out on a bench near Nuuk’s cultural centre, 68-year-old Aqqaluk Johansen — a retired hunter who still reads the weather like scripture — pinned the negotiations into the same ledger where he keeps track of icefall and tide. “They come to talk about bases and minerals, but we live here,” he said. “If there is to be more foreign boots and big machines, it should be on our terms.”

On the ground: Voices from Greenland

Conversations in Greenland are rarely abstract. In Sisimiut, a young geology student named Nivi explained why the potential for mine development is double-edged. “Jobs and money could mean hospitals, schools and less dependence on Denmark,” she said. “But my grandfather remembers when a military road divided a hunting ground. We must not trade our land for promises we cannot keep.”

In the capital, fishermen debate the same questions in dingy cafés over strong coffee and flatbread. “We’re not against cooperation,” said Kûsâq Petersen, owner of a small fishing company. “But fishing is our life. If foreign bases scare the fish away or pollute the water, no amount of money will bring it back.”

What the numbers tell us

These human stories sit beside stark statistics. Greenland’s population — roughly 56,000 — is sparse across a huge territory. Climate change has already reshaped the region: the Greenland ice sheet lost hundreds of billions of tonnes of ice annually over the last decade, contributing significantly to global sea level rise. The Arctic is warming at up to four times the global average in some measures, unlocking new shipping routes and potential extraction sites — but raising the stakes for local communities and ecosystems.

At the same time, the global appetite for rare earths and metals needed for electric vehicles and wind turbines is rising. Experts estimate that Greenland could host commercially viable deposits of these materials, drawing interest from mining companies and the governments that see them as assets in a transition away from fossil fuels.

Balance, sovereignty and climate justice

There is no single thread that will determine Greenland’s future. Instead, it will be woven from a complex fabric of sovereignty, economics, indigenous rights, environmental protection, and global strategy. For Denmark, Greenland is an autonomous part of the realm — but Nuuk is increasingly insistent on shaping its own destiny. For the United States, Greenland presents both a strategic advantage and a diplomatic puzzle. For Greenlanders, the question is existential: can they gain the benefits of cooperation without surrendering control?

“We must be careful not to replay colonial patterns,” cautioned Lena Asii, a lawyer who works on indigenous land rights. “Fair agreements mean real participation — not decisions done to us, but decisions done with us.”

And the clock is not just political. As the climate warms, the window for safe, responsible development narrows. Disturbance of permafrost or the release of greenhouse gases trapped in Arctic soils could accelerate changes even further. “This is climate justice as much as it is geopolitics,” Dr. Sørensen said. “Who benefits matters. Who bears the risks matters.”

Questions for the reader

What should a small, remote community be entitled to when major powers come knocking? How much sovereignty do people trade for security guarantees and economic promises, and who decides when those trade-offs are acceptable?

As you read from your own corner of the globe, consider this: Greenland’s future will not be determined in Washington or Copenhagen alone. It will be shaped by people who go out on the ice at dawn, by students studying geology in the capital, by elders whose knowledge of the land predates maps. The world may watch satellite images and sign memoranda, but the decisions here will be lived every day.

Negotiations continue. Envoys may visit, agreements may be proposed, and incremental steps will be taken. But the most important voices — those of the island’s people — are asking for something that resonates far beyond the Arctic: respect, participation, and a say in the destiny of their homeland.

Greenland: ~2.16 million km²; population ~56,000
Pituffik/Thule Air Base: U.S. facility in northern Greenland since the early 1950s
Key issues: defence cooperation, mineral development, indigenous rights, climate impacts

Where do you stand on the balance between strategic necessity and local rights? If the Arctic is the world’s new frontier, what kind of frontier do we want it to be?

Salaam African Bank Group oo xarigga ka jaray mashruuc Kayd shidaal ah oo laga hir galinayo Dalka Jabuuti

By

aden

-

May 12, 2026

May 12(Jowhar)Shirkadda Fuelstor oo hoos timaada shirkadaha Salaam Group ayaa maanta si rasmi ah u daahfurtay dhismaha xarun weyn oo kaydinta shidaalka iyo badeecooyinka kala duwan ah oo laga hirgelinayo deegaanka Damerjog ee dalka Djibouti. Mashruucan ayaa lagu tilmaamay mid muhiim u ah horumarinta kaabeyaasha tamarta iyo saadka gobolka Geeska Afrika.

Continue

Starmer faces mounting pressure as third UK government minister quits

By

hanad

-

May 12, 2026

Pressure on Starmer as third UK govt minister resigns

Downing Street at Dawn: A Country Waiting

There are moments in politics that feel like held breath — when the familiar rhythms of routines, briefings and party rooms collapse into a single, noisy second. This is one of those moments. Outside No. 10, the black iron railings reflect the grey London sky. Inside, a handful of ministers file into a crisply lit room where, by midday, the prime minister will chair a meeting billed as “urgent” and “decisive.” The word on everyone’s lips is the same: crisis.

What is happening here is not only about one leader. It is a study in how fragile democratic authority becomes when scandal, poor judgement, or plain political fatigue collide with the unrelenting glare of media and social media. It is also, intimately, about people — voters, civil servants, aides, and MPs — who watch the spectacle with a mix of anger, exhaustion and curiosity.

The Crunch Meeting

Cabinet tables are usually islands of careful choreography. Ministers take their places, papers rustle, a civil servant sets a timer. Today the choreography is brittle. The cabinet room has been described by insiders as tense and quiet, with conversations happening in clipped asides rather than the usual banter. A senior government source told me, “There is a calculation happening in every corner: is this a turning point or a stumble we can survive?”

Those calculations are urgent because the political pressure is real and growing. Across the country, MPs and party officials have been fielding emails, calls and texts from constituents telling them the same thing: it’s time to act. In Westminster speaking network, words like “leadership challenge,” “confidence motion,” and “resignation” travel faster than any official statement.

For the prime minister, the meeting is narrow in purpose and wide in consequence: steady the ship, restore trust, and fend off calls to quit. The outcome will shape the government’s agenda for months — possibly years — to come.

Behind Closed Doors

Inside No. 10, aides move like people carrying plates in a busy kitchen. Some speak in reassurances — “We can manage the narrative” — while others are more blunt: “If we don’t check the leaks, we lose control.” A Downing Street aide, speaking on condition of anonymity, said, “There are conversations about whether a renewed mandate can be secured. But a mandate isn’t useful if nobody believes it’s honest.”

On the other side of the table, senior ministers weigh their options. Some quietly advocate for a reset: a public apology, a set of clear policy wins, and a show of unity. Others are whispering about a leadership contest, saying that party rules and parliamentary math now make a change more plausible than it would have been months ago.

Voices on the Ground

Walk a mile from the polished pavements of Westminster and you meet a different United Kingdom. In a north London bakery, the owner, who immigrated here as a child, folds his hands over a paper cup of tea and says, “We want accountability. Whoever runs the country must be someone we can trust with our lives and pensions and kids’ schools. Right now, that trust is gone for a lot of people.”

Outside a library in Birmingham, a retired teacher I met on a bench told me, “It’s not just about one mistake. It’s about a pattern. When people in power act like the rules don’t apply to them, it chips away at the social contract.” A young voter in Leeds, clutching a tote bag, offered a different tone: “I feel exhausted by all of it. I want someone who cares about the future — jobs, housing, climate. Is that too much to ask?”

These are not just isolated sentiments. Polling organizations and civic groups report a steady erosion of public trust in institutions over the past decade, a global trend that has particular resonance here. Citizens are looking for competence and integrity; when they perceive either lacking, the political temperature rises quickly.

What Could Happen Next?

There are a few broad scenarios that political strategists are working through. None is inevitable; each depends on shifting alliances and hard-to-predict personal calculations.

A display of unity: A dramatic public show of support could stabilize the prime minister for a time. This usually requires key figures to sign on publicly and a fast-moving policy push to reclaim the narrative.
A slow bleed: Ongoing defections, whispered opposition, and a persistent scandal could sap authority and leave the government weakened but intact — struggling to govern effectively.
A leadership contest: If enough MPs submit formal letters of no confidence within party rules, the stage is set for a leadership challenge and possibly a new prime minister.
An abrupt resignation: The most dramatic outcome is a sudden resignation, which throws the door open to a rapid scramble for successors and a reshaping of national priorities.

What the Numbers Tell Us

Certain facts ground these possibilities. The UK Parliament has 650 seats; the balance of those seats within the governing party and opposition determines how easily a prime minister can survive internal rebellion or an opposition-led motion. Meanwhile, public opinion matters: when support for a leader drops dramatically in polls, MPs — who depend on voters’ goodwill — quickly feel the heat.

Economic indicators also play a role. Inflation, unemployment and household budgets are the real-world metrics voters feel most urgently. When public confidence in the government’s economic stewardship falls, political survival becomes harder.

Global Reverberations

Why should the world care? Because Britain’s political stability matters beyond its borders. The UK is a major economy, a key diplomatic player in Europe and NATO, and a partner in global financial markets. A leadership change can ripple through markets, influence diplomatic negotiations, and alter approaches to shared challenges like climate change, migration, and security.

More broadly, this episode is part of a global conversation about democratic resilience. How do modern democracies handle the failings of leaders? How do parties balance loyalty with accountability? And how does social media — with its electrifying speed — change the calculus of political survival?

Looking Ahead: A Moment of Reckoning

As the cabinet meeting concludes and ministers disperse back into their constituencies, one thing is clear: the country is watching. The outcome will not just be measured by whether the prime minister stays or goes, but by what follows — reforms, apologies, or new leadership that addresses the deeper issues voters have raised.

Ask yourself: what do you expect from political leadership in times like these? Is it contrition, competence, or both? And when leaders fail, where should accountability come from — the ballot box, the parliamentary system, or the court of public opinion?

For now, Downing Street braces for the next chapter. The conversations that begin in that room today will ripple through living rooms, workplaces and newsfeeds across the country. They will shape not only the fate of one leader, but how a nation defines the trust it grants to those who govern it.

Madaxweyne Xasan oo ka qeyb galay caleema saarka madaxweynaha Uganda

By

aden

-

May 12, 2026

May 12(Jowhar) Madaxweynaha Jamhuuriyadda Federaalka Soomaaliya Mudane Xasan Sheekh Maxamuud ayaa maanta ka qayb galay munaasabadda caleemo-saarka Madaxweynaha Jamhuuriyadda Yugaandha Mudane Yoweri Kaguta Museveni oo lagu qabtay magaalada Kampala.

Continue