Former Sri Lanka intelligence chief arrested in 2019 bombings probe

February 25, 2026

Sri Lanka's former spy chief arrested over 2019 bombings — The bombings on Easter Sunday seven years ago targeted Christian churches and hotels

At Dawn in Colombo: An Arrest That Reopens Old Wounds

The arrest happened before sunrise, the kind of quiet that makes every bird call louder and every footstep more noticeable. In a sleepy suburb of Colombo, police moved in and took into custody a man once at the pinnacle of Sri Lankan intelligence — a retired major general whose name, until today, had been wrapped in rumor, accusation and official silence.

For families who lost fathers, daughters, friends in the carnage of 21 April 2019, the scene on the curb felt less like closure and more like another chapter opening in a story they’ve waited seven years to read. “We have been waiting for truth,” said a middle-aged woman who lost her brother in the bombings, her voice catching between resignation and fierce hope. “If this is a step toward that, we must watch closely.”

What Happened in 2019 — A Brutal Snapshot

The coordinated suicide attacks of Easter Sunday 2019 tore through three luxury hotels, two Roman Catholic churches in Colombo and an evangelical church on the outskirts. By the time the smoke cleared, 279 people were dead, including 45 foreign nationals, and more than 500 were wounded.

It was the bloodiest blow to civilians in a country still carrying the scars of a civil war that killed at least 100,000 people and only ended in 2009. The bombings not only stole lives but also shook the island’s confidence in its institutions — the police, the military and the intelligence services tasked with keeping citizens safe.

The State Intelligence Chief and the Allegations

The man arrested has been accused of conspiring and aiding those attacks — allegations he has repeatedly denied. Investigators say there is evidence of contact between him and individuals tied to the bombings “even recently,” according to law enforcement sources. Independent reports, including a 2023 investigation by international broadcasters, suggested earlier contact and raised questions about whether parts of the security establishment had foreknowledge or, worse, a role in empowering radical elements.

These are explosive claims. They tie together threads that many Sri Lankans have long whispered about in tea stalls and temple courtyards: that certain military intelligence units once channeled resources to radical groups in the east, that political calculation may have played inaction like an instrument, and that cover-ups are easier when institutions protect their own.

Voices in the Aftermath

Reactions to the arrest were immediate and varied. A Catholic church spokesman said, “This arrest gives the families a reason to keep hoping. Seven years is a long time for wounds to go unexamined.”

A human rights lawyer, who has been tracking the case, offered a more cautious assessment: “Arrests can be symbolic. What matters next is transparency — how evidence is handled, who is questioned and whether the legal process is allowed to run its course without political interference.”

At a small tea stall near the capital, a tuk-tuk driver wiped his hands on his sarong and said, “We have had many promises — inquiries, committees, reports. We want to know if those who failed us will answer for it. Justice is not only for the dead; it is for the living who must trust their country again.”

Questions of Politics, Power and Accountability

The arrest cannot be untangled from recent political shifts. The suspect rose to head the State Intelligence Service in 2019 after the election of Gotabaya Rajapaksa and was later dismissed following a change in leadership in 2024. Critics have pointed to a troubling timeline: two days after the bombings, Mr. Rajapaksa declared his candidacy and later won, campaigning on a pledge to crush Islamist extremism.

Independent inquiries and media investigations have suggested that elements within military intelligence once engaged with — and even funded — local jihadist factions in order to shape political and social dynamics in parts of the country. One former member of the extremist network told reporters in 2019 that the unit’s funding helped spread a fundamentalist ideology in Sri Lanka’s multi-ethnic eastern province. Government sources subsequently acknowledged the military’s connection to that group, raising uncomfortable questions about responsibility and intent.

Legal Echoes and International Threads

The legal fallout since the bombings has been far-reaching: U.S. authorities charged three Sri Lankans in 2021 for their alleged roles supporting the attacks, and at least 25 suspects have been indicted in Sri Lanka’s High Court. The country’s Supreme Court even fined then-president Maithripala Sirisena and four senior officials the equivalent of roughly €1 million in a civil case for failing to prevent the attacks.

International bodies have not been silent. The United Nations called on Sri Lanka to publish parts of earlier inquiries that were withheld from the public — a demand rooted in the belief that accountability requires sunlight. “Every nation must reconcile security with human rights,” said a UN analyst. “Victims deserve truth and states owe transparency.”

Who Pays the Price?

Beyond the courtrooms, the island’s tourism industry — a lifeline for many — suffered an immediate blow. Flights canceled, hotels emptied; livelihoods vanished as global bookings dropped. The ripples of trauma reached far beyond Colombo’s stained glass windows and hotel lobbies to fisherman on the east coast and tea pickers in the hills.

“People here feed their families with visitors,” a hotel manager in Galle told me. “When fear takes over, the whole country pays.”

Why This Matters — And What Comes Next

Arrests do not equal answers. But they can reopen a path to truth. The vital questions now are procedural: Will the investigation proceed with independence? Will witnesses be protected? Will the public see the evidence withheld in past reports? Or will the case become another tug-of-war between political factions, offering spectacle but little substance?

For survivors and families of the dead, the arrest is not an end but a test. “We do not want revenge,” said a young widow at a candlelight vigil, her face lit orange against the night. “We want to know who knew what, when. We want institutions that protect us, not hide behind uniforms.”

Looking Outward: A Global Story of Trust and Memory

Sri Lanka’s reckoning is, in truth, part of a broader global story: how democracies confront failures of security, how societies rebuild trust after state betrayal, how the politics of fear can be weaponized and how victims demand recognition. From Buenos Aires to Baghdad, citizens ask the same question: Can institutions be reformed when their hands are stained?

As readers, what should we watch for? Transparency in hearings, protection of witnesses, the independence of prosecutors, and, crucially, the publication of documents the public has been denied. These are the building blocks of trust.

After the Dawn

The arrest at dawn in Colombo is one small, public moment in a long process. It reverberates beyond courtrooms into churches, kitchens and markets — into the lives of the 279 people who will never return and the tens of thousands who still live with fear. Whether it marks a real turn toward accountability or another chapter of deferred justice depends on what happens next.

So I ask you, reader: when a nation faces its worst failings, what should justice look like — swift retribution, meticulous due process, or both? And how does a society rebuild faith in the institutions meant to protect it? The answers will shape not only Sri Lanka’s future, but offer lessons for democracies everywhere.

Trump Proclaims a ‘Golden Age’ in State of the Union Address

hanad

February 25, 2026

Trump hails 'golden age' in State of the Union address — US President Donald Trump delivers his State of the Union address

Night of Pageantry and Politics: Inside a State of the Union That Felt Like a Campaign Rally

When the chamber lights dimmed and Donald Trump rose to speak, it felt less like a sober accounting and more like a presidential highlight reel — all brass, bravado and a steady drumbeat of winners. Republican members cheered; a string of empty Democratic seats gaped like punctuation marks. Outside, activists chanted and marched. Inside, the president held forth for one hour and forty-seven minutes — the longest delivery of a State of the Union in modern memory — painting a portrait of an America he called “bigger, better, richer and stronger.”

Yet the applause sat uneasily beside the facts on the ground: an economy where many households still feel squeezed, a judiciary that struck down much of his signature tariff policy, and a public mood fractured along partisan lines. Was this an address to rally a base, to reassure wavering voters, or to rewrite the ledger of reality? The answer, as the night showed, was likely all three.

The Economy: Triumphs Claimed, Anxieties Unanswered

For the first hour, the speech was a numbers-heavy sales pitch. “Inflation is plummeting,” the president declared. He trotted out stock-market gains and tax cuts as proof of a thriving America. To many in the gallery, the spectacle landed: the weekly headlines, the ticker tape of the markets, offered a tidy narrative of recovery.

But outside the sound bites are the everyday statistics people live by: grocery bills, rent checks, insurance premiums. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released shortly before the address put approval of Mr. Trump’s handling of the economy at 36% — a cold splash of data that undercut the claims of universal prosperity. New economic reports released that same day showed growth slowing and inflation stubbornly persistent, complicating the administration’s sunny picture.

“My family is getting by, but we’re not thriving,” said Maria Lopez, who owns a bakery near Capitol Hill. “Prices on eggs and flour are still up from two years ago. A State of the Union about prosperity doesn’t mean much if my rent keeps going up.”

Reuters/Ipsos poll: 36% approve of Trump’s economic handling.
All 435 House seats and roughly one-third of the Senate are on the ballot this November.
Recent Supreme Court ruling struck down most of the administration’s import tariffs.

What the Numbers Don’t Tell Us

Numbers can flatter and they can mislead. Stock indices rally when corporate profits climb, even as wage growth lags for millions. The president’s celebration of market highs does not erase the truth that prices for essentials — food, housing, utilities — remain meaningfully higher than they were a few years back. For voters in swing districts, that gap between national headlines and kitchen-table realities is where elections are won or lost.

Immigration, Anger, and the Theatre of Confrontation

When the speech shifted to immigration, the chamber became a ring. The language echoed the rhetoric that propelled the president’s candidacy: tough enforcement, stern rebukes of Democratic resistance, and the familiar refrain that undocumented migrants were tied to a wave of criminality. The declarations drew sharp responses from the minority party. Voices rose. Shouts crossed aisles. Emotions — raw and rehearsed — spilled into the open.

“You should be ashamed,” Mr. Trump thundered, directing criticism at Democrats who have pushed back against funding his Department of Homeland Security on his terms. Rep. Ilhan Omar, representing Minneapolis, yelled back that federal enforcement had “killed Americans” — a reference to high-profile incidents of agents using lethal force. The exchange became a microcosm of the wider national schism: policy debate folded into moral indictment.

“It felt like a boxing match,” said Jamal Turner, a teacher from Fairfax County who watched a local viewing party. “No one is listening — people are shouting their talking points at each other instead of dealing with the root issues. Meanwhile, folks at my school worry about kids who are food-insecure.”

Drama, Pageantry and the Politics of Symbolism

Trump’s State of the Union was as much about spectacle as it was about substance. He invited the men’s Olympic hockey team into the chamber, fresh from gold-medal celebrations — their skates a metaphorical flourish packed with patriotism. He announced a Presidential Medal of Freedom for the team’s goaltender, tying athletic triumph to national glory.

But the spectacle also included pointed moments of protest. Rep. Al Green was removed after waving a sign with a searing message; several Democrats chose to skip the speech for demonstrations outside; a group of Epstein accusers sat in the gallery, and some Democratic women wore tags demanding “release the files.” A Hawaii congresswoman’s white jacket, embroidered with words like “affordability” and “healthcare,” was a quiet rebuke — a sartorial protest stitched into the march of ceremony.

What Was Left Unsaid

Notably absent from the oratory were extended conversations about emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, which is reshaping labor markets and financial systems, and a lack of detail on China and long-simmering tensions with Iran — topics that many experts say deserve sober, forward-looking plans. The president briefly addressed Iran, warning against nuclearization while saying diplomacy was preferred; he offered no clear roadmap to avoid escalation.

“Global tensions and technological disruption are the moonshots of our era,” said Dr. Hannah Liu, a political economist. “A State of the Union that ignores AI policy and gives only broad strokes on foreign tensions is a missed opportunity to set a coherent national strategy.”

Why This Night Matters — And What It Might Mean for November

State of the Union speeches are part pep rally, part manifesto, part audition. This one read like a campaign event wrapped in ceremonial trappings: long, theatrical, and aimed at both calming supporters and shoring up votes. With control of Congress hanging in the balance — and with all 435 House seats and about a third of the Senate up in November — the message was unmistakable: projecting strength, claiming victories, and framing opponents as out of touch.

But projection isn’t the same as persuasion. The crowd outside — activists and everyday citizens — reminded everyone that politics is lived in streets and kitchens as much as in capital corridors. A state of the union should be a conversation; last night, for many, it felt like a monologue.

So where do we go from here? Can polished rhetoric turn the tide of household discontent, or will voters demand tangible relief? Will the next chapters be defined by compromise or confrontation? As you read this, consider: what do you most need your leaders to address in the months ahead — and how will you hold them to it?

Lines were drawn, voices were raised, and the television cameras kept rolling. The State of the Union ended. The questions it left behind — about prosperity, dignity, and who gets to claim victory in this country — are only beginning to be answered.

Flights Between Ireland and US Canceled After Northeast Blizzard

hanad

February 25, 2026

Irish flights cancelled after blizzard hits US northeast — Crews work to de-ice planes at LaGuardia Airport

When the Northeast Went Silent: A Storm That Stopped a Region

By dawn the city wore an unfamiliar hush. The usual honk of Manhattan taxis, the distant roar of commuter buses, the flurry of luggage carts at airport terminals — all muffled under a blanket of heavy white. Streets that were full of life the night before lay buried; front steps vanished, mailboxes became tiny periscopes, and tree branches bowed like bowing elders. For thousands of travelers, the morning began not with a gate announcement but with a text: your flight has been cancelled.

This was no ordinary snowfall. A Nor’easter swept the northeastern United States overnight, dumping more than two feet in parts of Rhode Island and nearly a foot and a half across stretches of New York City. Central Park recorded roughly 50cm (about 20 inches) of snow — the most at the city’s official reporting station in over a decade — while Rhode Island’s TF Green International Airport reported a staggering 83cm (about 33 inches). The storm’s sheer volume halted planes, trains and traffic, and plunged hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses into darkness as power lines succumbed to the weight.

Air Travel: A Patchwork Recovery

Airlines scrambled through the night and into the morning, issuing cancellations by the thousands and circulating tentative plans to get back in the air. Nine transatlantic flights to or from Dublin and one to Shannon were among those cancelled, impacting Irish travelers and transits that depend on tight connections.

“We’re working around the clock to restore schedules safely,” said an airline operations director who asked not to be named. “The physics of getting crews, aircraft and ground crews back in sync after a blizzard aren’t trivial — you can’t just flip a switch.”

The picture at the airports was uneven. New York’s trio of major airports — JFK, LaGuardia and Newark — and Boston Logan bore the brunt of the cancellations, while other carriers that have fewer flights tied to the Northeast fared slightly better. Southwest Airlines, for example, canceled about 7% of its network operations yesterday — a relatively light hit, in part because the carrier has less exposure in the hardest-hit corridor. By contrast, JetBlue cancelled roughly 80% of its flights for the day, a number reflected in FlightAware’s near-real-time tracking, while American, Delta and United each reported roughly a fifth of their departures grounded.

“Our plan is to start ramping up operations as conditions permit,” a Southwest spokesperson said. “Safety is our north star.” United and Delta released similar cautious notes: crews would be recalled, but travelers should expect delays even as operations resume.

Numbers That Matter

Central Park snowfall: ~50cm (about 20 inches)
TF Green (Rhode Island): ~83cm (about 33 inches)
JetBlue cancellations: ~80% of flights (about 1,600 cancellations through tomorrow, per FlightAware data)
American/Delta/United cancellations: ~20% each on the worst day
Southwest cancellations: ~7%
Power outages and business interruptions: hundreds of thousands affected across multiple states

On the Ground: People, Plows and Peril

Downshovel and downshift: that’s how the routine of the morning felt. Commuter rail was disrupted. Amtrak cancelled dozens of services between New York and Boston and on other northeast lines. State authorities in Rhode Island prolonged travel bans, and Massachusetts instituted restrictive measures for nonessential driving in some counties. Boston public schools stayed closed another day, extending an involuntary holiday for families that now balance snow piles with childcare and remote work.

“We woke up to an absolute whiteout,” said Maria Hernandez, who lives in a fourth-floor walk-up in Astoria. “My neighbor grabbed a shovel and we dug out the stoop together. Out here, the snow brings people together, even while it keeps them apart.”

On the highways, highway patrols issued stern warnings and checkpoints to enforce temporary bans on nonessential travel. “We don’t want to see cars stranded on the shoulder, creating needless rescues,” said a state trooper at a press briefing. “If it’s not essential, wait it out.”

Plow drivers — faces flushed from the cold, coffee steaming in disposable cups — became the unsung heroes of the morning. “You get real close to the city when it’s quiet like this,” said Dion Johnson, who has been running a municipal snow plow for 12 winters. “You feel every crackle. And you learn to watch for people who’ll try to clear a path and then get stuck. We’re here for them.”

Local Color: The Human Side of the Blizzard

There is a particular flavor to New England snowfall. At a diner in Providence, the coffee tasted deeper than usual, as if the roast itself had thickened to match the weather. In a small Irish pub near Dublin Airport, staff wiped down the bar and kept the lights on for stranded transatlantic passengers, offering Irish stew to anyone whose flight had been called off. In Boston neighborhoods, snow angels appeared in front yards like brief, joyful signatures — statements that said, we’re still here.

“When the roads close you notice what matters,” reflected Dr. Hannah Lee, a sociologist who studies urban resilience. “Communities come forward, networks of neighbors re-emerge. The storm is a stress test — and it’s teaching us about the fragility and the strength of our systems.”

Why It Matters Beyond the Headlines

Storms like this are not just weather events. They touch global supply chains, delay business travel and complicate the movement of people around the world. A cancelled flight to Dublin is more than an itinerary hiccup; it can be a missed surgery consultation, a delayed wedding, a business deal pushed into limbo. For the many hub airports in the Northeast, ripple effects will be felt internationally for days.

Climate scientists note that while a single storm cannot be declared the result of climate change, the frequency and intensity of heavy precipitation events have increased in many regions. “Warmer air holds more moisture,” said Dr. Priya Nair, a climatologist. “When storms tap into that moisture, there’s more fuel. It’s one reason cities in the Northeast are investing in better infrastructure and emergency planning.”

Practical Takeaways for Travelers and Residents

Check directly with your airline before traveling — cancellations are often updated faster than third-party sites.
Allow extra time (or choose not to travel) — roads and public transport may remain disrupted even after the snow stops.
Keep essentials with you: chargers, medications, water, and warm layers.
Be considerate of clearance crews — don’t park in snow emergency zones and clear sidewalks where safe to do so.

Looking Forward

By late morning many airlines had sketches of recovery plans: staggered restarts, pre-positioning crews, and the slow, careful reintegration of aircraft into service. But officials warned that operations would be measured, not meteoric. There is a human cost to rushing: fatigued crews, unsafe taxiways, and the chaos of cancelled connections.

So what should we take away from a morning when a storm could make a city pause? Perhaps this: our infrastructure remains vulnerable, our communities remain resourceful, and our travel plans — fragile as paper in a storm — can teach us to plan with humility. The snow will melt. Flights will resume. The bigger question is whether we will invest in systems that make those disruptions less frequent, less painful, and less unequal.

As the plows grind on and the last stranded travelers make their way to new planes, we are left with small, human scenes: a mother lifting a child over a snow drift, a barista handing off a thermos with a smile, a pilot muttering a weary laugh as ground crews wave them toward a cleared runway. The storm was loud enough to stop a region. But it also brought into relief what keeps cities moving: people, persistence, and, at the end of the day, cooperation.

Mandelson’s lawyers deny claim he left the country, call it baseless

hanad

February 25, 2026

Mandelson lawyers say claim on leaving country 'baseless' — The former Labour minister has been accused of passing sensitive information onto paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein during his time as business secretary

Sirens, Silence and Questions: A London Night That Pulled an Old Scandal Back into the Light

It began, like so many modern dramas, with an ordinary street and an extraordinary interruption: a police car, blue lights cutting through drizzle, a neighbour drawing back their curtain at 2am to see officers at the door of a terraced house in central London. By dawn, the name at the centre of the story—Peter Mandelson—was on everyone’s lips: the 72-year-old former cabinet minister had been arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office and subsequently released on bail.

The arrest, according to the peer’s lawyers, followed a “baseless” suggestion that he intended to leave the country permanently. “There is absolutely no truth whatsoever in any such suggestion,” said a statement supplied by his legal team, adding that Mr Mandelson has been cooperative with the inquiry and intends to clear his name. The Metropolitan Police, in brief early-morning communiqués, merely confirmed that a 72‑year‑old man had been detained and released on bail until the end of May.

Why Now? The Epstein Files and Old Emails

What lifted this arrest out of the ordinary was not simply the person arrested but the shadow that hangs over him: Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender whose web of connections has kept making headlines long after his death in 2019. Documents and emails dating back to 2009 and 2010—part of the so‑called Epstein files that continue to leak and be litigated—appear to show communications between Mr Mandelson and Epstein about policy matters. Messages allegedly touch on ideas that sound political and prosaic—asset sales, taxes on bankers’ bonuses, and an imminent euro bailout—but their destination and timing have reopened painful questions about influence, access, and judgment.

It’s worth remembering the context: Epstein was convicted in Florida in 2008 for soliciting sex with minors, and the revelations about his relationships with powerful people across the globe have spawned multiple investigations and civil suits. The arrival of these emails into the public sphere has forced a reckoning with how officials mix with wealthy outsiders and where lines are drawn between legitimate lobbying and misconduct.

“This isn’t just about one email or one friendship,”

said Dr. Emma Clarke, a UK-based expert on political ethics. “It’s about how power circulates. The public rightly asks: who has privileged access to decisions that affect millions?”

Voices from the Street: A Mix of Anger and Caution

On the pavement near Mr Mandelson’s home, reactions were mingled. A neighbour who asked not to be named described waking to a heavy knock and the hum of cameras. “You don’t expect it on your road,” she said. “He’s a person people either love or hate. But everyone deserves their day in court.”

A retired civil servant, who had once worked in the corridors of Whitehall and watched Mandelson’s rise, offered a different perspective. “This is the kind of moment that forces institutions to show their mettle,” he said. “Transparency now matters more than theatre.”

Government Documents, Political Pressure

The arrest does not appear to have derailed plans in Westminster to publish files related to Mr Mandelson’s appointment to a diplomatic or envoy role—documents the government has already pledged to release in the interest of transparency. A Cabinet minister flagged the government’s intention to make the documents public, while cautioning that anything that might compromise an active police investigation must be withheld.

At the same time, the issue has become a flashpoint inside Labour. Keir Starmer, who approved Mr Mandelson’s appointment, has faced criticism for appointing a peer with past links to Epstein; Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar publicly demanded Starmer’s resignation over the decision. The Prime Minister has said he was aware of the friendship; parliamentarians and the public now expect a fuller accounting, with the Cabinet Office’s due diligence report likely among the first wave of releases.

What the documents may reveal

Cabinet Office due diligence on the peer’s past associations and potential risks
Correspondence between Downing Street and Mr Mandelson about his suitability
Internal questions and answers that the prime minister put to the peer before approving any role

Some sensitive correspondence, senior officials have implied, may be withheld until legal proceedings conclude—if indeed they do. That has stoked suspicion and frustration from those who believe full transparency should be immediate.

Law, Politics and the Burden of Proof

Legal commentators stress that arrest is not guilt. “In a functioning democracy, the presumption of innocence remains crucial,” said Sylvie Martin, a criminal law academic. “An arrest triggers public attention, yes, but it also triggers due process.”

Yet the social and political cost of proximity to Epstein is already high. Public trust in institutions—government, the media, the judiciary—has been frayed by decades of scandals. According to recent polling, confidence in politicians in the UK remains low, with only a slim plurality saying they trust political leaders to act in the public interest. Moments like this, where celebrity, wealth and politics collide, test how resilient civic institutions are at holding powerful people to account.

Beyond One Man: Broader Questions of Power and Accountability

What should we, as a public, demand from our leaders? Is it enough that due process runs its course, or should institutions proactively close off routes of undue influence? The Mandelson arrest—interesting, shocking, and legally technical—invites a broader conversation about governance in an interconnected age, where emails and meetings can ripple into geopolitical consequences.

“We live in a world where private jet manifests, emails, and social calendars can determine who gets to influence policy,” Dr. Clarke observed. “That should make us all a little more vigilant.”

Where Things Stand—and What to Watch

For now, Mr Mandelson has been bailed until the end of May. The Metropolitan Police will continue their enquiries; the government will move forward cautiously with document releases; and politicians will trade statements and demands. The archive of the Epstein files will continue to yield surprises, each new leak or release testing public appetite for answers.

As the days unfold, consider this: do we want secrecy clothed in the language of diplomacy, or a system that balances confidentiality with accountability? How do we ensure that the corridors of power are not simply echo chambers for those with the means to buy influence?

We will return to these questions. In the meantime, the drizzle has stopped, the police lights have faded, and a city that thrives on forgetting has been asked, once more, to remember—and to judge how it wants to be governed.

Live updates: Calls for Russia to accept ceasefire agreement

hanad

February 25, 2026

As it happened: Russia urged to agree to ceasefire

When the World Says “Enough”: The Urgent Push for a Ceasefire in Ukraine

The morning air in a small eastern Ukrainian town tastes of diesel and memory. A woman stands on the cracked pavement of what used to be the market square, clutching a faded sunflower-seed packet she kept through last winter. Behind her, a community centre patched with blue tarpaulin is now a makeshift hub for food distribution and injured smiles. Around the world, diplomats are urging a single, simple thing: Russia must agree to a ceasefire. But “simple” is a dangerous word when lives, histories, and geopolitics are tangled so tightly.

On the ground, the plea is human

“We don’t want speeches,” says Olena, 34, her voice low with a mixture of hope and exhaustion. “We want our children to run in fields again without the roar of something overhead. You can’t trade that back once it’s gone.”

Her words cut through diplomatic jargon and the official communiqués that populate global news feeds. They turn abstract numbers into something immediate: a son’s crooked front tooth, a grandmother’s paper-thin hands, a kettle that whistles in an empty apartment. This is the human face of why the international community keeps pressing for an immediate halt to hostilities.

Calls from capitals and corridors of power

From the polished halls of the United Nations to the echoing rooms of European capitals, the message has been consistent: the fighting must stop. Western leaders, humanitarian organizations, and some neutral states have all urged Russia to agree to a ceasefire—often framing it as the only feasible way to open safe corridors, evacuate civilians, and allow aid convoys to reach hospitals and shelters.

“A cessation of hostilities is the only immediate remedy to prevent further civilian suffering,” says a senior humanitarian official who has been on rotation in Ukraine and asked not to be named. “We can deliver medicine, food, and hope—if only the guns fall silent for a little while.”

Behind those public appeals are practical numbers: humanitarian agencies report that millions have been forced from their homes, hundreds of thousands are in need of urgent medical care, and critical infrastructure—water plants, power stations, hospitals—has been damaged at a scale that will take years and billions of dollars to repair.

The logistics of silence

At first glance, calling for a ceasefire seems straightforward. In practice, it requires an alignment of incentives, credible monitoring, and guarantees that neither side will use a pause to regroup offensively. That’s why ceasefires often unravel: mistrust sits at the core.

“Ceasefires are less about words and more about the layers you put around them,” explains Dr. Marcus Ellison, a conflict specialist who has advised peace processes across Europe and the Middle East. “Verification mechanisms, third-party observers, clearly marked humanitarian corridors—these are the scaffolding that make silence sustainable. Without them, a ceasefire is a fragile, symbolic thing.”

And in this conflict, there’s another complicating factor: the global ripple effects. Grain shipments blocked from Ukrainian ports have pushed food prices upward in markets as distant as North Africa and the Middle East. Energy volatility tightened supply lines in the winter months. A ceasefire in Ukraine has implications far beyond its borders—an argument humanitarian agencies use to underscore why a pause matters to everyone.

Voices across the divide

Not all voices are aligned. In a crowded café outside Moscow, a factory worker—who preferred anonymity—told me, “We feel cut off from our reality. We don’t see this whole picture the same way as people on the border. We get bits on the news, and then our own losses.”

Meanwhile, local mayors in Ukrainian towns, hands still warm from holding hot tea for evacuees, speak of something more immediate than political calculus. “A ceasefire is not surrender,” Mayor Petro Koval said. “It is a chance to count our dead with dignity, to heal wounds, to rebuild schools. We want peace with respect, not just silence.”

What a ceasefire could look and feel like

Imagine a morning without artillery: shopfronts opening, an elderly man sweeping the pavement in front of the bakery, a child scuffing a soccer ball down the street. A ceasefire could let aid workers reach trapped families; it could allow engineers to repair the fragile electricity grid and pulp out water contamination alarms. It could reopen lines of communication—literal and figurative—between communities torn apart.

Here are immediate practical steps often suggested by experts:

Establishment of internationally monitored humanitarian corridors;
Temporary truce zones around hospitals and schools;
Independent verification teams with open access to frontline areas;
Short-term prisoner exchanges and evacuation windows for civilians.

These measures sound bureaucratic, but for people like Olena, they are lifelines. “If they allow even two hours a day for people to collect medicine,” she says, “that changes things.”

The risks of delay—and the stakes for the world

Every day the guns remain active, the cost compounds. Infrastructure decays. Schools remain closed. Psychological scars deepen in children who count the seconds between sirens. Global markets watch and react, markets that are already fragile after pandemic shocks and inflationary pressures.

There’s also a geopolitical calculus that makes some states hesitant to endorse—or help enforce—a ceasefire unilaterally. They worry about legitimacy, about whether a pause will freeze territorial gains, or whether it will create a lull that encourages further aggression behind the scenes.

“We must acknowledge that peace is not merely the absence of war,” Dr. Ellison cautions. “It requires justice, accountability, and a long-term political process. But a ceasefire is an essential first act—without it, there is no audience for negotiation.”

How you can feel involved

What does a global citizen do when distant wars feel abstract? Start small. Donate through trusted humanitarian groups. Follow reporting from journalists on the ground. Write to elected officials and ask them how their policies support humanitarian corridors and diplomatic engagement.

Ask yourself: when a war is played out in headlines, what responsibilities do we carry as readers, voters, and neighbors of a shared planet? Silence is its own kind of consent. Speaking up for a ceasefire—especially a just and verifiable one—is a way to refuse that consent.

Conclusion: The fragile art of hoping

Hope looks different in each person’s eyes. For a mother in a bombed-out flat, it is a promise that her child will sleep through the night without being woken by a helicopter. For diplomats in Geneva, it is the slim possibility of a negotiated pause. For the baker in a provincial town, it is the return of regular customers and the smell of fresh loaves.

“We are tired,” Olena tells me as she folds the sunflower packet into her coat. “But if a ceasefire gives us even a chance to breathe, to decide, to choose—then we will try.”

That, perhaps, is the most human argument of all: peace is not merely the absence of bombs. It is the chance to rebuild ordinary life—and ordinary life is, in the end, worth arguing for with everything we have.

US TV Host Offers $1 Million Reward for Kidnapping Information

hanad

February 25, 2026

US TV host offers $1m reward for information on abduction — Savannah Guthrie and her mother Nancy pictured in 2023

A Desert House and a Vanished Mother: The Guthrie Family’s Plea for Answers

When the sun slides behind the saguaros of Tucson, the light in that part of the city takes on a copper hush. It’s the kind of evening where porch lights throw long shadows and people slow down enough to notice the ordinary things: a newspaper on a stoop, a neighbor’s dog padding by, a motion-activated camera blinking to life. It’s also the kind of evening when an absence becomes deafening.

For Savannah Guthrie, the absence is literal and terrible. Her mother, 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie, was last seen at her Tucson home on 1 February. Twenty-four days later, the Guthrie family has turned private grief into a public plea: a family reward of up to $1 million for any information that leads to her recovery.

“We know that she may be lost,” Savannah wrote in a wrenching Instagram post that felt like watching a family’s center of gravity tilt. “She may already be gone.” Then, as if not to leave the sentence hanging in the dark, she added: “Someone out there knows something that can bring her home. Somebody knows.”

A frantic investigation, public clues

The disappearance has drawn federal attention. The FBI released doorbell-camera video this month showing a masked person approaching Nancy Guthrie’s home on the night she vanished. The clip—grainy, anonymous, haunting—became a focus for armchair detectives and seasoned investigators alike. The FBI is now offering a $100,000 reward for information that leads to Nancy’s location or to the arrest of those responsible.

“We released the footage because we believe someone will recognize the gait, the clothing, or a vehicle,” said an FBI spokesperson in a statement to reporters. “Even small details can change the trajectory of an investigation.”

Local law enforcement has been careful with details. Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos publicly ruled out any family involvement. “We have thoroughly investigated the family and can say they are not suspects in this case,” he told a press gathering last week. Beyond that, leads have been scarce and the suspect—if there was one—remains unidentified.

Community ripples: vigils, doorbell footage, and the social feeding of fear

In the neighborhoods around Nancy Guthrie’s home, people talk in the measured tones of those trying not to let panic settle in their throats. A neighbor who asked to be called Maria said she’d seen the family sitting on the curb outside the house hours after the police tape came down.

“They hugged each other like you don’t see on TV,” Maria said. “You could tell they were trying to hold themselves together. I brought over coffee. You do what you can.”

Small, candlelit vigils have gathered outside the house. Strangers leave notes and quilts on the porch rail—paraphernalia of hope in the age of online grief. Tucson, a city as much defined by its desert plants as by its patchwork of cultures—Indigenous, Hispanic, Anglo—has shown up in ways both public and quiet.

“This is our town,” said Luis Ortega, who runs a bakery two blocks away. “It doesn’t matter who you are; if someone disappears, we feel it. You hear the sirens and you think, ‘That could be my mom, my sister.’”

Why rewards, and do they work?

The Guthries’ decision to put up to $1 million on the table is dramatic—but not unprecedented. Families often turn to rewards when traditional investigative channels stall. The FBI’s own $100,000 reward, meanwhile, is part of a formal toolset that federal agents use to incentivize tips. But experts caution that rewards are not a magic wand.

“Rewards can bring in useful leads, but they also bring noise,” said Dr. Elaine Harper, a criminologist who studies missing-persons investigations. “You get people who want a payday, or who misremember what they saw. That means investigators have to sift through a lot of information quickly—time they might otherwise spend following up on solid leads.”

Still, there’s empirical precedent. High-profile rewards have sometimes broken cases or at least moved investigations forward. In other instances, the publicity creates a pressure valve that leads to new witnesses coming forward, even if the tip doesn’t directly solve the case.

Older adults, vulnerability, and broader patterns

Cases like Nancy Guthrie’s raise uncomfortable questions about how societies care for and protect older adults. While most missing-person reports are resolved quickly—many involve runaways or misunderstandings—older adults present a different profile. Age-related cognitive issues, mobility limitations, and isolation can increase vulnerability.

“We see that older adults can become targets precisely because they’re perceived as less able to defend themselves, or because they may be disoriented,” Dr. Harper said. “The best prevention is a web of social supports—neighbors who check in, technology used responsibly, and community programs that reduce isolation.”

In Tucson, cultural rhythms and family structures often create such webs, but not always. As the city expands and demographics shift, those informal safety nets can fray.

What you can do: noticing, reporting, and empathy

The Guthrie case is, at heart, a neighborhood story writ large: a family’s raw grief intersecting with law enforcement, media scrutiny, and a community’s attempt at consolation. If you’re reading this and you live near Tucson, or if you saw the doorbell footage when it circulated online, here are tangible steps you can take:

Report anything, even small details, to the FBI tip line. Minor details—what someone was wearing, the time they passed—can be crucial.
Look after older neighbors. A knock on the door, a quick check-in, a note left on the porch—all build resilience.
Resist the urge to speculate on social media. False narratives can harm investigations and wound families.

“When something like this happens, people want to help,” Maria said. “Sometimes the best help is quiet—call the number, don’t spread rumors, and keep an eye out.”

Closure, for a family and for a community

There is a strange cruelty in public grief: the world watches, offers condolences, and then moves on. For the Guthrie family, moving on is impossible until they know what happened to Nancy. “We need her to come home. For that reason, we are offering a family reward of up to $1m for any information that leads us to her recovery,” Savannah wrote, voice breaking across screens and paper.

How do we live with these unsolved spaces in our lives? How do communities balance vigilance with compassion? These aren’t rhetorical questions so much as calls to action: to notice, to check in, to be the kind of neighbor who sees when someone’s light goes out.

If you have information about Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance, the FBI and local police urge you to come forward. For a family watching the days go by, every call is a lifeline; every detail could be the one that restores a mother to her home, or a family to a quieter, terrible kind of peace—the peace that comes with knowing, at last.

UN Secretary-General: Ukraine war a ‘moral stain on our conscience’

hanad

February 24, 2026

Ukraine war 'stain on our conscience', says UN chief — A couple embrace in front of a makeshift memorial for Ukrainian and foreign soldiers in Independence Square, Kyiv

Four Years of War: Kyiv’s Candles, the UN’s Alarm, and the World Between Hope and Exhaustion

On a wind-scrubbed morning in Kyiv, candles winked like tiny defiant stars across Independence Square. Men in fatigues sat beside ordinary families, and an old woman traced the names carved into a new memorial with the same gentle reverence you might use on a family photograph.

It has been four years since Russia’s full-scale invasion reshaped lives, borders and the language we use to talk about security in Europe. The United Nations marked the anniversary with an urgent, unmistakable rebuke: this war remains “a stain on our collective conscience,” Secretary‑General António Guterres warned, pressing for an immediate ceasefire and a return to diplomacy before more lives are lost.

The human ledger

Numbers cannot hold the whole story, but they offer a ledger of loss. At the UN Security Council session convened for the anniversary, officials cited more than 15,000 civilian deaths and upwards of 41,000 injuries since the invasion began, with roughly 3,200 of the killed or wounded being children. These are figures that do not include the quiet violence of shattered routines—schools without classrooms, hospitals with corridors too quiet or too full, harvests lost and futures deferred.

“Every number is a person,” said Rosemary DiCarlo, the UN under‑secretary general who read Mr Guterres’ remarks on his behalf. “Every life cut short, every child whose laughter is now a memory—these are the human costs no calculation should normalize.”

Outside, at the People’s Memorial of National Remembrance, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and First Lady Olena Zelenska laid candles with foreign dignitaries and servicemen. They moved among the plaques in a small, deliberate procession that felt less like a ceremony and more like a promise: remember, resist, rebuild.

“Nuclear roulette” and the real dangers on the horizon

Perhaps the sharpest chord in the UN’s message was a warning about the risks to nuclear sites in Ukraine. “This unconscionable game of nuclear roulette must cease immediately,” Guterres declared, a phrase that hung in the chamber like an electric charge.

Even for people far from Kyiv, the image is unnerving—missiles arcing close to facilities that house reactors, spent fuel, or waste. Nuclear safety is not a regional issue; it is a global one. A single misstep could ripple beyond borders, contaminating air, soil and food chains for generations.

On the ground: small moments, large burdens

In a small café a few blocks from the square, where a radiator hissed and a cat slept on a windowsill, I spoke to Oksana, a kindergarten teacher who has volunteered to run free classes for children displaced within the city.

“We teach them to draw the sun again,” she said, smiling through a fatigue that has lines around it like old maps. “Some of them haven’t seen a sunny day in their hearts for years.”

A soldier who asked only to be called Dmytro paused, tracing the seam of his glove. “My brother’s wedding was postponed three times,” he told me. “We are disciplined, we are stubborn. But every day away is another child without a father at the table.”

Zelensky’s plea to Europe: accession, loans, and security guarantees

Speaking via video to the European Parliament on the anniversary, President Zelensky put the moment plainly: Ukraine needs not just sympathy but structure—membership clarity from the EU, economic backing, and clear post‑war security guarantees.

“If there is no date, then President Putin will find a way to block Ukraine for decades by dividing Europe,” Zelensky warned. He pressed the bloc to implement the most recent €90 billion package pledged to Kyiv and urged tougher sanctions on Russian oil and the designation of those who direct Moscow’s war among the sanctioned.

“There must be no place in the free world for Russian oil,” he said, a line meant for both halls of power and skeptical voters across Europe who worry about energy bills and inflation.

What does a security guarantee really mean?

One of the thorniest debates now is what credible security guarantees for Ukraine could look like. Washington has hinted at — but not fully laid out — post‑war guarantees that would deter future aggression. For Kyiv, those assurances need to be tangible: military support, automatic sanctions triggers, or treaty‑like commitments that bind allies to act. For partners, the cost and strategic implications loom large.

“It’s not enough to promise sympathy,” said Dr. Elena Markova, a security analyst who has followed Eastern European conflicts for two decades. “Mechanisms are what matter—deterrence, verification, and a political will to enforce consequences. Words without structures are a recipe for relapse.”

Broader ripples: migration, sanctions, and a shifting world order

Zelensky also linked past and present conflicts—pointing to Russian military support for Syria as part of what he described as a chain of interventions that helped fuel migration pressures on Europe. Whether one accepts that entire causal chain or not, his argument highlights a harder truth: regional conflicts can cascade, creating waves of displacement, economic strain, and political friction across continents.

Meanwhile, sanctions remain a blunt but potent tool. The EU and other allies have stacked punitive measures on Moscow, but debates persist about scope, enforcement and unintended consequences—especially when global energy markets and fragile supply chains are involved.

EU loan package to Ukraine: €90 billion (recently pledged)
UN civilian toll cited at the Security Council: 15,000+ killed, 41,000+ injured, including 3,200 children
Four years since the invasion began: Feb 24, 2022–Feb 24, 2026

What the world is being asked to do

Guterres and Zelensky both offered a simple yet heavy prescription: de‑escalate, fund humanitarian relief, and negotiate a peace that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty. The language is straightforward. The politics are not.

“Enough with the death. Enough with the destruction,” Guterres said. “It is time for an immediate, full and unconditional ceasefire—the first step toward a just peace that saves lives and ends the endless suffering.”

But how do you get to that ceasefire? Through diplomacy backed by clear incentives and deterrents, some argue. Through continued military and humanitarian support to Ukraine, others insist. Through a combination of both, many believe is the only realistic path.

Questions for readers

What does responsibility look like for countries far from the front lines? Do moral imperatives trump pragmatic concerns about cost and political risk? And, perhaps most urgently—how do we keep the global community engaged without letting compassion curdle into fatigue?

These are not abstract queries. They are the pulse checks a world reliant on order must ask when that order cracks. The candles in Kyiv will keep being lit, one by one. The question for the rest of us is whether we will see those lights as call to action—or allow them to be another mournful routine in an ever‑lengthening ledger of wars.

“We keep remembering because if we forget, we repeat,” a volunteer named Pavlo told me as he adjusted a line of votive candles. “We keep fighting because if we stop, someone else will start again.”

And so the anniversary passes: part vigil, part political contest, and entirely human. The choices made in the coming months—over loans, accession timetables, and the shape of post‑war guarantees—may not bring back those who are gone. But they will shape whether the next generation grows up in a neighborhood lit by safety or by the glow of warning lights.

Trump threatens steeper trade tariffs against countries that “play games”

hanad

February 24, 2026

Trump raises global tariff rate on US imports to 15% — Donald Trump said the 15% global tariff will be effective immediately

When a Court Rattles the Shipping Crates: How One Ruling Has Restarted a Global Tariff Drama

There are moments when a single sentence from a court can make cranes pause at the port, traders fumble with purchase orders and kitchen tables across continents replay last season’s supplier invoices. Last week one such sentence arrived in Washington: the US Supreme Court said the president could not use a 1977 emergency law to impose sweeping import tariffs. The decision upended the legal basis for a signature trade tool—but what followed was anything but calm.

Within hours, the man who had wielded those tariffs as a centerpiece of economic policy fired back. In a string of posts on his platform, he warned trading partners that if they tried to exploit the court’s ruling, they would face “much higher” levies. He even floated the possibility of new license fees on imports, an idea that confounded trade lawyers and left export-dependent businesses scrambling for clarity.

From Courtroom to Global Market: The Shock Ripple

The immediate effect was disorienting. European lawmakers, prepared to ratify a delicate deal that would ease duties on many US industrial goods, abruptly decided to pause. In Brussels, negotiators called an emergency meeting to assess what, exactly, the United States intends to do next—and how any new moves square with the agreement reached only months earlier.

“We can’t move forward until we know the ground rules,” said one EU trade official, in a voice that mixed irritation and genuine surprise. “This is not just diplomatic theatre. Thousands of firms—manufacturers, cheesemakers, aircraft suppliers—need predictability.”

The deal in question, struck in July last year, was already a political tightrope: Washington agreed to a 15% tariff on most European goods, while carving out exemptions for sensitive products such as certain foods, aircraft parts, critical minerals and pharmaceutical inputs. In return, the EU was to lift duties on a swath of American industrial goods. Now, a Supreme Court rebuke of the president’s legal route has thrown the choreography into disarray.

What the President Said — and What He Didn’t

Rather than retreat, the president signaled he would shift tactics. “The court’s ruling prevents that particular law from being used,” he wrote, “but it does not negate our ability to protect American industry under other, stronger statutes.” He then warned that countries “playing games” would be met with higher tariffs—and that “buyer beware” should be their motto.

That rhetoric has real teeth: the administration announced a new temporary 15% global duty on many imports, to take effect immediately with limited exemptions. Officials say the levy will expire in 150 days unless Congress intervenes—an intentionally short fuse that has importers scrambling to reprice contracts and reroute shipments.

“We are in survival mode,” said Ana Costa, owner of a small Portuguese textile company that exports to the US. “My clients are asking if deliveries are going to cost 15% more overnight. I cannot just palm that off on them. We need clear rules or we will lose business.”

License Fees, Legal Routes and a Cloud of Uncertainty

Trade lawyers cautioned that the president’s hint about “license fees” on trading partners is unusual, and painfully vague. “The administration is signaling it has other legal levers,” said a trade attorney in New York. “But until the White House or US Trade Representative’s office shows the statutory text and the exemption list, firms are left reading tea leaves.”

Even European Commission spokespeople have been measured. “We will make a mature assessment,” said one Brussels official, “but we need to know precisely what the US intends to do and under what legal authority.” That is not a bureaucrat’s delay—it is a recognition that tariff law and international agreements are technical, and actions taken in haste can ripple badly through supply chains.

On the Ground: Farmers, Factories and Freight

At the Port of Rotterdam, a container terminal manager described the atmosphere as “tense, almost surreal.” Haulers are rerouting containers, importers are delaying orders, and storage yards are filling up as firms wait for certainty.

In Iowa, a corn farmer who ships to European markets worried about retaliatory measures. “My margins are thin,” he said. “Any tariff that makes American grain more expensive abroad is my problem. Politics shouldn’t decide my harvest’s fate.”

Meanwhile, a small electronics assembler in Shenzhen—who relies on American components—saw the developments through a different lens. “We don’t want more tariffs anywhere,” she said. “Higher costs would be passed to consumers. In the long run, trade uncertainty destroys innovation.”

China, Brussels and the Wider World

China reacted predictably: Beijing urged Washington to roll back unilateral levies and warned that there are no winners in trade wars. That statement matters, because the president is due to visit China soon—a trip that now carries a heavier diplomatic load. If talks are to reduce tariffs and thaw tensions, negotiators will need to do so against a backdrop of legal uncertainty at home and political grandstanding abroad.

For the European Union, the choice is knotty. Do legislators move forward with the July deal—which included mutual easing of duties—or press pause until the US clarifies its approach? For many in Brussels, the safe play is the latter.

Why This Matters Beyond Tariff Rates

This episode is not just bureaucratic wrangling. It is a reflection of larger trends in the global economy: the retreat from predictable rules, the rise of unilateral economic instruments, and the fragility of supply chains that were designed for efficiency, not for rapid policy whiplash.

Ask yourself: how valuable is predictability to global trade? How do small businesses hedge against political swings in capitals they can’t influence? Those are not academic questions; they determine whether factories stay open, whether shelves are stocked, and whether wage bills can be paid.

Short-term pain: importers and exporters must adjust or pause operations under temporary 15% levies that expire in 150 days unless Congress acts.
Legal pivot: the president claims alternate statutory authority for tariffs and hinted at license fees; the details are still pending.
Diplomatic standoff: the EU delayed a parliamentary vote pending clarity; China called for rollback and warned against protectionism.

What Comes Next?

The next days and weeks will reveal whether this is high-stakes brinkmanship or the start of a new, more protean era of US trade policy. Congress could offer clarity by extending or rejecting the temporary duties. Trade negotiators from the EU and US will speak, and markets will watch for where legal arguments land.

For the people whose livelihoods depend on predictable cross-border flows—factory managers, port workers, farmers, and small exporters—this episode is a reminder: globalization is not only a market force; it is a political project vulnerable to the vagaries of law and leadership.

So, what would you do if a sudden tariff change altered the price of making or buying your next meal or product? In a world where politics and pallets collide, that question has become everyone’s business.

1...404142...306 Page 41 of 306