SIR Lewis Hamilton has taken his relationship with Kim Kardashian up a gear — going Instagram official.

The Formula 1 great took his girlfriend for a spin in a Ferrari in Tokyo and shared a video of it on social media.

It showed the reality star grinning in the passenger seat.

After drifting down a road and spinning, he brought the car to a stop and Kim, said: “That’s insane.”

She flew out to Asia to be with him at the end of last month for the Japanese Grand Prix, but did not attend the race itself.

The Sun first told in February how Brit Lewis, 41, had struck up a romance with The Kardashians star, 45, with the couple spending a weekend at Estelle Manor in the Cotswolds.

READ MORE ON KIM KARDASHIAN

Beauty buzz

Olivia Attwood copies Kim Kardashian as she undergoes stem cell treatment

KARD TO BELIEVE

I know exactly why fans are outraged by Lewis Hamilton’s romance with Kim

They have since been seen together in Paris and the US, but this is the first time either has publicly posted about the other on social media.

Kim, who was four kids with disgraced rapper Kanye West, 48 — who she was married to from 2014 to 2022 — said last October she could not imagine herself dating another famous man.

She told a podcast that the person “would have to be someone super- special” for her to start another relationship.

Kim explained: “I don’t know if I have the energy or whether I’ve met the right person that I would want to blend my family with.”

On whether she might date another musician or athlete, she added: “Neither. We’re going, like, lawyers and longevity scientists who would give me all their secrets.”

After splitting from Kanye, she dated comedian Pete Davidson and then NFL player Odell Beckham Jr until things fizzled out in April 2024.

Lewis has not had a serious relationship since he split from Pussycat Dolls singer Nicole Scherzinger in 2015 after almost eight years.

The driver is currently fourth in the F1 standings behind his team-mate Charles Leclerc — and hit out at those who criticised his recent performances.

Seven-time champ Lewis said: “When you have difficult years, there are lots of questions.

“It felt great to come into this season and start off strong, to be able to show that I still have what it takes to be able to compete at the front.”

WASHINGTON — U.S. intelligence agencies are “urgently warning” private sector companies throughout the nation that Iranian actors “are conducting exploitation activity” that has resulted in “disruptions across several U.S. critical infrastructure,” according to a government notice reviewed by The Times.

The Iranian cyberactivity comes as President Trump is threatening to target Iran’s critical infrastructure in the coming hours, particularly its bridges and power plants.

Iran’s attack targeted products by Rockwell Automation’s Allen-Bradley, one of the most widely used industrial automation brands, according to the notice, which said that cyber actors affiliated with Iran were exploiting “programmable logic controllers across U.S. critical infrastructure.”

Tehran’s targeting campaigns against U.S. organizations “have recently escalated, likely in response to hostilities between Iran,” the notice warned.

“Iran-affiliated advanced persistent threat (APT) actors are conducting exploitation activity targeting internet-facing operational technology (OT) devices, including programmable logic controllers (PLCs) manufactured by Rockwell Automation/Allen-Bradley,” the notice reads.

“U.S. organizations should urgently review the tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) and indicators of compromise (IOCs) in this advisory for indications of current or historical activity on their networks,” it continues.

The advisory was issued Tuesday jointly by the FBI, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the National Security Agency, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and Cyber Command.

Top executives from companies at the core of the nation’s ability to function — those leading America’s largest energy, water, transportation, and communications corporations — had already been taking it upon themselves to increase their vigilence over potential attacks, concerned that Trump’s willingness to target Iran’s critical infrastructure inadvertently put a mark on their backs.

Some fear Iran’s ability to conduct cyber operations that could take down transformers or power inverters, if not a wide-scale power system. Others are concerned by threats to brick and mortar sites from proxies of Tehran — physical attacks against facilities such as nuclear plants, or power management systems, the crown jewels of the sector.

Larger, even more capable actors, particularly Russia and China, may also take advantage of the fog of war to launch strikes themselves.

“There remains concern about Iranian cyber capabilities and retaliation if the U.S. carries through on threats to attack their infrastructure,” said Ernest Moniz, former U.S. secretary of energy under President Obama who helped negotiate the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran. “There may already be backdoors, Trojan horses and malware hidden in our infrastructure.”

“I have to believe that the government cyber experts — or what’s left of them — are working closely and indeed overtime with the power companies and other infrastructure operators on cyber defense and intrusion detection and warning,” Moniz added.

Iran has demonstrated an ability to penetrate networks tied to critical U.S. infrastructure before.

In 2015, Iran-backed hackers accessed data associated with Calpine Corp., one of California’s largest power producers, obtaining detailed engineering diagrams and credentials related to power plant systems. Some were labeled “mission critical.” U.S. officials feared at the time that the breach would allow Tehran to initiate blackouts nationwide.

Since that time, companies at the center of the U.S. energy and telecommunications sectors have markedly improved their defenses. But Iran’s offensive capabilities have improved, as well.

Large players in the energy sector are operating with “a watchful eye and an elevated posture right now,” said Pedro J. Pizarro, president and chief executive officer of Edison International, the parent company of Southern California Edison, one of the nation’s largest electric utilities.

Companies like Edison have been operating under persistent threat for over a decade. In 2024, a pair of devastating cyberespionage attacks targeting U.S. critical infrastructure attributed to Chinese hackers, Volt Typhoon and Salt Typhoon, were discovered after avoiding detection for at least three years.

The threat of a similarly latent attack — where malware lies dormant in critical infrastructure systems, waiting for a signal to activate — is a real cause for concern in the sector, despite its best efforts and technological advances, experts and insiders said.

“The threat of cyber and physical attacks targeting critical infrastructure is not new,” said Jennifer DeCesaro, senior vice president of industry operations at the Edison Electric Institute, “which is why we partner with the government through the Electricity Subsector Coordinating Council to share actionable intelligence and prepare to respond to incidents that could affect our ability to provide electricity safely and reliably.”

The ESCC works closely with the National Security Council and its intelligence arms, particularly the intelligence agencies and CISA, to coordinate regular briefings on safety standards, best practices and intelligence tips.

The CIA declined to comment. A spokesperson with CISA, listed as out of office due to the ongoing federal funding hiatus for the Department of Homeland Security, could not be reached for comment.

Last summer, announcing a 40% cut to the workforce of her office, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard eliminated the Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center, previously seen as a critical fusion hub of information by private sector partners.

Asked to respond to the potential of retaliatory attacks against U.S. infrastructure, Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, repeated the president’s threats.

“The Iranian regime has until 8PM Eastern Time to meet the moment and make a deal with the United States,” she said. “Only the president knows where things stand and what he will do.”

Trump has threatened to destroy every bridge and power plant in Tehran if they fail to come to an agreement that ends its control over the Strait of Hormuz.

Ultimately, corporate executives shoulder much of the burden as the first line of defense for the country’s critical infrastructure, roughly 85% of which is owned by private sector companies.

Tom Fanning, former CEO of Southern Co. and now executive committee chairman at the Alliance for Critical Infrastructure, said the threat from Iran is “credible.”

“I have not seen what I would describe as the existential threat, to take down a wide-ranging power system,” Fanning said. “Could those things be turned on? Sure. Is the United States critical infrastructure prepared to act? I think so.”

Last month, early on in the war, the Los Angeles Metro transit system was forced to shut down a portion of its network due to a hack. Authorities say it is still unclear who was behind the breach, but a source told The Times that Iran-backed hackers are being investigated as the potential culprit.

The transportation agency said its security team had “discovered unauthorized activity,” and were making sure its roughly 1,400 servers were secure before bringing them back online. The agency has emphasized the hack did not impact passengers’ commute time.

The FBI said it was aware of the hack. DHS is working with local partners “to address cyber threats to critical infrastructure,” an official said.

“The reality is that the threats are here and now,” Fanning added. “The truth is, the bad guys are already here.”

Times staff writers Kevin Rector, Richard Winton and Rebecca Ellis, in Los Angeles, contributed to this report.

Scotland supporters will be hoping that the prices for their games against Haiti and Morocco will come down.

But the final group game against Brazil is likely to be in high demand.

Like England, Scotland are expected to have a high number of travelling fans who will look to secure tickets late.

For now, the price of the 2,937 tickets listed is broadly in line with the England matches.

The cheapest resale ticket is for the first match against Haiti in Boston. A $400 (£304) ticket is listed for a total resale cost of $690 (£524).

Again, the category four tickets are hugely inflated. Only one is available, with an asking price of $2,875 ($2,185) from an original price of $70 (£53).

Morocco is slightly more expensive, with a category two ticket priced at $805 (£612) from a face value of $430 (£327).

The resale prices for the Brazil fixture in Miami are eye-watering.

The cheapest available is in category three and has an asking price of $1,150 (£874), when it cost just $310 (£236) at the ballot stage.

For category one, the lowest listed is at $2,253 (£1,713) from a face value of $700 (£532).

The price of one ticket goes as high as £143,750 (£109,250).

Tehran, Iran – The head of Iran’s top science and engineering university believes that the United States and Israel are targeting symbols of Iran’s progress as a nation, and not merely hitting the governing establishment.

The Sharif University of Technology in Tehran was bombed on Monday, destroying and damaging multiple buildings, including what was described by the authorities as an artificial intelligence centre housing critical databases. The university’s website and other online services went dark.

“We believe the reason the enemy targeted these buildings and destroyed the entire infrastructure is that it did not want us to achieve AI technology,” university President Masoud Tajrishi said, adding that the higher education facility had been working on training AI models in Persian for two years and provided services to hundreds of companies.

“The enemy does not want us to succeed or have development and progress, but all our universities are united now by these attacks,” he said at the site of the bombing on Tuesday. Minutes later, another attack targeted the capital, with low-flying cruise missiles visible over downtown Tehran and air defence guns activated.

Tajrishi also said that no country had been prepared to provide Iran with the knowledge and know-how to work on AI technology due to US sanctions and competitive advantages, so all of the research was done domestically.

The US and Israel have not provided an official reason for targeting Iran’s main higher education hubs or cultural heritage sites, which are considered civilian infrastructure. No casualties were reported inside Sharif since all school and university classes are being taken online, but more than 2,000 people have been killed during the war.

The strike on the top university, which was founded six decades ago, came after a string of similar air raids targeting research centres inside other prominent facilities, including the century-old Pasteur Institute, a photonics lab at Shahid Beheshti University and a satellite development lab at the Science and Technology University.

More than 30 universities have been affected by US and Israeli attacks since the start of the war on February 28, Iran’s minister of science, research and technology, Hossein Simaei Saraf, told Al Jazeera last week.

The attacks prompted the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to declare US and Israeli-affiliated universities “legitimate targets”.

Mohammad Hossein Omid, president of Tehran University, wrote a letter on behalf of 15 top university heads last week, urging the IRGC to refrain from attacking other universities in order to show that Tehran is committed to safeguarding higher education facilities anywhere as “human and global heritage” entities.

However, he has since shifted his position and demanded retaliatory attacks in kind after a huge backlash from local hardline media.

The US and Israel have continued to attack across Iran, targeting the country’s infrastructure, hours ahead of US President Donald Trump’s deadline for Iran to capitulate to his demands. The Israeli military has already on Tuesday hit Iran’s railway network, but Trump has threatened to bomb critical civilian infrastructure, such as the country’s main power plants and bridges, which would constitute a violation of international law.

Trump said “a whole civilisation will die tonight” in Iran, with the comment coming days after the country’s steel factories and petrochemical manufacturers were extensively targeted in another move that will affect all of Iran’s population of more than 90 million. He boasted that it would take 20 years for Iran to rebuild if Washington were to withdraw today, but it could take 100 years to rebuild if the war continues.

Hitting Iran or the Islamic Republic?

Inside the Sharif University on Tuesday, a mathematics professor held an online class inside the remains of a bombed building as a show of defiance and continuity.

Placards placed nearby by the authorities read, “Trump’s help has arrived.”

This was in reference to repeated claims by the US president and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that they wish to “help” the Iranian people overthrow the Islamic Republic, which came to power after a 1979 revolution but has faced nationwide protests in recent years.

But the increasing systematic targeting of civilian infrastructure has caused deep concerns among many Iranians, especially since the country was already dealing with a host of issues before the war, including economic woes and an energy crisis.

“It was a strange feeling waking up in the morning and seeing your university attacked, not to mention the terror of feeling you might not have electricity to check anything tomorrow,” said a Shahid Beheshti student, who asked to remain anonymous.

“If you can justify attacks on power plants, steel, petrochemicals, bridges, universities and science institutes, you can justify anything,” he told Al Jazeera.

The civilian infrastructure attacks have also prompted local media to lash out against foreign-based Iranians, some of whom have supported US and Israeli attacks in the hope that they would lead to the toppling of the governing establishment of military, political, and theocratic leaders.

The Fars news agency, affiliated with the IRGC, claimed on Tuesday that the attack on Sharif University could not have been possible without “betrayal” from dissidents abroad. It accused Ali Sharifi Zarchi, a top former professor-turned-dissident at Sharif, of leaking the coordinates of the bombed centre, without providing evidence.

Sharifi Zarchi pointed out in a tweet in response that the centre was marked on Google Maps, and said that while he unequivocally condemns the targeting of universities and other civilian sites, “the aim of any attacks should be the overthrow of the Islamic Republic regime, which has held the Iranian people hostage through repression, mass killings, and internet shutdowns.”

The professor circulated a letter published in a number of nongovernment student groups on Tuesday, which also condemned the US and Israeli attacks but said that the establishment was responsible for pursuing policies that put it on a collision course with the two countries and their allies.

“Our people want to work, to study, to breathe, to have access to the internet, and to build their own future,” the students wrote. “Minds that leave do not return. A girl who is detained no longer studies. A child whose school is bombed does not grow up. The cost of these losses will be paid by all of our futures – including those who benefit from this divide today.”

Reinaldo Iturriza is a Venezuelan intellectual and writer who served as Minister of Communes (2013-14) and Culture (2014-16). He currently heads the Socialist Democracy Studies Center (CEDES) in Caracas. In this interview with Diario Red, Iturriza offers his views on the present Venezuelan context, the US’ January 3 invasion and subsequent impositions, the phenomenon of political disaffiliation and the importance of organizing a counter-offensive.

Although US aggression against Venezuela has been going on for decades, what happened on January 3, 2026, was an unprecedented and, to some extent, disconcerting event. This is because of the kidnapping of President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, but also because it wasn’t a coup d’État, at least not according to the White House’s usual playbook, which involves a change in the government’s political alignment. What is your analysis of what happened that day?

What happened that day was an invasion, in every sense of the word. A flagrant and criminal violation of our sovereignty, preceded by constant threats and provocations, as well as the murder of dozens of fishermen in the Caribbean Sea – to which must be added the hundred Venezuelan military personnel and Cuban internationalists responsible for the president’s security who fell in combat during those early morning hours.

Regarding the shift in the government’s political alignment, the first thing this outcome reveals, in my view, is that it is absolutely false that the US aggression was motivated by anything even remotely related to its concern for democracy, just as the siege immediately preceding it had nothing to do with the Venezuelan government’s alleged ties to drug trafficking.

It is clear that the US government acted out of an interest in regaining control of our strategic resources, starting with our oil. Additionally, while weighing options and considering possible scenarios, the US concluded that the least traumatic way to achieve that objective was to leave the government structure virtually unchanged.

How did we reach this critical juncture?

Only someone completely unversed in politics would dare to claim that we should thank the United States for taking the first decisive steps to free us from a “tyranny” that had been in power for 25 years and that, otherwise, might have persisted indefinitely.

I mention this because Venezuelan society is not exactly known for its apolitical nature. What I’m getting at is that this is a narrative that is not only self-serving but also very dangerous, seeking to defend the indefensible. It is a version of events that is stumbling its way forward and aspires to become common sense. That is why it is essential to block its path once and for all.

And this requires emphasizing that throughout the first decade of this century, and even during the first half of the past decade, Venezuela was characterized as a high-intensity democracy, with very notable advances in all aspects of the material and spiritual lives of the popular majorities. What needs to be understood is what has happened here over the last 10 years.

When did the turning point occur? What circumstances led to the erosion of our high-intensity democracy? 

It seems to me that Antonio Gramsci provides invaluable analytical insights to begin understanding this historical development. What we witnessed and endured was nothing other than what the Italian intellectual calls the “reciprocal destruction” of the forces in conflict, with the consequent deterioration of democratic life and the progressive weakening of the political class and its respective social bases of support.

It is in this context that the intervention of the “foreign guard” took place on January 3, to continue using Gramscian terminology. A “foreign guard” that, incidentally, played a leading role in the conflict, decisively supporting one of the forces [the Venezuelan opposition] and doing everything possible to undermine the foundations of the national economy.

As the weeks went by, it became clear that the government of Acting President Delcy Rodríguez has largely accepted the conditions imposed by the United States. Is this a “betrayal,” or is it a tactical retreat aimed at sustaining the Bolivarian Process in the long term?

Speaking in terms of betrayal or loyalty to the cause contributes little or nothing to understanding the situation. Opinions one way or the other are part of what Gramsci himself described as “petty political criticism.” Nor, it must be said, does the abuse of historical analogies aid in this regard.

I clearly recall that regarding the government’s rapprochement with certain factions of the bourgeoisie throughout 2016, and later in connection with the implementation of the orthodox monetarist program in 2018 – aimed primarily at controlling hyperinflation, which meant, among other things, reducing public spending to unprecedented levels and freezing wages – some comrades asked me in good faith whether this was something akin to Lenin’s New Economic Policy or whether, on the contrary, we were witnessing the abandonment of the strategic programmatic banners of the Bolivarian Revolution.

I would almost invariably tell them that what was needed was an analysis of the balance of power and that, regardless of how one chose to characterize it, the indisputable fact is that a recomposition of the ruling bloc was taking place: the working class, slowly but surely, ceased to be the backbone of that power bloc, as it undoubtedly had been throughout the Hugo Chávez era and even during Maduro’s early years.

Since January 3, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk has been invoked to try to explain the reasons behind the rapprochement with the US government, much in the same way that anything was previously justified by invoking Stalin’s defeat of fascism because we were facing the far right.

It is paradoxical that over the past 10 years we were able to find ourselves in the situation of the Soviet Union in March 1921, then in May 1945, and finally in March 1918, yet today, following one tactical retreat after another, the Bolivarian Process is hardly in a better position to face the future.

In retrospect, the facts seem to point to a structural retreat or, more precisely, a full-fledged strategic retreat.

A few days after January 3, you wrote an article in which you noted that the public reaction following the kidnapping [of Maduro and Flores] was one of “silence.” At that initial moment, there were no celebrations by the opposition, nor were there pro-government demonstrations; instead, a mood of “mourning for the humiliated nation” prevailed. And you made a very interesting point by arguing that “far from signifying consent with what had happened,” it was a manifestation of dissent that could find no “means of expression.” This is striking given the narrative of polarization that has surrounded Venezuela for years, which seems to encompass the entire society, dividing it between Chavistas and anti-Chavistas. Is there a vacuum of political representation?

Indeed, quite contrary to the prevailing narratives, Venezuelan society over the last 10 years has become increasingly depolarized, or perhaps we should work with the hypothesis that polarization has taken on new contours: the majority of the population versus its political class.

On several occasions, I have argued that during this period, no political phenomenon has been more significant and with more far-reaching implications than political disaffiliation. And this is by no means a recent “discovery”; I first raised this point in December 2015, in the context of the opposition’s parliamentary election victory.

When we analyzed the situation in depth, it became clear that the defeat of the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) stemmed from the fact that, in Chavismo’s electoral strongholds, there had been a protest vote against the government.

It is no small matter that, despite the historical and contextual differences, that 2015 defeat, as was the case on January 3, was not celebrated by the people. That protest vote reflected a demand for correction.

In the eyes of a very significant portion of the social base supporting the Bolivarian Revolution, that correction did not occur. Quite the contrary: it was precisely from that point on that this process of recomposition of the power bloc I have already referred to began or intensified.

Why do you think this political disaffiliation occurred?

I am working on the hypothesis that the massive disaffiliation from Chavismo – understood here as a political identity – is directly proportional to the gradual distancing of the official political class from its working-class origins. In other words, to the extent that political identity ceased to embody the interests of the popular majorities, they ceased to feel represented by that political identity.

What occurred was what René Zavaleta Mercado termed a political and ideological hollowing out of the popular classes. This hollowing out, incidentally, should not be confused with depoliticization. The concept refers rather to the fact that the main guiding ideas that organize and give meaning to the way we conceive of the political are no longer associated with a specific identity.

This is particularly evident among younger people: my generation (and even more so the generations that preceded us) often laments the depoliticization of youth. And yes, there is depoliticization. But it is not uncommon to strike up a conversation with a young person from the working class in their twenties and realize that several of the key ideas that historically defined Chavismo are still there, yet those ideas have no political expression today.

In any case, I must emphasize that this phenomenon is far from being exclusively limited to young people. In reality, it describes the situation of the vast majority of Venezuelan society. A majority that does not condone something like a foreign invasion, but that cannot find ways to express its deep discontent with the state of affairs.

In your role as Minister of Communes between 2013 and 2014, but also as an activist and intellectual, you have been involved in the process of organizing and building the communes. This is a novel form of popular organization proposed by the Bolivarian Revolution and particularly by Hugo Chávez. For those unfamiliar with the topic, what are the communes? What is their objective?

The communes, and before them the communal councils, can be understood as the political formula devised by the Bolivarian leadership, and in particular by Hugo Chávez, to organize fundamentally that segment of the working class that came to constitute the backbone of the movement: the subproletariat, understood as the working poor whose labor does not guarantee them sufficient means to ensure their reproduction as a labor force.

Elsewhere I have elaborated in greater detail on what I am now only touching upon very briefly: the subproletariat was the driving force behind the popular uprising of February 27, 1989, [known as the Caracazo]. During the 1990s, under neoliberalism, the subproletariat came to represent the largest segment of the Venezuelan working class.

Excluded from the market, politics, and citizenship, it became politicized under Chávez’s leadership. It did everything possible to bring him to power. It defended democracy when it was threatened by the elites and led the massive street demonstrations that succeeded in reversing the 2002 coup d’état. Months later, it was on the front lines of resistance against the strike-sabotage of the oil industry and the corporate lockout: the Bolivarian Revolution would not be defeated by hunger and unemployment.

In a country on the brink of economic ruin [in 2002-03], we witnessed the recovery of the oil industry and experienced the effects of the first attempts at the democratic redistribution of oil rents – an experience that was entirely foreign to the more recent subproletariat.

Citizenship and the market were no longer off-limits: they gained gradual access to healthcare, education, and food. Their neighborhoods began to appear on official maps. Millions were able to obtain an identity card for the first time. They achieved their most resounding political victory in the 2004 referendum, which decided whether Chávez would remain in power.

In 2005, the Bolivarian leadership faced the challenge of how to organize a sub-proletariat that, by definition, is not in the factory, that due to its political culture distrusts the more traditional forms of political representation, and that also demonstrates a strong inclination toward political experimentation.

The answer, broadly speaking, was that it was necessary to promote the creation of popular self-government in the territories; this self-government had to, among other things, identify the productive potential of those territories and organize itself to develop that potential.

It was in this context that the first community councils were established. Later, in 2008, in areas where the self-governance initiatives were deemed to have the greatest political potential, efforts were intensified with the pilot launch of the first communes.

The communes were conceived as spaces with relative autonomy. This means that they were not to be subordinate to any formal power, nor were they to function as small, self-sufficient communities – like tiny islands in the sea of capitalism.

In Chávez’s words, they were to be capable of organizing themselves in a networked manner, “like a gigantic spiderweb covering the territory of the future, but in no case outside the strategic horizon of the Bolivarian Revolution.” In this sense, they represented a kind of popular vanguard in the process of implementing the program of transformation in the territory.

What is the current state of communal organization in Venezuela compared to previous years? How has the process been affected in recent years?

That’s a good question, especially since it has become customary in recent years to point to the existence of the communes as a kind of political – and even ethical – bulwark that could eventually serve as a counterweight to more authoritarian or conservative tendencies within Chavismo.

As a sort of consolation: we admit that things aren’t going very well, to say the least, and it’s equally true that the outlook isn’t encouraging at all, but at least the communes exist.

However, we must emphasize a few points I’ve already mentioned: the last 10 years have been a time of recomposition of the ruling bloc, of massive political disaffiliation, and of an economic policy that does not prioritize the interests of the working class. These are times of managing the status quo, which means that the scope for political experimentation has been reduced to historic lows.

To this, of course, we must add that after January 3, it is the US government that ultimately administers and decides how our revenues are spent. In other words, the problem is no longer even the scope of action of the communes, but rather the scope of the republic’s sovereignty.

This issue of the communes’ relative autonomy presents itself to us today in a radically different context: it remains to be seen whether, beyond the ability to manage very limited resources for the implementation of very limited local projects, communal leadership has the will and capacity to reaffirm its autonomy – no longer in the face of state or party institutions, but primarily in the face of a “foreign guard” that seeks to decide the nation’s fate.

Regarding the latter point you mentioned, Donald Trump’s offensive against Latin America, within a global context of military escalation and the rise of the far right, presents a very complex scenario for leftist governments, movements, and organizations. Added to the aggression against Venezuela is the intensification of the blockade against Cuba and the pressure on progressive governments in the region. How do you see the future of Chavismo and the Bolivarian Revolution in this context?

Let me refer once again to Gramsci: the analysis I have attempted here is not an end in itself. Its purpose is not to demonstrate clarity, eloquence, or anything of the sort. Such an analysis only makes sense if it aims to create the conditions for “optimism of the will.” 

The global onslaught of the far right cannot be met with voluntarism or naive pragmatism. There is no more effective incentive than developing the capacity to conduct analyses of the balance of power that are as rigorous and unflinching as possible. In times of retreat, the priority must be on organizing the counteroffensive. And such a thing is impossible based on complacent analyses or those aimed at reaffirming our status as victims.

In the battle of ideas, it is imperative to construct an effective narrative regarding the Bolivarian Revolution. One that does not shy away from pointing out our mistakes or limitations, but at the same time – and drawing on abundant historical evidence – properly highlights our numerous successes, starting with the fact that we managed to outline a programmatic vision that the popular majority embraced, feeling for the first time in a long while that they were masters of their own destiny.

The current state of affairs is not the inevitable consequence of an anachronistic program –one alien to our ideas and customs –that carried within it the seeds of authoritarianism from the very beginning. On the contrary, our program was well-suited to its time, consistent with our political culture, and realized itself as a high-intensity democracy. We must account for the multiple causes of various kinds that led to the interruption of the process of implementing that program.

This must take place within the context of a profound crisis of political representation, so we will most likely have to be prepared to witness – and even foster – the emergence of a new political identity that does not renounce its national, popular, and anti-capitalist character.

In the short term, what is essential is the convergence of all forces of different stripes that oppose the imposition of conditions of tutelage on our nation. We are on the threshold of new battles to recover our full sovereignty. This is only just beginning.

Source: Diario Red

Organizers canceled the popular Wireless Festival after the United Kingdom denied its headliner, the embattled rapper Ye, a visa into the country.

The U.K. government cited Ye’s history of antisemitic outbursts as a reason for denying him a travel permit.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said on Tuesday that “Kanye West [Ye’s former name] should never have been invited to headline Wireless.”

“This government stands firmly with the Jewish community,” he continued, “and we will not stop in our fight to confront and defeat the poison of antisemitism. We will always take the action necessary to protect the public and uphold our values.”

As a result, the entire summer festival was scrapped and ticket holders were issued refunds.

“The Home Office has withdrawn YE’s [electronic travel visa] ETA, denying him entry into the United Kingdom. As a result, Wireless Festival is cancelled and refunds will be issued to all ticket holders,” Wireless Festival organizers said in a statement on Tuesday. “As with every Wireless Festival, multiple stakeholders were consulted in advance of booking YE and no concerns were highlighted at the time.”

“Antisemitism in all its forms is abhorrent,” they continued, “and we recognise the real and personal impact these issues have had. As YE said today, he acknowledges that words alone are not enough, and in spite of this still hopes to be given the opportunity to begin a conversation with the Jewish community in the U.K.”

Ye said, in a statement reported by the BBC, that he was “following the conversation around Wireless”, and that “I know words aren’t enough…I’ll have to show change through my actions. If you’re open, I’m here.”

Ye has been mounting a comeback after years of erratic and conspiratorial remarks about Judaism and Jewish people, and openly embraced Nazi symbols in his merchandise. He recently took out an ad in the Wall Street Journal, saying he struggled with a frontal-lobe injury from a car crash and a bipolar type-1 diagnosis. “I gravitated toward the most destructive symbol I could find, the swastika…I lost touch with reality. Things got worse the longer I ignored the problem. I said and did things I deeply regret.”

He recently released a new album “Bully” and headlined SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, performing a hit-heavy set without incident. He did not address his recent behavior.

ORLANDO, Fla. — Environmental groups on Tuesday asked a federal appellate court panel to drop its temporary halt of a lower court’s order instructing state officials to close an immigration detention center in the heart of the Florida Everglades known as “Alligator Alcatraz.”

The Everglades facility remains open, still holding detainees, because the appellate court in early September relied on arguments by Florida and the Trump administration that the state had not yet applied for federal reimbursement, and therefore wasn’t required to follow federal environmental law. State officials opened the detention center last summer to support President Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Questions by the three appellate judges during oral arguments in a Miami courtroom focused on how much control the federal government had over the state-built facility and under what circumstances an environmental review was required to be in compliance with federal law. The judges did not indicate when they would rule.

Jesse Panuccio, an attorney for the Florida Department of Emergency Management, told the judges federal funding and federal control of the facility were the two criteria for determining if the federal environmental law would apply and the federal agencies had no control over the state-run detention center.

Florida was notified in late September that FEMA had approved $608 million in federal funding to support the center’s construction and operation.

“You need both,” Panuccio said. “Even with funding, I don’t think that would follow because they don’t have federal control.”

An attorney for the environmental groups said the law requiring a review applied to the facility because the Department of Homeland Security had authorized the funding and immigration was a responsibility of the federal government, not the state.

“What is different about this property is that immigration is constitutionally a federal function,” said Paul Schwiep,” an attorney representing the Friends of the Everglades and the Center for Biological Diversity. “The state has no role.”

The federal district judge in Miami in mid-August ordered the facility to wind down operations over two months because officials had failed to do a review of the detention center’s environmental impact according to federal law. That judge concluded that a reimbursement decision already had been made. The appellate court halted the order on an appeal.

The environmental lawsuit was one of three federal court challenges to the Everglades facility since it opened. In the others, a detainee said Florida agencies and private contractors hired by the state had no authority to operate the center under federal law. The challenge ended after the immigrant detainee who filed the lawsuit agreed to be removed from the United States.

In the third lawsuit, a federal judge in Fort Myers, Fla., ruled the Everglades facility must provide detainees there with better access to their attorneys, as well as confidential, unmonitored, unrecorded outgoing legal calls.

Schneider writes for the Associated Press.

AUGUSTA, Ga. — Among the fortunate (relatively) few headed to the Masters? You might spend a bundle on merchandise, but you’re unlikely to go broke buying food.

For $75.75 you can purchase the entire menu. That’s 26 items, including eight different types of freshly made sandwiches — the famous pimento cheese one costs $1.50 — water, soft drinks, three varieties of beer, white wine and desserts such as Georgia pecan caramel popcorn and a peach ice cream sandwich.

The new item this year is the Masters candy bar ($2.25), described as a dark-milk chocolate bar with caramel, rice crisps and a hazelnut crunch. Think a bunch of Rolo pieces in the shape of a Butterfinger.

The sandwiches are in sealed, green plastic baggies that match the impeccable grass of the course, so TV viewers probably couldn’t spot a stray wrapper on the ground — not that Augusta National would ever knowingly allow one to touch the meticulous turf.

In a world where you’re paying $8 for a Dodger Dog, $16 for a cheeseburger and waffle fries at a Lakers game and $19 for a craft beer at SoFi Stadium, spending less than $10 on a lunch at the Masters is a steal.

As for the merchandise emporium, well … that’s where the credit card starts heating up.

Donald Trump warned that “a whole civilisation will die tonight” if Iran does not open the Strait of Hormuz, ahead of a Tuesday night deadline for Tehran to comply. The comments follow a “pretty shocking” silence from US Congress on the US-Israeli war, Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett explains.

Follow the build-up, analysis and live text commentary of the game as Madrid host Bayern for their first-leg clash.

Billionaire investor Bill Ackman has launched a $65 billion bid to purchase Universal Music, the label representing some of music’s biggest names like Taylor Swift, Kendrick Lamar and Bad Bunny.

As part of the proposed deal, UMG would merge with Ackman’s investment firm, Pershing Square Capital Management, and the company’s stock listing would be relocated from Amsterdam to the New York Stock Exchange.

Pershing Square already holds more than 4.5% of the music giant’s shares. Ackman said the move to a U.S.-based stock exchange would increase the value of UMG .

“UMG’s stock price has languished due to a combination of issues that are unrelated to the performance of its music business and importantly, all of them can be addressed with this transaction,” said Ackman in a statement.

The proposed deal includes Universal Music merging with Pershing Square SPARC Holdings, an acquisition company approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2023. If agreed upon, the proposed transaction could close at the end of the year, according to the company.

Universal Music Group currently has its corporate headquarters in the Netherlands and a local L.A. office in Santa Monica. The label was founded in 1996. Over the years, it’s cemented its reputation as one of the music industry’s “Big Three,” alongside Warner Music Group and Sony Music Entertainment. Universal also controls smaller labels like Republic Records, Interscope Geffen A&M, Capitol Music Group, and Def Jam Recordings.

The news has drawn a level of skepticism, as Ackman will need two-thirds of UMG’s investors to approve the proposed deal, including French billionaire Vincent Bolloré, who is UMG’s largest shareholder with a morethan 18% stake, according to Bloomberg.

If finalized, UMG shareholders would receive €9.4 billion in cash, around €5.05 per share, or roughly $10.9 billion and $5.84 per share.

Investors would receive 0.77 shares in the new merged company. This would value the total consideration package of cash and stock estimated to be worth €30.40 per share, a 78% premium to UMG’s stock price. The transaction will also include the cancellation of 17% of UMG outstanding shares. The new UMG will have 1.541 billion shares outstanding.

UMG’s stock price has jumped over 11% to €19.05 Tuesday morning, due to this potential acquisition.

“What’s the rate today?”

That’s the message Juan gets every day starting around 9 am. Often it doesn’t matter if it’s Sunday, a national holiday, Christmas, or Holy Week. The demand for bolívares is always there, and Juan is always ready to supply it.

It wasn’t always this way. Back in July 2024, Juan worked in an office in Chuao from 8 to 5. The only messages he used to receive were from his bosses, friends, or family.

In fact, if you ask Juan how he got into this business, he’ll tell you he never imagined doing it. Sure, he knew many money changers and understood the basic economics, but he also knew the risks. Juan thought he didn’t have the means to take them on.

But things changed after July 28, 2024. As political tensions rose after the elections, the economic scene began to shift. After a few years of relative stability, devaluation returned to the Venezuelan context with the possibility of new sanctions looming. By late August 2024, the parallel dollar had drifted away from the official BCV dollar (Central Bank of Venezuela rate), creating an exchange rate gap.

To make matters worse, the government ordered businesses to charge prices using the official rate. If a product’s price was listed in dollars, its conversion to bolívares had to follow the BCV rate, not the rates displayed by Binance or Monitor Dólar.

That created a distortion in the economy. In practice, prices were cheaper in bolívares than in dollars, which boosted the use of bolívares: up to more than 80% of daily transactions, according to Ecoanalítica.

Juan knows the foreign exchange crimes law hangs over his head and how much changed after January 3.

That’s how Juan found his new line of work. One morning, he realized he could act as the bridge for friends and family needing to get bolívares. He first partnered with the office administrator, someone who always had bolívares on hand. But as demand grew, he had to rely on a friend already in the business to keep up.

Two years later, Juan runs a small but structured operation. He has bolívar suppliers and plenty of clients. He considers himself a retail money changer. He doesn’t handle large volumes like some of his peers, but it’s enough to live well.

Still, not everything in this world shines. He’s aware of the foreign exchange crimes law that hangs over his head, knows how much changed after January 3, and recognizes that the future may force him to evolve or rebuild.

This is the daily life of a money changer in Venezuela, his reality and expectations after the events of January 3rd.

What rate are you using?

For money changers, life revolves around two questions:

The first refers to the day’s operating rate on the market. Typically, Binance serves as the main reference for negotiations.

Juan explains that this is usually the highest rate available, and that it’s common to find bolívares slightly cheaper. At the end of the day, everyone (individuals and businesses alike) wants to minimize losses.

That’s why you might see a 3–5% difference between the Binance rate and street prices.

The money changer operates within that margin. Juan says most of his bolívares come from companies that need to unload them quickly. His power depends on the amount involved and how urgently the client needs the transaction.

When the sums are small, bolívares are usually cheaper than the Binance rate. But if the amounts are large, some people buy at a premium (above Binance) and then sell below it, closer to the street price.

That’s where the business is.

Juan expects the gap to remain due to inflation and rising economic activity. With more bolívares circulating, pressure on the parallel market will return.

As for the second question—how do you pay?—it may sound simple, but it reveals much about Venezuela’s monetary dynamics.

Basically, the question centers whether you pay in cash dollars or via Zelle. This distinction might not seem relevant elsewhere, but in Venezuela’s economy, it matters a lot.

Juan recalls that cash dominated most transactions back in 2025. Everyone paid in physical dollars, and there was growing interest in “bankarization”—something Juan even started offering as an additional service.

By early 2026, however, most payments are now done through Zelle transfers. Cash usage has dropped, and more people are urgently looking for physical dollars.

Ultimately, this just mirrors broader economic movements. During 2025, under strict sanctions, most of the dollars entering Venezuela came in cash. Now, with oil companies returning and a new exchange framework in place, money enters mainly through transfers.

Juan’s only wish is that the money keeps flowing.

“I’m still selling plenty”

There’s been an elephant in the room since January 3rd.

The exchange rate gap was born from several factors, such as sanctions, uncertainty, and speculation. Now that sanctions are being relaxed and Venezuela is earning more foreign currency from oil exports, many thought the problem was solved.

When the government announced a $500 million cash injection into the economy in January, plenty of people claimed the gap would vanish.

Juan heard it both seriously and jokingly. His answer: “I’m still selling plenty.”

He knows the issue isn’t that simple. While the dollar has stopped devaluing as quickly and the gap has narrowed, he sees that there’s still a long way to go.

Seasonal factors come into play, too. The first quarter brings income tax payments (ISLR), which pull bolívares out of circulation. Meanwhile, new dollars arrive at day-to-day varying rates, a mix that reduces bolívar availability.

For the first time in his career, Juan has faced days when he simply runs out of bolívares.

Yet as long as political uncertainty and lack of transparency persist, none of this will really be solved.

Juan expects the gap to remain due to inflation and rising economic activity. With more bolívares circulating, pressure on the parallel market will return. It won’t be as sharp as in 2025, but it will still matter.

As several economists point out, the only lasting solution is a credible adjustment program that restores market confidence. Until that happens, Juan plans to keep working and maybe expand into areas like financial intermediation.

He’s aware of the risks, including a possible police investigation and legal fallout, but he considers them part of the deal. Profit is worth it, and for him, risk is just the shared language of doing business in Venezuela.

MADISON, Wis. — Democrats hoped to increase liberal control of the state Supreme Court in Wisconsin on Tuesday in an election that has focused largely on abortion rights as cases affecting congressional redistricting, union rights and other hot button issues also await in the perennial battleground state.

This year’s Supreme Court election stands in stark contrast to the swing state’s previous two, where national spending records were set in battles over majority control. Spending and national attention is down dramatically this year without control of the court at stake.

Democrats are looking to tighten their control of the court just months before a November election in which they seek to keep the governor’s office and flip the state Legislature, where Republicans have held the majority since 2011. Democrats aspire to undo a host of Republican-enacted laws that made Wisconsin a focal point for the nation’s conservative movement in the 2010s.

In Tuesday’s Supreme Court race, Democratic-backed Chris Taylor, a former state lawmaker who also worked for Planned Parenthood, faces Republican-supported Maria Lazar. Both Taylor and Lazar are state Appeals Court judges.

Liberals would increase their majority on the court to 5-2 from 4-3 with a Taylor win. That would lock in the liberal majority until at least 2030.

Liberals took control of the state’s top court in 2023, ending 15 years under a conservative majority. They held onto their majority with last year’s victory in a race that drew involvement from President Trump and billionaires George Soros and Elon Musk, who personally handed out $1 million checks to voters in the state.

Liberals argued that democracy was at stake in the 2025 election, noting that when the court was controlled by conservative justices in 2020 it came just one vote shy of siding with Trump in his attempt to invalidate enough votes to overturn his loss in that year’s presidential election.

Since liberals took control, the court has reversed several election-related rulings, including one that overturned a ban on absentee ballot drop boxes, and it is poised to once again be in the spotlight around the 2028 presidential election.

Races for the court are officially nonpartisan, but support for candidates breaks down mostly along partisan lines.

Taylor has focused much of her campaign on abortion rights, with one TV ad saying that “abortion is on the ballot.” In another ad, she criticized Lazar for calling the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022 “very wise.”

Lazar, who was supported by anti-abortion groups in her run for the appeals court, tried to brand Taylor as nothing more than a politician who will push a partisan agenda on the court.

They sparred over each other’s partisanship during the campaign’s sole debate last week.

Lazar accused Taylor of being a “radical, extreme legislator” and a “judicial activist.” Taylor said that Lazar would bring “an extreme, right-wing political agenda to the bench.”

Lazar has had a much harder time getting her message out. Taylor had a large fundraising advantage and spent about nine times as much as Lazar on television ads, based on a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice.

The liberal-controlled court has already struck down a state law banning abortion and ordered new legislative maps, fueling Democrats’ hopes of capturing a majority this November.

Taylor has been a judge since 2020 and before that she spent 10 years as a Democrat representing the liberal capital city of Madison in the state Assembly.

Lazar, a judge since 2015, previously worked four years under a Republican attorney general in the state Department of Justice. In that role, she defended a law enacted under former Republican Gov. Scott Walker that effectively ended collective bargaining for most public workers.

A circuit court judge ruled in December that the law is unconstitutional, a decision expected to ultimately land before the state Supreme Court.

Lazar also defended laws passed by Republicans and signed by Walker implementing a voter ID requirement and restricting abortion access.

Democrats are optimistic given the past two Supreme Court elections, which saw candidates they backed winning by double digits.

The seat is open due to the retirement of a conservative justice. Another conservative justice is retiring next year, giving liberals a chance to take 6-1 control of the court if they win on Tuesday.

Bauer writes for the Associated Press.

Was that really Aday Mara?

It was the most maddening part of March.

It was a Cinderella story that smelled like rotting pumpkin.

It was a big dance over the sensibilities of everything that is UCLA.

Seriously, was that really Aday Mara?

Aday Mara holds a Spanish flag and a piece of the net he cut while celebrating Michigan’s national title win Monday in Indianapolis.

(AJ Mast / Associated Press)

The biggest player on the giant national champion Michigan basketball team Monday night looked familiar, yet strange.

Familiar, because he once played for the Bruins.

Strange, because he wasn’t buried on the bench.

Meet Mick Cronin’s nightmare, a 7-foot-3 indictment of his embattled program, a monumental mistake that has spent three weeks eating at the heart of even the most dedicated Bruin loyalists.

In Michigan’s overpowering run in this tournament, Mara was everywhere.

Playing the previous two seasons at UCLA, Mara was nowhere.

In six tournament games, Mara had at least two blocks in five, scored in double figures in four and racked up 26 points with nine rebounds in the semifinal win against Arizona.

In his last 11 appearances as a Bruin last season, Mara never played more than half the game.

“One Shining Moment” is another man’s darkness, and so it was that after Michigan’s 69-63 title victory over UConn Monday night, Mara unwittingly milked his co-starring role in the tournament’s annual music video compilation.

In a brief closeup from an earlier tournament game, Mara was shown wagging his tongue in celebration … or was that in revenge?

It sure felt like the latter, as Mara’s nationally televised presence this spring repeatedly summoned one question about the current UCLA basketball culture.

How could the Bruins allow the cornerstone of the program’s future to just walk out the door?

Yes, Cronin isn’t the first coach to lose a star to the transfer portal, as Michigan became the first champion for which all five starters were transfers.

But Mara was more than a transfer, he was transformative, and everyone who had watched him roaming the Pauley floor during his sporadic appearances knew it. If Mara had stayed with the Bruins this season, they could have been at least a Sweet 16 team, maybe advancing to the Elite Eight, and who knows how much further, his presence alone changing so many things about the team in so many different ways.

Michigan’s Aday Mara dunks while Arizona players watch during the Wolverines Final Four semifinal win Saturday in Indianapolis.

(Michael Conroy / Associated Press)

His rim protection is powerful. His shot-blocking is masterful. His footwork is precise, his shooting touch soft and his overall game has been improving with his maturity.

Bruin fans loved him. Pauley rocked with him. Scouts fawned over him.

But Cronin never seemed sold on him, starting him once in two years, playing him about 13 minutes a game last season.

After which, Mara begrudgingly bolted.

“It was a hard decision to leave UCLA,” Mara told former Times staff writer Ben Bolch last spring, “because you saw every game — I was enjoying it, I was super happy because I saw all the crowd cheering for me, helping me a lot. Los Angeles is like a really, really good place, Westwood, so I’m going to miss that and I wanted to say that because it was a hard decision because it’s just after two years it feels like I spent a lot more time than two years, you know?”

When explaining the benchings, Cronin frequently talked about Mara’s matchup problems, conditioning problems, and illness problems. And to be fair, Cronin has often used his tough love with great success, turning marginal players into good ones.

But Mara was a potential superstar, and he wasn’t buying any of it.

“I had expectations when I came here that I didn’t achieve,” said Mara to Bolch. “Also, I think I felt like I was playing good, practicing good, practicing hard, you know, putting in extra work and until Wisconsin I never had the opportunity to show that I was able to play, you know? And once [Cronin] gave me the opportunity, I saw — not a lot, but I saw what I could do, so those are the two reasons.”

Ah, yes, Wisconsin. That game, in January of 2025, could have solidified the Cronin era. Instead, it eventually only served as another eventual milestone of regret.

In the Bruins upset of the Badgers, Mara had 22 points, five rebounds and two blocks in 21 minutes in the best game of his UCLA career.

That finally earned him a place in the rotation after weeks of being lost on the bench, and he played more than 24 minutes in three of the next four games including finding himself in the starting lineup for the first time.

But it was also the last time. Beginning in early February, he didn’t play more than 20 minutes a game the rest of the season, which, after he experienced such success in the Badger beatdown, he found increasingly frustrating.

After the season, there were reports that Mara asked for an inordinate salary increase while demanding that he set his own practice schedule. He denied all those charges to Bolch, saying, “I feel like that’s crazy.”

You want to know what’s really crazy? That UCLA would not work with him no matter what the demands.

One can only guess about the millions of dollars paid to top UCLA athletes, but the Bruin power brokers should have busted the NIL bank for this kid. Certainly, one can also speculate that the Spaniard was considered soft and wasn’t always in great shape, but he was still a teenager and in need of the sort of persistent patience not often shown in Cronin’s world.

Whatever, there was surely a way to put Mara on a path to his seemingly destined greatness. But the hard-nosed Cronin apparently couldn’t reach him while Michigan’s gentler Dusty May could and … hmmmm.

On Monday night, one of those coaches was celebrating while the other one was watching.

Who knows, maybe Cronin and his demanding, sometimes demeaning program will pick up another shiny seven-foot star from this spring’s newly opened portal.

Or maybe not.

The provided text details the history and observance of the Day of the People’s April Revolution, a significant public holiday in Kyrgyzstan. This commemoration marks the 2010 uprising in which citizens protested against government corruption and rising costs, leading to the removal of President Kurmanbek Bakiyev. The source explains that the unrest escalated into violent clashes in the capital, resulting in numerous casualties and the establishment of a transitional government. Each year, the nation honors those lost during the conflict with memorial ceremonies and prayers attended by high-ranking officials. Established as an official holiday in 2016, the date serves as a solemn reminder of the country’s turbulent path toward political change fo … 

The US-Israel war on Iran has sparked a global fuel crisis as thousands of tankers carrying crucial deliveries of oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) remain stranded on either side of the Strait of Hormuz, currently under a blockade imposed by Iran.

On Saturday, Egypt’s government said it is among the “best-performing” countries in tackling the crisis because of the measures it has implemented to save on fuel.

Here is what we know about the steps Egypt is taking and whether other countries are doing the same.

Why has the Iran war caused an energy crisis?

Pressure on oil and gas markets is mounting due to the almost complete halt to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz as well as air strikes on and around key energy facilities in the Gulf as the United States-Israel war on Iran enters its sixth week.

One-fifth of the world’s oil and LNG is shipped from producers in the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz in peacetime. This is the only route from the Gulf to the open ocean.

On March 2, two days after the US and Israel began strikes on Iran, Ebrahim Jabari, a senior adviser to the commander in chief of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), announced that the strait was “closed”. If any vessels tried to pass through, he said, the IRGC and the navy would “set those ships ablaze”. Since then, traffic through the strait, carrying cargoes including 20 million barrels of oil each day, has plunged by more than 95 percent.

Now, Tehran is allowing just a handful of tankers through after reaching agreements with some countries to do so.

Besides this, energy infrastructure in the Middle East has suffered damage over the course of the war.

On March 24, QatarEnergy declared force majeure on some of ⁠its long-term LNG supply contracts after an Iranian attack on Qatar’s Ras Laffan LNG facility – the largest in the world – wiped out about ⁠17 percent of the country’s LNG export capacity, causing an estimated $20bn in lost annual revenue and threatening supplies to Europe and ⁠Asia.

All of this disruption has sent energy prices soaring. On Tuesday, global oil benchmark Brent crude was around $109 per barrel, compared to around $65 per barrel right before the war started.

How is Egypt tackling the energy crisis?

Egypt’s Petroleum Ministry has announced rises in fuel prices ranging from 14 percent to 30 percent.

On March 28, Egyptian Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly’s office told a press conference that the country’s energy import bill had increased from $1.2bn in January to $2.5bn in March.

Egypt is both one of the region’s largest energy importers and among its most heavily indebted economies. While domestic gas and oil account for the majority of its total energy supply, the country still relies on imported fuels, especially refined oil products and some natural gas, from Israel and the Gulf states.

Madbouly announced measures Egypt is taking to mitigate this and preserve state energy resources.

• From March 28, shops, malls and restaurants are closing at 9pm (19:00 GMT) every day for one month, except Thursdays and Fridays.
• On Thursdays and Fridays, the closing time will be 10pm (20:00 GMT).
• Fuel allocations for government vehicles will be reduced by 30 percent.
• Street lighting and street advertisement lighting will be cut by 50 percent.
• From April 1, eligible employees will work remotely on Sundays, the first day of the working week. Some essential services, such as pharmacies, grocery stores and tourist facilities, will be exempted from this.

Which other countries have introduced energy conservation measures?

Besides Egypt, other countries are also taking steps to save energy.

Last week, Malaysia ordered civil servants to work from home to save energy in government offices.

In mid-March, it was revealed that government offices in the Philippines had moved to a four-day work week, officials in Thailand and Vietnam were being encouraged to work from home and limit travel, and Myanmar’s government had imposed alternating driving days.

Pakistan, which imports about 80 percent of its energy from the Gulf, announced on Monday of this week that markets and shopping malls would close at 8pm (15:00 GMT) across the country, except in Sindh province. The government’s statement added that food outlets would close at 10pm (17:00 GMT), which is also when marriage ceremonies at private properties and houses must end.

Bangladesh has reduced working hours for government and private workers and banking services hours in a bid to conserve electricity.

In Sri Lanka and Slovenia, authorities have introduced fuel rationing and purchase limits to manage shortages and soaring costs.

ONE of the Center Parcs resorts is planning a huge overhaul of 120 holiday lodges.

The holiday park in the Lake District has submitted plans as part of its ‘second phase’ of an overhaul to improve accommodation at Whinfell Forest.

Center Parcs has put forward proposals to expand some of its existing accommodation with the extension of its outside patios.

Increasing the size of the outdoor areas means new pergolas will be added and means families can still enjoy the outdoors in rain, wind or shine.

The design and access statement said: “Center Parcs is a major local employer and has an obligation to continually improve its operation and building stock in order to maintain its position in the market.

“The proposed improvement to the external areas will help in the continuation of the popular holiday destination.

TRIP UP

The Sun’s travel experts reveal their best EVER holidays & how you can do them too

PARK UP

Holiday park expert reveals her top UK resorts and how to get cheap stays

“The proposal will improve tourism facilities within Whinfell Forest by providing betterment of the general facilities which are paramount in maintaining Center Parcs position as a great holiday destination.”

The upgrades are part of the second phase of a ‘lodge refurbishment project’ to improve guest accommodation at Whinfell.

The first phase of the Whinfell Forest lodge refurbishment was announced in August 2025.

This was when Woodland Premium and Grand Forest Lodges were upgraded to have modern interiors, smart technology, and improved outdoor spaces.

The Woodland Premium Lodges have fully equipped kitchen along with be a flame-effect electric fire, blackout curtains for a well-needed sleep after all the holiday park activities and a coffee machine.

The Grand Forest Lodge is “indulgent accommodation” suited more towards large groups or multi-generational families on a trip together.

There will be two, three or four-bedroom lodges available, and each will have ensuite bathrooms in every bedroom.

The standout feature of the Grand Forest Lodge is the heated outdoor pergola – so you can stay warm outdoors even in the cooler months.

It even has an indoor ‘snuggle pod’, a cosy retreat with an interactive games screen and colour-changing mood lighting.

Here are more of our favourite holiday parks…

*If you click on a link in this box, we will earn affiliate revenue

Park Holidays UK Sand le Mere, Yorkshire

This holiday park in Yorkshire is a thriving family resort, just steps from Tunstall Beach. Entertainment is what this resort does best, with costume character performances, Link-up Bingo and cabaret shows. Accommodation ranges from fully-equipped Gold Caravans to Platinum Lodges with sun decks and luxury bedding.

BOOK A BREAK

St Ives Bay Beach Resort, Cornwall

This beachfront resort in St Ives, Cornwall is a true beach bum’s paradise – whether you want to laze out on the sand, or take to the waves for some surfing. Activities include disc golf, a Nerf challenge and an outdoor cinema, as well as indoor activities for the colder months like karaoke, bingo and DJ sets.

BOOK A BREAK

Billing Aquadrome Holiday Park, Northampton

This holiday park has loads of unique activities on offer, including TikTok dance classes, alpaca feeding, a pump track for BMX riding, and taking a ride on the resort’s very own miniature railway. Throw in bug hotel and den building, pond dipping, survival skills workshops and a lake for paddleboard and pedalo hire, and you’ve got yourself an action-packed park.

BOOK A BREAK

Parkdean Resorts Camber Sands, Sussex
This beachfront resort is a classic family favourite. If you’re not up to swimming in the sea, there’s four fantastic pools here, as well as water flumes, underwater jets, inflatable jet skis and kayak races. Plus if you’ve got any little fans of Paw Patrol or Milkshake!, you’ll be glad to know there’s Milkshake! Mornings and Paw Patrol Mighty Missions to keep your tots entertained.

BOOK A BREAK

In Scotland, work on its brand new Center Parcs is officially underway.

The new holiday park costing £450million will have its very own Subtropical Swimming Paradise, spa and treehouse lodges.

On March 18, work officially got started on Center Parcs’ new resort.

The site in Hawick called Scottish Borders, and is planned to open in summer 2029.

When it opens, this holiday park will be the first in Scotland, and the newest Center Parcs in over a decade.

In recent news, Center Parcs has scrapped a much-loved family service at all holiday parks.

And here’s now to have a Center Parcs-style holiday without actually staying there – and save nearly £1,000.

Netflix has shared an update on Love on the Spectrum’s fifth season

The future of Netflix’s Love on the Spectrum has been confirmed, but there’s good and bad news.

Fans have been following the dating show for six seasons overall, including two instalments of Love on the Spectrum: Australia. It centres around adults on the autism spectrum as they tackle the uncertain world of romance.

Season four was released on April 1st, coinciding with Autism Acceptance Month, and has already climbed Netflix’s most-watched charts.

This series shed light on couples viewers have become obsessed with over the last few years, as well as newcomers who want their own shot at love.

But what does the future hold for Love on the Spectrum?

Will Love on the Spectrum return for season 5?

Yes, Netflix has confirmed that the dating show will come back for a fifth series.

The streaming giant has also teased what’s in store. “In Season 5, Love on the Spectrum will follow a group of neurodivergent daters as they navigate the confusing world of relationships,” they shared.

“By learning the inexplicable rules of dating (rule No. 1: don’t say “I love you” on the first date) and embracing the many intricacies of communication styles and sensory sensitivities, the romantic hopefuls offer an unfiltered look at life and love on the spectrum.”

The news comes as fan favourite Connor Tomlinson shared his own major update.

Get Netflix free with Sky for Bridgerton Season 4

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

from £15

Sky

Get the deal here

‘Dearest gentle reader’, as the fourth season of Bridgerton follows second son Benedict love story, there’s a way to watch this fairytale-like season for less.

Sky is giving away a free Netflix subscription with its new Sky Stream TV bundles, including the £15 Essential TV plan. This lets customers watch live and on-demand TV content without a satellite dish or aerial and includes the new season of Bridgerton.

Is Connor returning for Love on the Spectrum season 5?

Connor has confirmed that he will not return to the show for series five. He told Variety that three seasons were “enough to tell his story”.

“It is with humility and a heavy heart that I share I will not be partaking in season five,” he told the publication. Connor went on to joke: “I’ve chosen to pass the torch to the next person who can make it as big as me.”

But it probably won’t be the last time fans see the Netflix star as he is venturing into acting.

He explained: “Don’t worry about me — I’m still going to be in the acting business, especially voice work. I’ve always been a huge fan of animation and would love to be involved with a TV show.”

Love on the Spectrum is streaming now on Netflix.