Finance

ADVERTISEMENT

Crude oil prices plunged to a multi-year low following OPEC+’s decision to accelerate production hikes for June. During Monday’s Asian session, Brent futures slumped as much as 4.6% to $58.50 per barrel, while West Texas Intermediate futures dropped nearly 5% to $55.53 per barrel at a point, both at their lowest levels since February 2021.

On Saturday, eight OPEC+ members agreed to raise output by 411,000 barrels per day (bpd) next month, extending the group’s ongoing plan to unwind production cuts that began in April. The cumulative increase will reach 957,000 bpd in June, further weighing on prices already pressured by deteriorating global trade conditions.

The group, which accounts for around 40% of global oil supply, has jointly reduced production by approximately 2.2 million bpd in 2023. The quicker-than-expected phased rollback began with a 135,000 bpd increase in April, tripling to 411,000 bpd in May. The acceleration is seen as a punitive measure against members which failed to comply with agreed production quotas, with Kazakhstan and Iraq identified as recent overproducers.

“The gradual increases may be paused or reversed subject to evolving market conditions. This flexibility will allow the group to continue to support oil market stability,” OPEC+ said in a statement on Saturday. “The eight OPEC+ countries also noted that this measure will provide an opportunity for the participating countries to accelerate their compensation.”

The group’s next meeting is scheduled for 1 June.

A demand-driven market

Crude prices have been sliding throughout the year, now down over 20% since mid-January. The decline has been driven in part by US President Donald Trump’s pro-drilling stance, the escalating global trade war, and rising US-China tensions. The downtrend intensified after Trump announced sweeping reciprocal tariffs in early April. OPEC+’s increased output has added to bearish sentiment in fossil fuel markets.

Analysts now view crude as primarily a demand-driven market. “The outlook is more demand driven at the moment because the Saudis have effectively taken their hands off the wheel when it comes to supply,” Kyle Rodda, senior market analyst at Capital.com Australia, said. “Now that it’s gone and OPEC+ is going to crank up production, any rebound in prices will be down to an improvement in growth conditions — which in the immediate future is all tied to US trade policy.”

Crude prices fell more than 7% last week—the largest weekly decline in a month—due to weakening demand outlooks amid the ongoing US-China trade war. Recent economic data from the world’s two largest economies have highlighted worsening conditions due to the impact of high tariffs. The US economy contracted in the first quarter, while labour market indicators pointed to a slowdown. In China, the world’s largest oil importer, manufacturing activity fell to its lowest level in 16 months.

Oil traders are now closely watching the development of trade relations between Washington and Beijing. During an interview with NBC on Sunday, Trump indicated he may lower tariffs on China “at some point”, stating: “Because otherwise, you could never do business with them, and they want to do business very much.”

On Friday, China said it was assessing the potential for trade negotiations with the US. “The US has recently sent messages to China through relevant parties, hoping to start talks with China,” the Ministry of Commerce said. “China is currently evaluating this.”

Comments aired ahead of Putin’s three-day ceasefire, as Ukraine’s Zelenskyy says he does ‘not believe’ Russia will stick to pledge.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that there has so far been no need to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, expressing “hope” that they will not be required.

Putin said his country had enough “strength and means” to bring the three-year war, sparked by Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, to a “logical conclusion with the outcome Russia requires”. His comments were part of a documentary marking his quarter century in power by state television channel Rossiya 1 that was released on Sunday.

Responding to a question from journalist Pavel Zarubin about the Russian response to Ukrainian strikes on Russian territory, Putin said: “There has been no need to use those [nuclear] weapons … and I hope they will not be required.”

His comments came ahead of his unilaterally declared three-day ceasefire over May 8-10 to mark the 80th anniversary of the victory of the Soviet Union and its allies over Nazi Germany in World War II, an initiative that he claimed would test Kyiv’s readiness for long-term peace.

Moscow earlier rejected an unconditional 30-day ceasefire proposed by Kyiv and Washington in March.

‘No faith’

Speaking during a visit to the Czech Republic, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that he did “not believe” Russia would adhere to its truce. “This is not the first challenge, nor are these the first promises made by Russia to cease fire,” he said.

“Today and all these days they are talking about wanting some kind of partial ceasefire, but you should know, for example, that the number of assaults today is the highest in recent months,” Zelenskyy said, citing a military report showing Russia had carried out more than 200 attacks on Saturday.

“So there is no faith [in them],” he said, calling on Kyiv’s allies to increase pressure on Russia at a joint press conference with Czech President Petr Pavel on day one of his two-day visit to the country.

Pavel, a former NATO general, said Putin could end the war with “a single decision”, but he had not shown any “willingness” to do so.

Continued strikes

With the two countries still at odds over competing ceasefire proposals, hostilities persist.

Russia fired two ballistic missiles and a total of 165 exploding drones and decoys overnight, the Ukrainian Air Force said. Of those, 69 were intercepted and a further 80 lost, likely having been electronically jammed.

Two people were killed by Russian guided bombs Sunday, one each in the  and Sumy regions, Ukrainian officials said.

A Russian drone attack overnight on the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, wounded 11 people, Ukraine’s State Emergency Service said Sunday.

Russia’s Defence Ministry said its air defences shot down 13 Ukrainian drones overnight.

The governor of Russia’s Bryansk region said Ukrainian forces struck an electrical equipment factory close to the border with Ukraine, destroying much of the plant but causing no casualties.

The Israeli military will call up tens of thousands of reservists to expand the country’s war on the Gaza Strip, army chief Eyal Zamir has announced.

The Sunday announcement came after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to continue the war, despite growing calls from inside Israel for a deal that would bring home Israeli captives held in Gaza, and end the war, which has killed more than 50,000 Palestinians.

“This week, we are sending tens of thousands of draft orders to our reserve personnel to intensify and expand our action in Gaza. We are increasing the pressure to return our people [held captive in Gaza] and defeat Hamas,” Zamir said, adding that the Israeli military would “operate in additional areas and destroy all of [Hamas’s] infrastructure above and below ground”.

More to come…

Francesca Albanese, the United Nations special rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territory, talks to Al Jazeera following her controversial reappointment. She discusses Germany’s threats of arrest and cancelled university events. Albanese also argues that Israel’s actions in Gaza, including the blockade of aid and rejection of UN oversight, violate the UN Charter. Despite being labelled “anti-Semitic” and accused of supporting “terrorism”, she denies all allegations and says the real issue is the suppression of critical voices.

At least seven people were killed and 20 injured after a Doctors Without Borders hospital was bombed in Old Fangak, South Sudan. MSF condemned the attack as ‘a clear violation of international humanitarian law’ as fears grow of a return to civil war.

More than 3,500 children below the age of five years “face imminent death by starvation”, Gaza’s Government Media Office (GMO) has said, adding that some 70,000 children are being hospitalised in the enclave due to severe malnutrition amid more than two months of total Israeli blockade.

“Under this systematic blockade, more than 3,500 children under the age of five face imminent death by starvation, while approximately 290,000 children are on the brink of death,” the GMO statement on Telegram said on Sunday.

“At a time when 1.1 million children daily lack the minimum nutritional requirements for survival, this crime is being perpetrated by the ‘Israeli’ occupation using starvation as a weapon, amid shameful international silence,” it added.

At least 57 Palestinians have starved to death, causing global outrage, but that has failed to convince Israel to allow entry of aid into the enclave of 2.3 million people.

A shortage of food and supplies has driven the territory towards starvation, according to aid agencies. Supplies to treat and prevent malnutrition are depleted and quickly running out as documented cases of malnutrition rise.

The price of what little food is still available in the market is unaffordable for most in Gaza, where the United Nations says more than 80 percent of the population relies on aid.

Aid groups and rights campaigners have accused Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war.

Israel, for its part, insists the blockade is necessary to pressure Hamas to release the captives it still holds. Of the 59 captives still in Gaza, 24 are believed to be alive.

Israel’s war on Gaza has killed at least 52,495 Palestinians and wounded 118,366, according to Gaza’s Ministry of Health. The GMO updated the death toll to more than 61,700, saying thousands of people missing under the rubble are presumed dead.

Videos show the moment Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) carried out a drone attack on an airbase near Port Sudan airport, according to the Sudanese army. Port Sudan has been perceived as the safest place in the war-torn country.

Videos show the moment Israel bombed tents sheltering forcibly displaced Palestinians at Gaza’s Al-Rahb Camp, west of Khan Younis. Civil defence teams rescued children and recovered bodies from rubble and fire after further Israeli strikes.

Thousands of Israelis have gathered outside the Ministry of Defence in Tel Aviv, urging the government to prioritise the release of captives still held in Gaza instead of escalating military operations in the Palestinian territory.

The demonstration on Saturday was held as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government authorised the mobilisation of up to 60,000 reserve troops, signalling plans to intensify its assault on the besieged Palestinian enclave.

One protester held aloft a placard castigating Netanyahu that read, “our tyrant is a liar, because of him the state is on fire”.

Government officials claim an expanded military offensive on Gaza will pressure Hamas into releasing the 59 remaining captives, but critics argue it further endangers their lives. Ending the fleeting ceasefire, which saw Palestinian prisoners exchanged for Israeli captives earlier this year, has not led to any more releases.

A video circulated by Hamas on Saturday purported to show one of the Israeli captives, whom local media identified as Maxim Herkin. In the four-minute video posted online, Herkin is seen being rescued by Hamas members after an Israeli attack struck a tunnel, burying and injuring the Israeli captive.

Families of the captives released a statement saying they spent the Sabbath gripped by “excruciating anxiety” after news of the government’s planned escalation and the effect it could have on those still held in Gaza.

The Bring Them Home Campaign, a group representing the relatives, condemned the move as reckless.

“Israel is on its way to sinking into the Gaza mud in the name of the illusion that it is possible to achieve any victory without returning our brothers and sisters from captivity,” the group said in a post on X. “Expanding the fighting will endanger the kidnapped, the living and the dead alike.”

They urged Netanyahu to abandon the offensive and instead reach an agreement that would secure the captives’ return. “Stop this mistake,” the group said.

‘Protests not enough to influence Netanyahu’

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Israeli journalist Gideon Levy said the protest movement remains consistent, but lacks the momentum to challenge Netanyahu’s coalition. “It’s the same old protest, very courageous and devoted, but not big enough to influence Netanyahu,” Levy said.

He noted that a large segment of Israeli society continues to support the war effort, even amid rising frustration from the captives’ families, and that “when [Israelis] are called to war, they will obey.”

Netanyahu, speaking Thursday at a public event in Jerusalem, seemed to suggest that defeating Hamas remains Israel’s top priority instead of the release of captives. “We want to bring all our hostages home,” he said. “The war has a supreme goal, and the supreme goal is victory over our enemies, and this we will achieve.”

Captives’ families have accused Netanyahu of undermining previous attempts to reach a truce and swap deal. Some believe his refusal to compromise reflects political motives, aimed at ensuring the survival of his far-right coalition government, rather than genuine concern for the captives.

‘Oracle of Omaha’ stuns shareholders, but pledges to maintain investments in group and says he will still be ‘hanging around’.

Billionaire investor Warren Buffett has announced that he will retire from leading his Berkshire Hathaway business group at the end of the year.

Buffet told the group’s annual shareholder meeting on Saturday that he would step down as chief executive at the close of 2025, handing over the reins to vice chairman Greg Abel, already known to be his anointed successor.

“I would still hang around and could conceivably be useful in a few cases, but the final word would be what Greg said in operations, in capital deployment, whatever it might be,” said Buffett at the meeting in Omaha, Nebraska.

He added that the board of directors would be “unanimously in favour” of his recommendation.

About an hour later, Abel came out to oversee a formal Berkshire business meeting without Buffett. “I just want to say I couldn’t be more humbled and honoured to be part of Berkshire as we go forward,” he said.

Abel, 62, who has been the group’s vice chairman since 2018, managing non-insurance operations, was named Buffett’s expected successor as chief executive in 2021, but it was always assumed he would not take over until after Buffett’s death.

Previously, 94-year-old Buffett, known as the “The Oracle of Omaha” because of the influence he wields in business and financial circles, has always maintained he has no plans to retire.

His decision to step down caps a remarkable 60-year run during which he transformed Berkshire from a failing textile company into a $1.16 trillion conglomerate with liquid assets of $300bn.

Buffett’s net worth as of Saturday is $168.2bn, according to Forbes magazine’s real-time rich list. On Saturday, he pledged to keep his fortune invested in the company.

“I have no intention – zero – of selling one share of Berkshire Hathaway. I will give it away, eventually,” Buffett said.

“The decision to keep every share is an economic decision because I think the prospects of Berkshire will be better under Greg’s management than mine,” he said.

Earlier Saturday, Buffett warned about the dire global consequences of President Donald Trump’s tariffs, saying that “trade should not be a weapon” but “there’s no question that trade can be an act of war.”

Buffett said Trump’s trade policies have raised the risk of global instability by angering the rest of the world.

The People’s Action Party has been facing a concerted challenge form the Workers’ Party.

Singapore’s long-governing People’s Action Party (PAP) appeared set to retain its strong grip on power following the city-state’s general election, but early vote samples suggest the Workers’ Party (WP) could hold its ground, challenging the PAP’s dominance in several key areas.

Sample counts released by the Elections Department on Saturday showed the PAP ahead in 29 out of 32 contested constituencies, translating to about 87 of the 97 seats in parliament, including five secured uncontested.

A final tally was expected by early Sunday.

Although a comfortable win for the PAP was anticipated, the real test lay in how much support it could retain, especially under the leadership of newly appointed Prime Minister Lawrence Wong.

The party’s performance in 2020, when it won just more than 60 percent of the vote, was among its weakest showings since independence in 1965 after seceding from Malaysia.

Wong, who took office last year, campaigned on promises of continuity and new leadership, hoping to shore up support amid growing public concern about surging living costs and housing shortages in one of the world’s priciest locales.

The WP, Singapore’s most credible opposition force, contested 26 seats and is projected to keep the 10 it won in 2020, an unprecedented figure for any opposition party in the city-state.

While the PAP’s rule continues, the WP’s ability to maintain or slightly grow its share signals a shift in political sentiment, particularly among younger voters, according to analysts.

Saturday’s vote marked the first national test for Wong, 52, who succeeded Lee Hsien Loong, son of Singapore’s founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.

In many races, the PAP’s wins were big, the sample counting showed, with only three of the contests close and within the margin of error.

“It’s not just status quo, it’s also the margin of victory in each of the constituencies, and you can see that the numbers are quite remarkable,” said Mustafa Izzuddin, adjunct senior lecturer at the National University of Singapore, speaking to Reuters.

“That certainly points, at this juncture, to a healthy and strong mandate for the prime minister,” added Izzuddin.

The PAP, in power since before independence in 1965, still benefits from vast institutional reach and resources, while opposition parties struggle with limited coverage and funding.

Government officials had cautioned that losing seats could weaken Singapore’s ability to navigate global economic instability, especially amid ongoing US-China tensions.

The United States and Canada are experiencing one of their worst measles outbreaks in years, while the virus has also crossed to neighbouring Mexico.

A total of 2,500 cases and four deaths have been reported in the outbreaks across the three countries. Vaccine hesitancy has been blamed.

Here is what we know about the outbreaks so far and why measles cases are on the rise.

What is measles?

Measles is a highly contagious viral illness that starts with symptoms including high fever, cough, runny nose, red or watery eyes, and sensitivity to light. A few days after infection, a red, blotchy rash typically appears on the face and spreads down the body. Fatigue and loss of appetite are also common.

Most people recover within two to three weeks but complications, particularly in young children and those with weakened immune systems, can be serious.

These include ear infections, diarrhoea, pneumonia and brain swelling (encephalitis) which can lead to permanent disability or death. In wealthier countries, measles causes about one death in every 5,000 cases, but in lower-income regions with weaker healthcare systems, the fatality rate can be as high as one in 100.

Before the measles vaccine was introduced in 1963, about 3 to 4 million cases of measles were reported annually in the US, with hundreds of deaths and thousands of hospitalisations. By 2000, following widespread vaccination, measles was declared “eliminated” in the US – meaning there had been no continuous transmission of the disease for more than 12 months. Countries that have eliminated a disease through vaccines are considered to have “herd immunity” as long as vaccines continue to be offered to everyone.

What is herd immunity?

Herd immunity occurs when enough people in a community become immune to a disease, either through vaccination or by recovering from an infection.

The number of people who need to be immune in order to achieve herd immunity for the whole community varies from disease to disease. Measles, which spreads very easily, requires 95 percent of a community to have immunity.

When most people are immune, the disease has a much harder time spreading – meaning it is more likely to die before it can be transmitted to another host. This helps to protect those who cannot be vaccinated for specific reasons, including newborn babies or people with certain health conditions.

Experts say the safest way to maintain herd immunity is through vaccination due to the potentially severe effects of a measles infection.

How effective is the measles vaccine?

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), measles vaccination prevented an estimated 31.7 million deaths globally between 2000 and 2020.

The measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, widely used around the world, provides about 97 percent protection against the measles virus, according to public health agencies.

The vaccine is normally given to children in two stages: The first dose at 12 months and the second at about three years and four months of age (when the child is nearing pre-school age), as part of routine immunisation programmes in countries like the United Kingdom.

Breakthrough cases in vaccinated people are rare and usually mild.

Where has measles spread in North America?

North America is experiencing a significant measles resurgence, with more than 2,500 confirmed cases across the US, Canada and Mexico. Three deaths have occurred in the US and one in Mexico. The outbreak began in late 2024 in Ontario, Canada, before spreading to Texas and northern Mexico in early 2025, with Mennonite communities (Anabaptist Christian congregations), a historically under-vaccinated population, being the hardest hit.

A WHO report in April stated that measles cases in the Americas during the first three months of this year were 11 times higher than during the same period in 2024. The region now faces a “high” risk of measles outbreaks, compared with a “moderate” risk globally, the WHO said.

United States

The US has so far reported 935 confirmed measles cases across 30 states, with Texas being the epicentre of the outbreak, accounting for 683 of those cases. The outbreak has now also spread to New Mexico (67 cases), Oklahoma (16) and Kansas (37).

Three people died from measles between February and April, including two unvaccinated children in Texas and one unvaccinated adult in New Mexico. These mark the country’s first measles deaths since 2015.

In 2019, the US experienced its most significant measles outbreak since 1992, with 1,274 confirmed cases reported across 31 states, but no deaths.

Canada

Meanwhile, Canada is experiencing its worst measles outbreak in more than 25 years. Since mid-October 2024, Ontario alone has recorded more than 1,000 cases.

Canadian officials confirmed that the outbreak had originated from a large gathering in New Brunswick province that involved Mennonite communities, which strive for a simple life and tend to avoid modern technology and medicine.

Mexico

In Mexico, the number of measles cases has risen sharply this year in the northern state of Chihuahua, where 786 cases have been reported so far. Just seven cases were reported in the whole country last year. A 31-year-old, unvaccinated man from Ascension, Chihuahua, died from the disease in early April.

Why is measles spreading?

According to the WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the main reason measles is spreading is that fewer people are taking up vaccines. Misinformation and growing hesitancy have seen vaccination rates dropping below the level needed for herd immunity.

In some US states and Canadian provinces, exemptions – giving non-medical reasons for declining vaccines, such as for personal or religious reasons – are becoming more common. This has led to the existence of clusters of unvaccinated people who are more vulnerable to outbreaks when exposed to the virus.

The US CDC reported that during the 2023-2024 school year, exemptions from one or more vaccines were claimed by parents or carers of 3.3 percent of preschool children, compared with 3 percent the previous year. Exemptions were higher in 40 states and the District of Columbia, with 14 states reporting exemption rates exceeding 5 percent.

Health officials point to how closely connected the affected communities in the US, Canada and Mexico are, with people frequently travelling between them. Mennonite groups, in particular, have strong cross-border ties and lower vaccination rates, making it much easier for the virus to spread from one region to another.

Who are the ‘anti-vaxxers’ and what are their concerns?

Anti-vaccine advocates, often referred to as “anti-vaxxers”, oppose vaccinations for a number of reasons, including fears about side effects, distrust of pharmaceutical companies or government agencies, and religious or personal beliefs.

Mennonite groups in Ontario and Chihuahua have also historically been hesitant about taking up vaccines, and health authorities say a significant share of recent measles cases in these areas are concentrated within this population.

One of the most persistent myths driving vaccine hesitancy is the claim that vaccines cause autism. This belief stems from a 1998 study that has since been discredited and retracted.

Will Trump’s pick of RFK Jr as health secretary push vaccination levels down further?

Robert F Kennedy Jr’s appointment as US Secretary of Health and Human Services prompted concern among health experts, particularly as measles cases are on the rise across North America.

Kennedy, a longstanding vaccine sceptic, has repeated false claims that vaccines are linked to autism and that the MMR vaccine contains “aborted fetus debris”.

Health experts have debunked this claim. The rubella part of the vaccine was made using lab-grown cells which were copied from a single foetal sample taken in the 1960s. These cells have been multiplied in labs for decades and are used to grow the virus needed for the vaccine. But the cells themselves are removed during the process, so there is no fetal tissue in the actual shot.

Kennedy has been criticised for downplaying the severity of the current measles outbreak, and for promoting unproven treatments for measles. He has suggested alternatives including vitamin A supplements and cod liver oil, which experts say do not replace vaccination and are not backed by strong scientific evidence.

Kennedy has also made major changes to the Department of Health and Human Services, firing thousands of employees and cutting budgets for key agencies like the CDC, which experts say could weaken the country’s ability to respond to health emergencies.

I moved to Lesbos in 2001. This was nearly 80 years after my grandmother had arrived from Ayvalik on this same island as a nine-year-old refugee. She had stayed there for two years before moving to Piraeus. My grandmother was among the nearly 1.5 million Greeks forced to flee Asia Minor in the 1920s.

By 2001, the history of Lesbos as a place of refuge had been almost forgotten by the public, and yet the island continued to serve as a temporary stop for people crossing the Eastern Mediterranean, seeking protection in Europe.

In 2015, Lesbos found itself at the heart of a big refugee story once again. Wars and instability pushed millions to flee across the sea. Almost half of those trying to reach Greek territory arrived on the island.

Lesbos residents found themselves at the centre of a humanitarian response that gained global recognition. It was a time when the world began to talk about the solidarity shown by Greeks towards refugees and migrants, even as the country was mired in an economic crisis.

When I think of the solidarity that flourished during those days, I see outstretched hands along the shores of Lesbos. Countless moving stories emerged of locals helping with whatever they could, carrying food, clothes, and blankets from their homes to feed and dress the newcomers.

As newly arrived people filled the roads of the island, walking towards registration points, not a day went by without the locals giving a lift to a pregnant woman, a child, or a person with a disability we encountered on the way to work. The looks of gratitude, the smiles, the tears, and the endless thank-yous were unforgettable. Solidarity became a badge of honour, and triumphant stories of humanity and hope filled the media.

The island was transformed – its streets and squares filled with locals and newcomers mingling, a scene of human connection and shared humanity.

One day, a refugee family knocked on my door asking to wash their hands and have a little water. They had been on the road for days, sleeping in the park, waiting for a boat to continue their journey. I opened my door and 16 people came inside – among them, eight small children, a newborn, and a paraplegic girl. My small living room filled up; they sat on chairs, the sofa, even on the floor. Before I could bring them water, the children had already fallen asleep, and the adults, exhausted, closed their eyes, their bodies giving in to the weight of their fatigue.

Quietly, I left the room, leaving them to rest. The next morning, they said their goodbyes and boarded the ferry. They left behind a “Thank you” note with a hand-drawn flower and 16 names.

When I think of those days, my mind fills with images: People in the rain, people in the cold, people celebrating, and others mourning their dead. That summer, we attended burial after burial for those who hadn’t survived the dangerous sea journey.

A Palestinian volunteer once told me, “There’s nothing worse than dying in a foreign land and being buried without your loved ones.” When their loved ones weren’t there, we were. The strangers were not strangers to us; they became our people.

In October 2015, a wooden boat carrying more than 300 people sank off the western coast of Lesbos. As the tragedy unfolded, acts of humanity shone through. Locals and volunteers alike, fishermen included, rushed to help, pulling people from the sea and offering whatever comfort they could. Bodies washed ashore in the days that followed, and the morgue filled up.

A local woman held the body of a dead child in her arms. It was a little girl whose body had been found on the beach in front of her house. She wrapped her in a sheet and held her as she would her child – as anyone would hold any child.

Yet, even as the island’s shores became a symbol of solidarity, the shifting tides of European border policies were already beginning to reshape the reality for those arriving.

A few months later, Europe’s border policies changed, trapping asylum seekers on the island. The EU-Turkiye deal mandated that asylum seekers remain on the island where they landed while authorities assess whether they could be returned to Turkiye, deemed a “safe third country”.

The deal demonstrated that the European Union was ready to deviate from the basic principles of the rule of law and that border procedures and the safe-third-country concept were dangerous for the lives of refugees and migrants. It represented a frontal attack on international refugee and human rights protections, further instrumentalising people’s suffering.

Unfortunately, these policies have intensified since, and were eventually institutionalised at the state level, especially with the amendments of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), adopted in May 2024. The reform marked a radical shift in the EU rulebook for the worse, institutionalising discriminatory treatment of refugees, regimes of derogation, the revocation of basic rights and legal protections, and the imposition of extended and mass detention.

Back on Lesbos, I watched the smiles of people fade, along with their hopes, crushed inside and around the Moria camp, which had emerged in 2013 as a significantly smaller facility, never intended to accommodate the thousands who later stayed there. The mental health of the refugee and migrant population plummeted, with a significant rise in suicide attempts.

As the number of people increased, the appalling conditions, shortages, overcrowding, and extreme uncertainty created a desperate daily reality, one that bred frustration, anger, and sometimes violence. It was then that the authorities and media began to change the narrative. No longer were refugees and migrants portrayed as desperate souls arriving in the country and suffering in camps. They were now framed as a threat to the country.

Solidarity became part of the problem. It became a public insult, a mockery. Although NGOs and volunteers were called upon to provide food and services, and fill the endless gaps in humanitarian assistance, they were simultaneously accused by authorities of corruption and criminality. Common sense, humanity, and solidarity – the fabric of social cohesion – became targets. Society grew divided.

Xenophobic policies prompted xenophobic headlines, rescuers were persecuted, and increasingly racist voices dominated public discourse, threatening the memory of this island where humanity once thrived.

The events of 2015 were portrayed as a massive disaster that should never happen again. The miracle of solidarity, which brought global attention, resources, and solutions to an immense humanitarian crisis, was slandered. Policies of deterrence, pushbacks, refugee camps-turned-prisons, and the criminalisation of solidarity and civil society were presented as the only solutions. The polarisation deepened, escalating violence against asylum seekers, refugees, and solidarity workers.

The Moria camp – a place that can only be described as a graveyard for human rights – became a ticking time bomb for the island’s residents. At its peak, it devolved into a vast settlement of tents and shacks, with no access to potable water, hygiene, or basic necessities.

One afternoon in October 2016, I found myself in Moria, waiting for our interpreter so we could inform a family about their asylum interview date. As time passed, dark clouds gathered. Around me, people carried their belongings, children played in the dirt with whatever they could find, and young men hauled cardboard and plastic to shield themselves from the coming rain.

Standing there in the midst of it all, I watched a struggle for survival in conditions none of us would accept to endure for even an hour. Yet, every so often, someone would approach me – offering water, tea, or a piece of cardboard to sit on so I “wouldn’t have to stand”. The smiles of refugees made me feel so safe and so cared for, their humanity steadfast despite everything.

As the clouds thickened, I moved to help a woman secure her tent with stones. I bent down to add a few myself and saw that the tent was filled with small children. How could so many children fit into such a tiny tent? I admired her courage and determination to protect them. I smiled at her, and there, in the middle of nowhere, standing before a tent that the rain could wash away at any moment, she took my hand and invited me to share their meal.

How could such extremes fit into a single moment? The squalor, the inhumanity of the conditions, and yet, the hospitality, the need for one another, and the strength they gave even in the harshest of circumstances. How could one moment capture both need and dignity, desperation and generosity – the stones they used to anchor their tents also anchoring our shared humanity?

Back in town, where the voices against refugees and migrants were growing louder, I went to the supermarket. As I was standing in line, the woman in front of me turned to me and complained, “We’re overrun with foreigners. They’re everywhere. What’s going to happen with them?” She gestured towards a young African woman at the checkout counter.

The other customers nodded grimly. I thought about how to respond as I watched the young refugee woman place her few items on the counter. She then realised she didn’t have enough money and started to put back the few apples in her basket.

I looked at the woman in front of me watching the scene unfold. Fearing she would start shouting, I held my breath. Instead, with a decisive motion, she picked up the apples. “I’ll pay for these, my girl,” she said to the young woman, who looked at her in confusion. “Take them, don’t leave them.”

The young woman thanked her, hugged her, and left. And I heard the older woman mutter to herself, “What can they do? Who knows what they’ve been through? But what can we do, too?”

The op-ed is written on the occasion of the series of illustrations Kindness beyond boundaries, released by UN Human Rights, Refugee Support Aegean (RSA), the Greek Council for Refugees (GCR) and PICUM (Platform for International Cooperation on Undocumented Migrants), an initiative towards building a counter-narrative to the criminalisation of solidarity.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

Pakistan conducts training launch of surface-to-surface missile amid fears of military escalation with India over deadly attack on tourists in Kashmir.

Pakistan’s military says it has successfully test-fired a ballistic missile as tensions with neighbouring India over a deadly shooting attack in Indian-administered Kashmir last month remain high.

The surface-to-surface missile, named the Abdali Weapon System, with a range of 450km (280 miles), was successfully tested as part of an exercise on Saturday, Pakistan’s government said.

It added that the launch was “aimed at ensuring the operational readiness of troops and validating key technical parameters, including the missile’s advanced navigation system and enhanced maneuverability features”.

The tactical missile, which can carry conventional and nuclear warheads, is named after Ahmad Shah Abdali, the 18th-century founder of modern Afghanistan who led numerous invasions of the Indian subcontinent.

Pakistan’s President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif congratulated the scientists, engineers and those behind the successful missile test.

Pakistan conducted a successful training launch of the Abdali Weapon System, a surface-to-surface missile with a range of 450 kilometers, as part of Ex INDUS.

The launch was aimed at ensuring the operational readiness of troops and validating key technical parameters, including… pic.twitter.com/1CHHy9djhn

— Government of Pakistan (@GovtofPakistan) May 3, 2025

The ballistic missile’s test-firing came three days after Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said Islamabad had “credible intelligence” that India intends to launch a military strike within 24 to 36 hours in response to the killing of 25 male tourists and a Kashmiri last month in Indian-administered Kashmir.

India and Pakistan both stake a claim on the entire Kashmir region, but rule over parts of it. They have seen tensions spike over the issue frequently since their independence from British rule in 1947.

New Delhi accuses Islamabad of backing the April 22 attack in the scenic Pahalgam area by suspected Kashmiri rebels, and alleges that Pakistani nationals were involved in the killings. Pakistan has denied any involvement in the attack.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said he has given his military “full operational freedom” to respond as he promised to pursue those who had supported the attack “to the ends of the Earth”.

Pakistani minister Tarar said the Indian leaders want to use the Pahalgam attack as a “false pretext” to potentially strike Pakistan.

On Friday, Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff General Syed Asim Munir presided over a meeting of his top commanders about the “current Pakistan-India standoff”, a military statement said.

Munir “underscored the critical importance of heightened vigilance and proactive readiness across all fronts”.

Since the attack – the deadliest in Kashmir on civilians in years – India and Pakistan have exchanged tit-for-tat diplomatic barbs and expulsions, and shut border crossings. India also suspended its participation in the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan.

The two nuclear-armed countries have also exchanged gunfire along the militarised Line of Control (LoC), the de facto border dividing Kashmir between them, while Pakistan has threatened to suspend its participation in the 1972 Simla Agreement that underpins the LoC.

People in Indian-administered Kashmir have been concerned about the devastating ramifications of a potential military conflict between the two nations.

Islamabad, Pakistan – Eleven days after gunmen shot 26 people dead in the scenic valley of Baisaran in Indian-administered Kashmir’s Pahalgam, India and Pakistan stand on the brink of a military standoff.

The nuclear-armed neighbours have each announced a series of tit-for-tat steps against the other since the attack on April 22, which India has implicitly blamed Pakistan for, even as Islamabad has denied any role in the killings.

India has suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty that enforces a water-sharing mechanism Pakistan depends on. Pakistan has threatened to walk away from the 1972 Simla Agreement that committed both nations to recognising a previous ceasefire line as a Line of Control (LoC) – a de-facto border – between them in Kashmir, a disputed region that they each partly control but that they both claim in its entirety. Both nations have also expelled each other’s citizens and scaled back their diplomatic missions.

Despite a ceasefire agreement being in place since 2021, the current escalation is the most serious since 2019, when India launched air strikes on Pakistani soil following an attack on Indian soldiers in Pulwama, in Indian-administered Kashmir, that killed 40 troops. In recent days, they have traded fire across the LoC.

And the region is now on edge, amid growing expectations that India might launch a military operation against Pakistan this time too.

Yet, both countries have also engaged their diplomatic partners. On Wednesday, United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio called Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar, urging both sides to find a path to de-escalation. US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth called his Indian counterpart, Rajnath Singh, on Thursday to condemn the attack and offered “strong support” to India.

Sharif met envoys from China, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, three of Pakistan’s closest allies, to seek their support, and urged the ambassadors of the two Gulf nations to “impress upon India to de-escalate and defuse tensions”.

To understand how Pakistani strategists who have worked on ties with India view what might happen next, Al Jazeera spoke with Moeed Yusuf, who served as Pakistan’s national security adviser (NSA) between May 2021 and April 2022 under former Prime Minister Imran Khan.

Prior to his role as NSA, Yusuf also worked as a special adviser to Khan on matters related to national security starting in December 2019, four months after the Indian government, under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, revoked the special status of Indian-administered Kashmir.

Based in Lahore, Yusuf is currently the vice chancellor of a private university and has authored and edited several books on South Asia and regional security. His most recent book, Brokering Peace in Nuclear Environments: US Crisis Management in South Asia, was published in 2018.

Al Jazeera: How do you assess moves made by both sides so far in the crisis?

Moeed Yusuf: India and Pakistan have for long struggled in terms of crisis management. They don’t have a bilateral crisis management mechanism, which is the fundamental concern.

The number one crisis management tool used by both sides has been the reliance on third parties, with the idea being that they would try and restrain them both and help de-escalate the crisis.

This time, I feel the problem India has run into is that they followed the old playbook, but the leader of the most important third party, the United States, didn’t show up to support India.

It appears that they have so far taken a neutral and a hands-off position, as indicated by President Donald Trump few days ago. (Trump said that he knew the leaders of both India and Pakistan, and believed that they could resolve the crisis on their own.)

Pakistan’s response is directly linked to the Indian response, and that is historically how it has been, with both countries going tit-for-tat with each other. This time too, a number of punitive steps have been announced.

The problem is that these are easy to set into motion but very difficult to reverse, even when things get better, and they may wish to do so.

Unfortunately, in every crisis between them, the retaliatory steps are becoming more and more substantive, as in this case, India has decided to hold Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, which is illegal as the treaty provides no such provision.

Al Jazeera: Do you believe a strike is imminent and if both sides are indicating preparedness for a showdown?

Yusuf: In such moments, it is impossible to say. Action from India remains plausible and possible, but the window where imminence was a real concern has passed.

What usually happens in crises is that countries pick up troop or logistics movements, or their allies inform them, or they rely on ground intelligence to determine what might happen. Sometimes, these can be misread and can lead the offensive side to see an opportunity to act where none exists or the defensive side to believe an attack may be coming when it isn’t the case.

Pakistan naturally has to show commitment to prepare for any eventuality. You don’t know what will come next, so you have to be ready.

Having said that, I don’t think we are going to see a major war, but in these circumstances, you can never predict, and one little misunderstanding or miscalculation can lead to something major.

Al Jazeera: How do you see the role of third parties such as the US, China and Gulf States in this crisis, and how would you compare it with previous instances?

Yusuf: My last book, Brokering Peace (2018) was on the third-party management in Pakistan-India context, and this is such a vital element for both as they have internalised and built it into their calculus that a third-party country will inevitably come in.

The idea is that a third-party mediator will step in, and the two nations will agree to stop because that is what they really want, instead of escalating further.

And the leader of the pack of third-party countries is the United States since the Kargil war of 1999. (Pakistani forces crossed the LoC to try to take control of strategic heights in Ladakh’s Kargil, but India eventually managed to take back the territory. Then-US President Bill Clinton is credited with helping end that conflict.)

Everybody else, including China, ultimately backs the US position, which prioritises immediate de-escalation above all else during the crisis.

This changed somewhat in the 2016 surgical strikes and 2019 Pulwama crisis when the US leaned heavily on India’s side, perhaps unwittingly even emboldening them to act in 2019.

(In 2016, Indian troops launched a cross-border “surgical strike” that New Delhi said targeted armed fighters planning to attack India, after gunmen killed 19 Indian soldiers in an attack on an army base in Uri, Indian-administered Kashmir. Three years later, Indian fighter jets bombed what New Delhi said were bases of “terrorists” in Balakot, in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, after the attack on the Indian military convoy in which 40 soldiers were killed. India and Pakistan then engaged in an aerial dogfight, and an Indian pilot was captured and subsequently returned.)

However, this time, you have a president in the White House who turned around and told both Pakistan and India to figure it out themselves.

This, I think, has hurt India more than Pakistan, because for Pakistan, they had discounted the possibility of significant US support in recent years, thinking they have gotten too close to India due to their strategic relationship.

But India would have been hoping for the Americans to put their foot down and pressure Pakistan, which did not exactly materialise. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s phone call again is playing down the middle, where they are telling both the countries to get out of war.

So, what they have done has, oddly enough, still played a role in holding India back so far, since India didn’t (so far) feel as emboldened to take action as they may have during Pulwama in 2019.

Gulf countries have played a more active role than before. China, too, has made a statement of restraint.

Al Jazeera: How has Pakistan’s relationship with India evolved in recent years?

Yusuf: There has been a sea change in the relationship between the two countries. When I was in office, despite serious problems and India’s unilateral moves in Kashmir in 2019, we saw a ceasefire agreement on the Line of Control as well as back-channel talks.

We have tried to move ahead and reduce India’s incentive to destabilise Pakistan, but I think India has lost that opportunity due to its own intransigence, hubris and an ideological bent that continues to force them to demean and threaten Pakistan.

That has led to a change in Pakistan as well, where the leadership is now convinced that the policy of restraint did not deliver, and India has misused and abused Pakistan’s offers for dialogue.

The view now is that if India doesn’t want to talk, Pakistan shouldn’t be pleading either. If India does reach out, we will likely respond, but there isn’t any desperation in Pakistan at all.

This is not a good place to be for either country. I have long believed and argued that ultimately for Pakistan to get to where we want to go economically, and for India to get to where it says it wants to go regionally, it cannot happen unless both improve their relationship. For now, though, with the current Indian attitude, unfortunately, I see little hope.

Al Jazeera: Do you anticipate any direct India-Pakistan talks at any level during or after this crisis?

Yes – I don’t know when it will be, or who will it be through or with, but I think one of the key lessons Indians could probably walk away with once all this is over is that attempting to isolate Pakistan isn’t working.

Indus Water Treaty in abeyance? Simla Agreement’s potential suspension? These are major decisions, and the two countries will need to talk to sort these out, and I think at some point in future they will engage.

But I also don’t think that Pakistan will make a move towards rapprochement, as we have offered opportunities for dialogues so many times recently to no avail. As I said, the mood in Pakistan has also firmed up on this question.

Ultimately, the Indians need to basically decide if they want to talk or not. If they come forth, I think Pakistan will still respond positively to it.

*This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.

Cuts will reportedly take place over several years and be accomplished through reduced hiring as opposed to layoffs.

United States President Donald Trump’s administration is planning significant personnel cuts at the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and other major US spy units, according to The Washington Post, in a move seen as part of his bid to downsize key government agencies.

The CIA plans to cut 1,200 positions, along with thousands more from other parts of the US intelligence community, the newspaper reported on Friday.

Members of Congress have reportedly been told about the planned cuts, which will take place over several years and be accomplished in part through reduced hiring as opposed to layoffs, the report added.

Asked about the report, a spokesperson for the agency did not confirm the specifics, but said that the CIA director, John Ratcliffe, “is moving swiftly to ensure the CIA workforce is responsive to the administration’s national security priorities”.

“These moves are part of a holistic strategy to infuse the agency with renewed energy, provide opportunities for rising leaders to emerge, and better position CIA to deliver on its mission,” the spokesperson also said.

Trump appointee Ratcliffe, who was sworn in as CIA director in January, previously told lawmakers that, under his leadership, the agency would “produce insightful, objective, all-source analysis, never allowing political or personal biases to cloud our judgement or infect our products”.

“We will collect intelligence, especially human intelligence, in every corner of the globe, no matter how dark or difficult,” as well as “conduct covert action at the direction of the president, going places no one else can go and doing things no one else can do”, he said.

Addressing CIA officers, he said: “If all of this sounds like what you signed up for, then buckle up and get ready to make a difference. If it doesn’t, then it’s time to find a new line of work.”

In March, the CIA also announced that it would fire an undetermined number of junior officers as part of Trump’s government downsizing policy.

An agency spokesperson said those officers with behavioural issues or who are deemed a poor fit for intelligence work will be laid off, noting that not everyone proves to be able to handle the pressures of the job.

In February, the CIA also offered buyouts to some employees. It was not clear how many employees accepted the offer.

These are the key events on day 1,164 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Here is where things stand on Saturday, May 3:

Fighting

• A resident was killed in Ukraine’s southern Kherson region when a fallen attack drone detonated as the victim was trying to carry it away from a residential house.

• At least 46 people were injured after Russia launched a mass drone attack in Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, hitting a high-rise apartment block and triggering fires.

• Kharkiv’s Mayor Ihor Terekhov said there had been Russian strikes on 12 locations in four central districts of the city.

• Terekhov said an 11-year-old child was among those injured in the latest Russian attack, and eight of the injured were being treated at a hospital.

• Russia said its forces were continuing to create a “security strip” in border areas of Ukraine’s Sumy region after driving Ukrainian troops out of the Kursk region, just across the border in western Russia.

• More than 20 people were injured after Russian strikes hit the southern Ukrainian city of Zaporizhzhia.
• Ukrainian regional authorities said four people were also injured in a Russian joint drone and artillery attack on localities east of Nikopol city in southeastern Dnipropetrovsk region.
• Russia’s Ministry of Defence reports that its air defence units destroyed 10 Ukrainian drones in an hour. Eight of the drones were intercepted over the border region of Bryansk and two over Russian-annexed Crimea.
• Yury Slyusar, acting governor of Russia’s Rostov region, located on Ukraine’s eastern border, said Russian air defence units destroyed Ukrainian drones over five districts. Falling fragments from the destroyed drones had damaged some homes, he said, but there were no casualties.
• Ukraine’s internal security agency, the SBU, accused Russian intelligence of orchestrating an attempt to assassinate prominent Ukrainian blogger Serhii Sternenko, accusing an unnamed 45-year-old woman of carrying out the failed gun attack that injured the target.

Military aid

• President Volodymyr Zelenskyy denounces the latest barrage of drone strikes on civilian areas of Ukraine, while complaining that the country’s allies were moving too slowly in helping beef up his country’s air defence capability.
• The United States Department of State has approved the potential sale of F-16 training and sustainment, along with related equipment, to Ukraine for $310m, according to the Pentagon. The sale could include aircraft modifications and upgrades, flight training and maintenance.

Sanctions

• New economic sanctions are being readied against Russia to intensify pressure on Moscow to embrace US President Donald Trump’s efforts to end its war on Ukraine, three US officials said. The targets include the state-owned Russian energy giant Gazprom.

Politics and diplomacy

• Ukrainian armed forces will take part in a British military procession on Monday celebrating the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe (VE) Day, which marks the end of fighting on the continent during World War II.

• US Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have renewed calls on Russia and Ukraine to reach a peace deal, saying there was no clear end in sight to the conflict and warning that Trump needed a breakthrough “very soon”.