money

The resurgence of conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo has drawn renewed international attention following M23’s swift capture of Goma and Bukavu in late January 2025. In response, global actors have called for an immediate ceasefire and direct negotiations. Notably, Qatar and the United States have stepped forward as emerging mediators. This new momentum offers a rare opportunity to revisit the shortcomings of past mediation efforts – particularly failures in disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR), wealth-sharing, and regional consensus. Any new diplomatic initiative must prioritise these elements to forge a durable settlement and lasting regional stability.

To achieve a sustainable and enduring peace in eastern DRC, it is essential to address the root causes of the conflict. The region’s vast deposits of natural resources – especially rare earth minerals – have attracted international, regional and local actors competing for control, fuelling instability. Compounding this is the Congolese central government’s limited capacity to govern the eastern provinces, enabling the proliferation of armed groups with diverse allegiances. Ethnic tensions further exacerbate the crisis, particularly since the 1994 Rwandan genocide, after which the arrival of Hutu refugees and the formation of hostile militias heightened insecurity and cross-border conflict.

While regional dynamics, including Rwandan involvement, are undeniably significant, attributing the conflict solely to Rwanda risks oversimplification. Such narratives obscure the DRC’s longstanding structural inequalities, particularly the marginalisation of Congolese Tutsi communities. A durable peace must engage with these internal dynamics by ensuring the meaningful inclusion of Congolese Tutsi in the national political framework and addressing their grievances through equitable and just mechanisms.

Despite repeated international engagement, past mediation efforts in eastern DRC – from the Pretoria Agreement to the 2009 peace accords – have consistently failed to deliver lasting peace. These initiatives were undermined by structural weaknesses that eroded both their credibility and effectiveness.

A central flaw has been the absence of credible enforcement mechanisms. Most agreements relied on voluntary compliance and lacked robust, impartial monitoring frameworks capable of verifying implementation or deterring violations. Where monitoring mechanisms existed, they were often under-resourced, poorly coordinated, or perceived as biased. The international community’s inconsistent attention and limited political will to exert sustained pressure further undermined these efforts. In the absence of meaningful accountability, armed groups and political elites repeatedly violated agreements without consequence, fuelling a cycle of impunity and renewed violence.

Equally problematic has been the exclusionary nature of the peace processes. Negotiations were often dominated by political and military elites, sidelining civil society, grassroots communities, and particularly women – actors essential for building sustainable peace. Without broad-based participation, the accords failed to reflect the realities on the ground or earn the trust of local populations.

Moreover, these efforts largely ignored the root causes of the conflict, such as land disputes, ethnic marginalisation, governance failures and competition over natural resources. By prioritising short-term ceasefires and elite power-sharing arrangements, mediators overlooked the deeper structural issues that drive instability.

DDR programs – vital to breaking the conflict cycle – have also been inadequately designed and poorly executed. Many former combatants were left without viable livelihoods, creating fertile ground for re-recruitment into armed groups and further violence.

Crucially, these flaws were compounded by a lack of political will within the Congolese government. Successive administrations have, at times, instrumentalised peace talks to consolidate power rather than to advance genuine reform, undermining implementation and eroding public confidence.

More recent efforts, such as the Luanda and Nairobi processes, aimed to revive political dialogue and de-escalate tensions. However, they too have struggled to gain legitimacy. Critics argue that both initiatives were top-down, narrowly political and failed to include the voices of those most affected by the conflict. Civil society actors and marginalised communities perceived these dialogues as superficial and disconnected from local realities.

These processes also fell short in addressing the underlying drivers of violence – displacement, land ownership disputes, poor governance and the reintegration of ex-combatants. Without credible mechanisms for local participation or structural reform, the Luanda and Nairobi processes came to be seen more as diplomatic performances than genuine pathways to peace.

Taken together, these recurring shortcomings explain why international mediation efforts in DRC have largely failed. For any new initiative – including those led by Qatar and the United States – to succeed, it must move beyond these limitations and embrace a more inclusive, accountable and locally rooted approach.

The latest round of international facilitation – led by the United States and Qatar, alongside African-led efforts by the East African Community (EAC) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) under Togolese President Faure Gnassingbe – offers renewed potential for meaningful progress. However, success will depend on whether these efforts can overcome the systemic failures that have plagued previous mediation attempts.

To chart a more effective and durable path to peace, Qatari and American engagement should be guided by three core principles drawn from past experience:

First, prioritise inclusive participation. Previous peace processes were largely elite-driven, involving governments and armed groups while excluding civil society, women and affected communities. This lack of inclusivity weakened legitimacy and failed to address the grievances of those most impacted by violence. A credible mediation process must include these actors to build a broad-based coalition for peace and ensure that negotiated outcomes reflect the lived realities of eastern DRC communities.

Second, address the root causes of the conflict – not just its symptoms. Earlier efforts focused narrowly on ceasefires and power-sharing, without tackling the structural drivers of instability. Effective mediation must engage with unresolved land disputes, ethnic marginalization, governance failures and the socioeconomic reintegration of former combatants. Without addressing these underlying issues, any agreement will be fragile and short-lived.

Third, establish credible enforcement and accountability mechanisms. One of the most persistent weaknesses of past agreements has been the absence of strong implementation tools. Agreements often lacked independent monitoring bodies, clear benchmarks and consequences for violations. The international community, including Qatar and the United States, must commit to sustained diplomatic pressure and support mechanisms that can ensure compliance and respond decisively to breaches. Without this, the risk of relapse into violence remains high.

By adopting these principles, current mediation efforts stand a greater chance of breaking the cycle of failed peace initiatives and laying the groundwork for a more just and lasting resolution in eastern DRC.

The crisis has once again reached a critical juncture. The involvement of new actors such as Qatar and the United States, working alongside African regional mechanisms, presents a rare opportunity to reset the approach to peacebuilding. By learning from past failures and committing to an inclusive, root cause oriented, and enforceable mediation framework, these efforts can move beyond temporary fixes and lay the foundation for a durable peace – one that finally addresses the aspirations and grievances of the Congolese people.

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

Doctors at the Nasser Hospital in Gaza are overwhelmed by a surge in the number of malnourished babies and children in urgent need of life-saving treatment. Israel’s months-long blockade has left medicine, food, and baby formula critically scarce.

Washington and Tehran have taken a tough public stance before talks, with enrichment a key point of contention.

Iran and the United States are set to hold a fifth round of talks on Tehran’s nuclear programme amid uncompromising rhetoric on both sides.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff are due to meet in Rome on Friday.

The ongoing talks, mediated by Oman, seek a new deal in which Iran would be prevented from producing nuclear weapons while having international sanctions eased. However, little progress has been made so far, and both Washington and Tehran have taken a tough stance in public in recent days, particularly regarding Iran’s enrichment of uranium.

Witkoff has said Iran cannot be allowed to carry out any enrichment.

Tehran, which has raised its enrichment to about 60 percent, well above civilian needs but below the 90 percent needed for weaponisation, has rejected that “red line”.

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called the demand “excessive and outrageous,” warning that the ongoing talks are unlikely to yield results.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Tuesday that Washington is working to reach an agreement that would allow Iran to have a civil nuclear energy program but not enrich uranium, while admitting that achieving such a deal “will not be easy”.

On Thursday, the State Department announced new sanctions on Iran’s construction sector.

“Figuring out the path to a deal is not rocket science,” Araghchi said on social media on Friday morning. “Zero nuclear weapons = we DO have a deal. Zero enrichment = we do NOT have a deal. Time to decide…”

A spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Tehran took aim at the new sanctions, calling the move “vicious, illegal, and inhumane”.

High stakes

The stakes are high for both sides. Trump wants to curtail Tehran’s potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race.

Iran insists its nuclear ambitions are strictly civilian, but seeks to ease international sanctions that hamper its economy.

During his first term, in 2018, Trump nixed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), a 2015 agreement that saw Iran scale back its nuclear programme in exchange for eased sanctions.

After his return to the White House for a second term in January, Trump renewed his “maximum pressure” programme against Iran, piling further economic pressure, for example, by choking the country’s oil exports, particularly to China.

Iran responded defiantly, promising to defend itself against any attack and escalating enrichment far beyond the 2015 pact’s limits.

Tensions began to ease in April as the two countries launched the talks mediated by Oman, but Tehran’s enrichment programme has become a major point of contention.

Should that see the talks fail, the cost could be high. Trump has repeatedly threatened military action if no deal is reached.

Israel, which opposes the US talks with its regional foe, has warned that it would never allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons. Following reports that Israel may be planning to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, Araghchi warned on Thursday that Washington will bear legal responsibility if Iran is attacked.

Ceasefire negotiations between Russia and Ukraine may soon be under way, but Ukraine’s economic recovery will be hobbled unless the European Union fast-tracks the war-torn country’s membership and provides hundreds of billions of euros’ worth of insurance and investment, experts tell Al Jazeera.

“I think what Ukraine needs is some kind of future where it will have a stable and defendable border, and that will only come, I would think, with EU membership,” historian Phillips O’Brien told Al Jazeera.

The US administration of President Donald Trump last month handed Ukraine and Russia a ceasefire proposal that excluded future NATO membership of Ukraine, satisfying a key Kremlin demand and leaving Ukraine without the security guarantees it seeks.

“What business is actually going to take the risk of getting involved there economically?” asked O’Brien. “With NATO off the table, I think if Ukraine is going to have a chance of rebuilding and being integrated into Europe, it will have to be through a fast-tracked EU membership.”

That membership is by no means assured, although the European Commission started negotiations in record time last June, and Ukraine has the support of EU heavyweights like France and Germany.

If Ukraine becomes an EU member, it would still face a devastated economy requiring vast investment.

The Kyiv School of Economics (KSE) estimated that between Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022 and November last year, Moscow’s onslaught had destroyed $170bn of infrastructure, with the housing, transport and energy sectors most affected.

That figure did not include the damage incurred in almost a decade of war in the eastern regions of Luhansk and Donetsk since 2014 or the loss of 29 percent of Ukraine’s gross domestic product (GDP) from the invasion in 2022. The estimate also did not put a value on the loss of almost a fifth of Ukraine’s territory, which Russia now occupies.

That territory contains almost half of Ukraine’s unexploited mineral wealth, worth an estimated $12.4 trillion, according to SecDev, a Canadian geopolitical risk firm.

It also does not include some types of reconstruction costs, such as chemical decontamination and mine-clearing.

The World Bank put the cost of infrastructure damages slightly higher this year, at $176bn, and predicts the cost of reconstruction and recovery at about $525bn over 10 years.

‘The Kremlin has certainly looted occupied territory’

Economic war has been part of Russia’s strategy since the invasion of Donetsk and Luhansk in 2014, argued Maximilian Hess, a risk analyst and Eurasia expert at the International Institute of Strategic Studies.

“The Kremlin has certainly looted occupied territory, including for coking coal, agricultural products, and iron,” Hess told Al Jazeera.

The KSE has estimated Russia stole half a million tonnes of grain, included in the $1.9bn damages bill to the agricultural sector.

Using long-range rocketry, Russia also targeted industrial hubs not under its control.

Ukraine inherited a series of factories from the Soviet Union, including the Kharkiv Tractor Plant, the Zaporizhia Automobile Plant, the Pivdenmash rocket manufacturer in Dnipro and massive steel plants.

“All were targeted by Russian forces,” wrote Hess in his recent book, Economic War. “Russia’s attacks were, of course, primarily aimed at devastating the Ukrainian economy and weakening its ability and will to fight, but they also raised the cost to the West of supporting Ukraine in the conflict, something the Kremlin hoped would lead to reduced support for Kyiv.”

Through occupation and targeting, Russia managed to deprive Ukraine of a flourishing metallurgy sector.

According to the United States Geological Survey, metallurgical production decreased by 66.5 percent as a result of the war.

That is a vast loss, considering that Ukraine once produced almost a third of the iron ore in Europe, Russia and Central Eurasia, half of the region’s manganese ore and a third of its titanium. It remains the only producer of uranium in Europe, an important resource in the continent’s quest for greater energy autonomy.

Ukraine’s claims to have built a $20bn defence industrial base with allied help, a rare wartime economic success story.

That can make up for the losses in metallurgy, Hess said, “but only in part and in different regions of the country from which those mining and metallurgical ones were concentrated. Boosting [metallurgical activities] in places like Kryvyi Rih, Dnipro, Zaporizhzhia, and ideally territory ultimately freed from Russian occupation, will be necessary to win the peace.”

Trump’s minerals deal, and other instruments

Weeks ago, Ukraine and the US signed a memorandum of intent to jointly exploit Ukraine’s mineral wealth.

Ukraine committed to putting half the proceeds from its metallurgical activities into a Reconstruction Fund, but experts doubted the notion that mineral wealth can rebuild Ukraine.

“Projects have a long launch period … from five to 10 years,” Maxim Fedoseienko, head of strategic projects at the KSE Institute, told Al Jazeera. “You need to make documentation, environmental impacts assessment, and after that, you can also need three years to build this mine.”

The US and EU might invest in such mines, Fedoseienko said, because “we have more than 24 kinds of materials from the EU list of critical [raw] materials,” but they would only contribute to the Ukrainian economy if investments were equitable.

Trump presented the minerals deal as payback for billions in military aid.

“There’s nothing remotely fair about it. The aid was not given to be paid back,” said O’Brien.

As Fedoseienko put it, “It is not fair if everyone will say, ‘OK, we will help you in a time of war, so you are owned [by] us.’”

In addition to fairness, Ukraine needs money. Some of that needs to come in the form of insurance.

A state-backed war-risk insurance formula Kyiv reached with the United Kingdom in 2023, for example, brought bulk carriers back to Ukraine’s ports and defeated Russian efforts to blockade Ukrainian grain exports.

As a result, Ukraine exported 57.5 million tonnes of agricultural goods in 2023-2024, and was on track to export 77 million tonnes in the 2024-2025 marketing year, which ends in June, its agriculture ministry said.

“There needs to be a substantial expansion of public insurance products in particular, as well as a move to seize frozen Russian assets,” said Hess.

Seizing some $300bn in Russian central bank money held in the EU was deemed controversial, but the measure is now receiving support.

“The Russian state has committed these war crimes, has broken international law, has done this damage to Ukraine –  that actually becomes a just way of helping Ukraine rebuild,” said O’Brien. “[Europeans] have a very strong case for this, but they, right now, lack the political will to do it.”

Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, has already repeatedly asked Europe to use the money for Ukraine’s defence and reconstruction.

What Europeans have done in the meantime is going some way towards rebuilding Ukraine.

Some $300m in interest payments proceeding from Russian assets are diverted to reconstruction each year.

A European Commission programme provides 9.3 billion euros ($10.5bn) of financial support designed to leverage investment from the private sector.

Financial institutions such as the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the European Investment Bank are providing loan guarantees to Ukrainian banks, which gives them liquidity.

“So Ukrainian banks can provide loans to Ukrainian companies to invest and operate in Ukraine. This is a big ecosystem to finance investment and operational needs to the Ukrainian economy,” said Fedoseienko.

Together with the finance ministry, the KSE operates an online portal providing information about the various instruments available, which has already helped bring 165 investments to fruition worth $27bn.

“Is it enough to recover the Ukrainian economy?” Fedoseienko asked. “No, but this is a significant programme to support Ukraine now.”

By Tina Teng

Published on
23/05/2025 – 8:14 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Crude oil prices fell for a third consecutive trading day on Thursday ahead of the US-Iran nuclear talks. Traders are growing concerned about the possible return of oil supply from Iran, which holds around one-third of the world’s oil reserves.

Adding to the pressure, a Bloomberg report stated that the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies (OPEC+) is considering a third consecutive production hike in July, compounding fears of an oversupplied market.

Oil prices continued to decline during Friday’s Asian session. As of 4:40 am CEST, Brent futures were down 0.59% to $64.06 per barrel, while West Texas Intermediate (WTI) futures fell 0.6% to $60.83 per barrel—both touching their lowest levels in over a week.

Potential oversupply overshadows geopolitical tensions

Crude prices have experienced notable volatility in recent weeks as market participants weigh rising geopolitical tensions against mounting supply from major oil-producing nations. Broader macroeconomic factors—such as easing US-China trade tensions and renewed selling in US Treasuries—have also been influencing oil market movements.

Earlier in the week, prices briefly spiked following a CNN report that Israel was preparing to launch strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, citing intelligence from US sources. However, the rally proved short-lived, with analysts suggesting the warning may have been a strategic move by the US to exert pressure on Iran ahead of the nuclear negotiations.

The geopolitical boost was quickly overshadowed on Wednesday by data showing a surge in US crude inventories. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), US oil stockpiles rose to 443.2 million barrels in the week ending 16 May—the highest level since July 2024. The report also indicated that net US crude imports had increased for a third consecutive week, while domestic demand remained weaker than expected.

OPEC+ may accelerate production hike

News about OPEC+’s potential acceleration in production hike sent the oil price down further on Thursday. The oil production cartel is reportedly considering hiking crude output by 411,000 barrels per day (bpd) in July. The decision is yet to be finalised on 1 June when the group holds the next meeting.

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 and June. 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.

Crude prices have consistently fallen following OPEC+ announcements of larger-than-expected production increases in both April and May. However, the potential July decision may already be priced in by markets—unless the group surprises traders with an even more aggressive supply boost.

Demand outlook remains weak

The demand outlook remains fragile amid ongoing concerns over slowing global growth, particularly driven by the US tariffs. Crude prices had previously dropped to a four-year low on 9 April and again on 5 May. The oil market rebounded following the US and China’s trade talks earlier this month, when the world’s two largest economies reached an agreement to pause high tariffs on each other for 90 days.

While near-term pressure remains supply-driven, there is cautious optimism that a sustained recovery in market sentiment, driven by further progress in US tariff negotiations, could support a rebound in oil demand.

“While the immediate pressure comes from the supply side, I believe that in the longer term, further progress on US tariff negotiations with key partners could revive demand and offer more meaningful support for oil,” Dilin Wu, a research strategist at Pepperstone Australia, said.

The US will cut exports to Sudan and lines of government credit after determining banned weapons were used in the conflict between government forces and the RSF.

The United States will impose sanctions on Sudan after determining that the country’s military used chemical weapons last year while fighting against paramilitary forces.

“The United States calls on the Government of Sudan to cease all chemical weapons use and uphold its obligations” under the Chemical Weapons Convention, US Department of State spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a statement on Thursday.

Bruce said the US Congress has been notified of the State Department’s decision, and sanctions will be imposed around June 6.

They will include restrictions on US exports to Sudan and a block on access to US government lines of credit. Bruce’s statement did not include further details about when and where the chemical weapons were used by Sudanese government forces.

The New York Times reported in January that government forces had used chemical weapons on at least two occasions in remote parts of Sudan against the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The report cited unnamed US officials who said the weapon may have been chlorine gas, which can lead to severe respiratory pain and death.

Sudan’s army and the RSF have been locked in a civil war since April 2023 following a power struggle between the two sides.

The conflict has created one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises and a famine across Sudan, killing thousands and displacing 13 million people.

The US has also previously accused the RSF and its allies of committing genocide, and sanctioned top leaders like the RSF head, General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo.

In January, the US also sanctioned Sudan’s military chief and de facto head of state, Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, for refusing to participate in international peace talks.

These are the key events on day 1,184 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Here is where things stand on Friday, May 23:

Fighting

• Ukrainian drones disrupted air traffic around Moscow, grounding planes at several major airports on Thursday, as 35 drones targeting the city were downed, according to Russia’s Ministry of Defence.
• According to the ministry and Moscow mayor’s office, a total of 46 Ukrainian drones targeted Russia’s capital, while an additional 70 drones were launched against other targets across the country.
• Russia launched 128 drones at Ukraine overnight, according to Ukraine’s air force, with 112 of those drones either shot down, jammed or were lost en route to their targets.

• Russia said that 12 civilians were injured in a “massive” Ukrainian strike on the town of Lgov in Russia’s Kursk region.
• Valerii Zaluzhnyi, the former top commander of Ukraine’s military who was known for clashing with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said it was unlikely Ukraine would be able to return to the borders with Russia it held from 1991 until the Russian invasion of 2014. Even keeping Ukraine’s borders up until Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 may also not be possible, he said.
• “I hope that there are not people in this room who still hope for some kind of miracle or lucky sign that will bring peace to Ukraine, the borders of 1991 or 2022 and that there will be great happiness afterward,” Zaluzhnyi told a forum in Kyiv.
• Russia said it has received a list of names from Ukraine for a prisoner of war swap. A swap of 1,000 prisoners from each side was agreed to during a meeting last week between Russian and Ukrainian officials in Istanbul aimed at ending the war.

Regional security

• Finland said it is closely monitoring a Russian military build-up along its 1,340km (832-mile) joint border with Russia. Finland closed the border with its neighbour in December 2023 when 1,000 migrants crossed its frontier without visas.

Economy

• Following a meeting in Canada this week, the G7’s finance ministers said they would explore further sanctions on Russia if it fails to reach a ceasefire with Ukraine. They also said they will work to ensure “no countries or entities” that fuelled “Russia’s war machine” will be able to benefit from Ukraine’s reconstruction.
• Moscow is moving to block foreign companies returning to Russia from accessing “buyback” options for assets left there when they pulled out following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. The bill before Russia’s legislature allows “Russian citizens and companies to refuse to return assets to foreign investors, subject to a number of conditions”.

US President Donald Trump announces his latest defence plan: The Golden Dome.

Estimated at a cost of $175bn, it is designed to shoot down advanced missiles headed towards the United States.

Using both ground and space to detect incoming projectiles, it will far surpass a similar system used in Israel known as the Iron Dome.

But critics say it could prove ineffective and upset the balance of world power.

So, might the scheme lead to the militarisation of space and threaten the global order?

And could there be other motives behind Trump’s announcement?

Presenter:

Elizabeth Puranam

Guests:

Michael O’Hanlon, Senior fellow and director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution

Youngshik Bong, Research fellow at the Yonsei University Institute for North Korean Studies

Marina Miron, Post-doctoral researcher at the war studies department at King’s College London

The group said it would call for analysis on international supply chain resilience.

Finance ministers and central bank governors from the Group of Seven (G7) democracies have pledged to address “excessive imbalances” in the global economy and said they could increase sanctions on Russia.

The G7 announced the plan on Thursday as the officials, who met in the Canadian Rocky Mountains, said there was a need for a common understanding of how “non-market policies and practices” undermine international economic security.

The document did not name China, but references by the United States and other G7 economies to non-market policies and practices often are targeted at China’s state subsidies and export-driven economic model.

The final communique called for an analysis of market concentration and international supply chain resilience.

“We agree on the importance of a level playing field and taking a broadly coordinated approach to address the harm caused by those who do not abide by the same rules and lack transparency,” it said.

Lowering Russian oil price cap

European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis said the G7 ministers discussed proposals for further sanctions on Russia to try to end its war in Ukraine. They included lowering the G7-led $60-per-barrel price cap on Russian oil, given that Russian crude is now selling under that level, he said.

The G7 participants condemned what they called Russia’s “continued brutal war” against Ukraine and said that if efforts to achieve a ceasefire failed, they would explore all possible options, including “further ramping up sanctions”.

Russia’s sovereign assets in G7 jurisdictions would remain immobilised until Moscow ended the war and paid for the damage it has caused to Ukraine, the communique said. It did not mention a price cap.

Brent crude currently trades at around $64 per barrel.

A European official said the US is “not convinced” about lowering the Russian oil price cap.

Earlier this week, the US Treasury said Secretary Scott Bessent intended to press G7 allies to focus on rebalancing the global economy to protect workers and companies from China’s “unfair practices”.

The communique also recognised an increase in low-value international “de minimis” package shipments that can overwhelm customs and tax collection systems and be used for smuggling drugs and other illicit goods.

The duty-free de minimis exemption for packages valued below $800 has been exploited by Chinese e-commerce companies including Shein and Temu.

Syrians are hoping sanctions relief will help boost investment, reconstruction after more than a decade of civil war.

Business owners in Syria have welcomed the European Union’s decision this week to lift sanctions on the country, in what observers say is the most significant easing of Western pressure on Damascus in more than a decade.

The EU’s move, which followed a similar announcement by the United States in mid-May, was praised by Syrian Foreign Minister Asaad al-Shaibani as one that would bolster Syria’s security and stability.

For many Syrian entrepreneurs, it also brings the hope of rebuilding their livelihoods after years of economic isolation.

“Companies that were ousted from Syria and stopped dealing with us because of the sanctions are now in contact with us,” Hassan Bandakji, a local business owner, told Al Jazeera.

“Many companies and producers are telling us they are coming back and that they want to reserve a spot in our market.”

The EU and US sanctions had levied wide-ranging sanctions against the government of former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who was removed from power in a rebel offensive in December of last year.

The economic curbs had severely limited trade, investment, and financial transactions in Syria, cutting businesses off from supplies and international banking.

“The main obstacle we faced was getting raw materials and automated lines,” said Ali Sheikh Kweider, who manages a factory in the countryside of the Syrian capital, Damascus.

“As for bank accounts, we weren’t able to send or receive any transactions,” Kweider told Al Jazeera.

Syria’s new government, led by ex-rebel leader and interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa, had called for the sanctions to be lifted as it seeks to rebuild the country.

US President Donald Trump said after a meeting with al-Sharaa in Saudi Arabia last week that he planned to order the lifting of American sanctions on Syria.

Reporting from Damascus, Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed said the government is hoping the sanctions relief will help Syria reintegrate into the international community.

It also views the EU’s announcement as additional “recognition of the new political leadership” in the country, Abdelwahed added.

Israeli attacks come as residents of Lebanon’s southern districts prepare to vote in municipal elections on Saturday.

Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam has denounced a wave of Israeli attacks across southern Lebanon, calling on the international community to pressure Israel to respect a ceasefire reached in November with Lebanese group Hezbollah.

Lebanon’s official National News Agency (NNA) said on Thursday that the Israeli military struck a building in Toul, a town in the Nabatieh governorate. The army had earlier warned residents to evacuate the area around a building it said was used by Hezbollah.

Lebanese media outlets also reported Israeli bombardment in the towns of Soujod, Touline, Sawanna and the Rihan Mountain – all in the country’s south.

In a statement, Salam’s office said the Israeli attacks come at a “dangerous” time, just days before municipal elections in Lebanon’s southern districts on Saturday.

The contests are expected to be dominated by Hezbollah and its allies, and there have been growing concerns about the safety of voters, especially in border towns, amid the continued Israeli occupation of parts of southern Lebanon.

“Prime Minister Salam stresses that these violations will not thwart the state’s commitment to holding the elections and protecting Lebanon and the Lebanese,” his office said in its statement.

As part of the November ceasefire agreement, Hezbollah fighters were to pull back north of the Litani River and dismantle military infrastructure south of that demarcation line.

For its part, Israel was to withdraw all forces from Lebanon but it has kept troops in parts of south Lebanon. It argues it must maintain a presence there for “strategic” reasons.

The truce was based on a UN Security Council resolution that says Lebanese troops and UN peacekeepers should be the only people to bear arms in southern Lebanon, and calls for the disarmament of all non-state groups.

On Thursday, the Israeli military said its forces had carried out several strikes targeting Hezbollah sites and killed one fighter in the southern Lebanon town of Rab el-Thalathine.

Hezbollah did not immediately comment on the Israeli army’s claim.

Separately, a shepherd was injured in a different Israeli attack nearby, the NNA reported.

The Israeli military said its forces also “struck a Hezbollah military site containing rocket launchers and weapons” in the Bekaa Valley in northeastern Lebanon.

The NNA described Israel’s attacks as some of the heaviest since the ceasefire went into effect.

Economists echo Dimon’s concerns as US credit downgrade and tariff-driven uncertainty continue.

JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon has warned that he can’t rule out the possibility that the United States will fall into what is called stagflation— an economic term that refers to a period when inflation and unemployment are high as economic growth is slow.

In an interview with Bloomberg Television on Thursday, Dimon said, “I don’t agree that we’re in a sweet spot” in response to a question about some US Federal Reserve officials saying that the US economy was in a sweet spot.

Dimon made his comments while at JPMorgan’s Global China Summit in Shanghai. His comments come against the backdrop of the US facing increasing geopolitical tensions, rising deficits and pressure on consumer prices from changing government policies on tariffs that have led retailers to announce a need to raise prices and left businesses in a wait-and-watch mode over all the economic uncertainties.

Economists like Stuart Mackintosh, executive director of the financial think tank Group of Thirty, echoed Dimon’s concerns to Al Jazeera.

“Stagflation is a real risk we cannot rule out. We’re in a circumstance where we have uncertainty on tariffs, uncertainty on many policies that increase the downward pressure on growth in America.”

Last week Moody’s Ratings downgraded the US economy’s credit rating. The firm lowered its gold-standard Aaa to an Aa1 credit rating for the US, citing its growing national debt.

Dimon’s Thursday comments were underscored by his remarks at the company’s investor day on Monday.

“Credit today is a bad risk,” Dimon said.

While at the summit, Dimon also offered comments on US President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill”, the tax and spending bill passed by the US House of Representatives that includes key parts of the Trump administration agenda including tax cuts, slashes to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), increased funding for immigration enforcement, and new taxes on colleges and universities.

“I think they should do the tax bill. I do think it’ll stabilise things a little bit, but it’ll probably add to the deficit,” Dimon said in a record first obtained by the Reuters news agency.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that the tax bill would add $3.8 trillion to the national debt.

‘Inflation going up’

In the Bloomberg interview, Dimon added that the US Federal Reserve is doing the right thing to wait and see before it decides on monetary policy. The central bank opted to hold rates steady at its last policy meeting, which was largely in line with economists’ expectations.

Policymakers weighed a stable labour market at the time, even as they acknowledged that could be short-lived.

“This is unsustainable. We might get into a much worse economic picture almost immediately,” Mackintosh said.

More information on the state of the US labour market is expected in the next couple of weeks as both the US Department of Labor and the payroll and human resources firm ADP are slated to release their monthly report on the rate of job growth.

Dimon has also long warned that inflation and stagflation will continue to increase.

“I think the chance of inflation going up and stagflation is a little bit higher than other people think,” he noted.

On Wall Street, JPMorgan Chase’s stock has trended up following Dimon’s remarks. As of noon in New York (16:00 GMT), it was 0.2 percent higher than yesterday’s market close after opening lower this morning.

Authorities in the city of San Diego say that heavy fog had created low-visibility conditions at time of crash.

Authorities in the city of San Diego, California, have said that several people are dead after a small, private plane crashed into a military housing complex.

On Thursday, Assistant San Diego Fire Chief Dan Eddy said that the plane had capacity for between eight and 10 people, but it is not clear how many people were on board during the crash.

“I can’t quite put words to describe what the scene looks like, but with the jet fuel going down the street, and everything on fire all at once, it was pretty horrific to see,” San Diego Police Chief Scott Wahl said.

The incident took place in the early hours of Thursday morning, just before 4am Pacific time (11:00 GMT) in the United States.

The crash left a trail of charred vehicles and damaged houses in the Tierrasanta neighbourhood of San Diego, located in the southernmost region of California. Downed power lines were observed near the scene, as emergency responders struggled to contain the fire.

Residents of the neighbourhood were evacuated, and police say that two schools located near the site have been closed for the day. Authorities also asked people to avoid the area while emergency crews are at work.

The San Diego Police Department said in a social media post that “multiple fatalities” had been confirmed from the crash and that one person remains hospitalised, with two others treated and released.

The plane, which officials say was en route from the Midwest, caused damage to several homes and vehicles in the neighbourhood but did not cause any injuries to residents.

“It was definitely horrifying for sure, but sometimes, you’ve just got to drop your head and get to safety,” said Christopher Moore, who lives one street over from the site of the crash.

Eddy, the assistant fire chief, said that heavy fog had severely diminished visibility at the time of the crash.

“You could barely see in front of you,” he said.

UPDATE: Multiple fatalities confirmed in crash near Sculpin St & Santo Rd. 1 person hospitalized, 2 treated & released. Evacuations + road closures remain. Area expected closed all day as FAA investigates. Call 619-531-2000 if you find debris or jet fuel.

— San Diego Police Department (@SanDiegoPD) May 22, 2025

Authorities have yet to share details about the make and model of the plane, but the flight tracking website Flight Aware says that a Cessna Citation II jet was scheduled to arrive at the Montgomery-Gibbs Executive airport in San Diego at 3:47am after departing from the Colonel James Jabara Airport in Wichita, Kansas.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has said that the National Transportation Safety Board will oversee an investigation into the incident.

A Chinese coast guard vessel collided with a Philippines government ship near a disputed reef in the South China Sea. The Philippines accused China of “aggressive interference,” while China said the other vessel was “illegally intruding.”

European Parliament backs bill that will enact duties in July and gradually increase them over three years.

The European Parliament has voted to impose tariffs on fertiliser and certain farm produce imports from Russia and its ally Belarus, despite European farmers’ fears that the move could lead to higher prices.

The European Parliament on Thursday voted 411 to 100 in support of the bill that will enact duties in July and gradually increase them to a point where they would make imports unviable in 2028.

In 2023, more than 70 percent of EU fertiliser consumption was of nitrogen-based fertiliser, of which Russia accounted for 25 percent of EU imports worth about 1.3bn euros ($1.5bn).

According to the bloc, the tariffs for certain fertilisers will increase over three years from 6.5 percent to an amount equivalent to about 100 percent, effectively halting trade by 2028.

For farm produce, an additional 50 percent duty will apply.

While Russia and Belarus were hit with prohibitive tariffs last year over the war in Ukraine, the new measures will apply to 15 percent of agriculture imports from Russia that were not previously hit, including meat, dairy produce, fruit and vegetables.

EU lawmaker Inese Vaidere, spearheading the push for increased tariffs, said the bloc must stop fuelling “the Russian war machine” and “limit the dependency of Europe’s farmers to Russian fertilisers”.

Member states still must formally give the bill their final approval, having already supported the idea.

Russia said on Thursday that the tariffs would cause fertiliser prices in the EU to rise.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said that demand for Russian nitrogen fertilisers on other export routes remained high, adding that Russian fertilisers were of the highest quality.

Farmers’ fears

The pan-European farmers’ group Copa-Cogeca told the AFP news agency that using Russian fertilisers was the “most competitive in terms of price, due to well-established logistics”.

The tariff could be “potentially devastating” for the agriculture sector, the group warned, adding, “European farmers must not become collateral damage”.

A farmer in Belgium accused the EU of hurting its farmers.

Amaury Poncelet told AFP that he “doesn’t understand the European Union’s idea of punishing its farmers”.

“We’re losing money because of these European decisions that treat us like pawns who don’t matter,” he said.

The European Commission has argued the tariffs will help support domestic production and suggested duties on imports from other regions could be removed to alleviate price pressures, among other mitigating measures, in case of price shocks.

Heavy rains in New South Wales have caused record-breaking floods, killing two people and isolating tens of thousands of residents. Authorities warn of more rain and life-threatening flash floods as emergency teams continue rescue efforts.

Tyrese Haliburton’s incredible game-tying shot at the buzzer triggers Indiana Pacers overtime win against New York Knicks in Game 1 of Eastern Conference finals.

Tyrese Haliburton was sure his jumper as regulation ended was going in, then wasn’t certain it had after it bounced high off the rim and hung in the air for what felt like an eternity.

He thought it was a 3-pointer to win the game, then quickly realised it was a 2 to tie. A lot to process, followed by just one thought with overtime looming.

“Then my focus just became winning it,” Haliburton said.

The Pacers did, finishing off their stunning rally by beating the New York Knicks 138-135 in overtime on Wednesday night in Game 1 of the Eastern Conference finals.

The Knicks led by 14 points with under three minutes remaining in regulation, but Aaron Nesmith brought the Pacers back with a flurry of 3-pointers.

Haliburton then hoped he had won it with another. With the Pacers down two and time running down, he started to lose control of his dribble, regained it and dribbled back out toward the 3-point line. He fired up his jumper and when it finally fell in, he raced towards the sideline and made a choke signal to the crowd, like Pacers Hall of Famer Reggie Miller did to Spike Lee while leading an Indiana comeback in a playoff game in 1994.

Replays confirmed that Haliburton’s toe was on the line and it was a 2-pointer that tied it at 125. Andrew Nembhard eventually made the go-ahead basket with 26 seconds remaining in overtime.

Game 2 in the best-of-seven series is on Friday night.

Haliburton had 31 points and 11 assists. Nesmith finished with 30 points, going 8-for-9 from 3-point range.

Knicks stunned by Pacers’ late surge

It was a thrilling start to the ninth playoff matchup between these fierce rivals from the 1990s – but a deflating finish for the Knicks in their first Eastern Conference finals game since 2000.

Jalen Brunson scored 43 points and Karl-Anthony Towns had 35 points and 12 rebounds. But the Knicks couldn’t protect the big lead they built while Brunson was on the bench in foul trouble in the fourth quarter and had a collapse unlike any other in the postseason.

Teams leading by at least 14 points in the final 2:45 of the fourth quarter had been 994-0 since detailed play-by-play records began in 1997-98.

“Give them a lot of credit. They closed the game out like they’ve been doing all playoffs,” Brunson said. “Just not really good on our part.”

The Pacers beat the Knicks in Game 7 of the East semifinals at Madison Square Garden last year, routing a team that had been decimated by injuries.

This was an entirely different way to win, with the Pacers looking all but out of the game after the Knicks’ 14-0 run with Brunson on the bench pushed New York’s two-point lead to 108-92.

Even after Nesmith started to get hot, the Knicks seemed safe when Brunson’s 3-pointer made it 119-105 with 2:51 to go.

But Nesmith would later hit consecutive 3s and both free throws when the Knicks fouled him intentionally so he couldn’t try to tie it with another, giving Indiana the chance to tie on Haliburton’s last-second shot.

These are the key events on day 1,183 of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Here is where things stand on Thursday, May 22:

Fighting

• Russia’s Defence Ministry said air defences shot down 105 Ukrainian drones over Russian regions, including 35 over the Moscow region, after the ministry said a day earlier that it had downed more than 300 Ukrainian drones.
• Kherson Governor Oleksandr Prokudin said one person was killed in a Russian artillery attack on the region.
• H said over the past day, 35 areas in Kherson, including Kherson city, came under artillery shelling and air attacks, wounding 11 people.
• Ukrainian President Zelenskyy said the “most intense situation” is in the Donetsk region, and the army is continuing “active operations in the Kursk and Belgorod regions”.

Diplomacy

• Legislators from the European Union are expected to greenlight tariffs on fertiliser imports from Russia. A United States Senate bill to pressure Russia with new sanctions over the war gained the support of more than 80 members of both parties.
• The Kremlin rejected Ukrainian and European accusations that it was stalling peace talks, saying it plans to name its conditions for a ceasefire without a timeframe.
• Poland said its military intervened after a ship from the Russian “shadow fleet” was seen performing suspicious manoeuvres near a power cable connecting Poland with Sweden.
• Zelenskyy said he had spoken by phone to NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, and that they had discussed joint steps and the need to put pressure on Russia to secure “a just peace”.
• Ukraine’s allies, including the US and UK, issued an advisory warning of a Russian cyber campaign targeting logistics and tech firms involved in delivering foreign assistance to Ukraine.

By Tina Teng

Published on
22/05/2025 – 7:35 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Bitcoin surged to a fresh record high on Thursday, fuelled by optimism that the US Congress will soon pass a bill ill for stablecoin- the GENIUS Act, which is set to be the first regulatory framework under the Trump Administration.

During Thursday’s Asian session, the world’s largest cryptocurrency soared past $111,000 (€98,000) at 5:23 am CEST, surpassing its previous all-time high of over $109,000 (€96,000) set during President Trump’s inauguration on 20 January.

The rally was supported not only by legislative developments but also by increasing institutional interest. Michael Saylor’s firm, Strategy, disclosed a further aggressive Bitcoin purchase worth $765 million (€675 million) on Monday, bringing its total holdings to over $63 billion (€56 billion). Major financial institutions, including JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and BlackRock, have also expanded crypto offerings to clients.

“Perhaps the most crucial shift is who’s buying. This is the first real bull market where institutional participation is front and centre,” said Josh Gilbert, market analyst at eToro Australia.

Stablecoin legislation wins key Senate vote

Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies designed to maintain a stable value by being pegged to reference assets such as the US dollar, the euro or commodities like gold.

On Monday, a group of Senate Democrats dropped their opposition to the legislation, allowing it to clear a key procedural vote and raising hopes that the Senate will pass it as early as this week. The bill is expected to include provisions aimed at protecting stablecoin holders and regulating potential abuse for criminal or terrorist financing.

Previously, the bill had stalled over concerns about potential conflicts of interest, stemming from President Trump’s and his family’s involvement in the cryptocurrency. Trump launched his own meme coin in January, while the Trump family business supported the launch of a new stablecoin, USD1, in March. USD1 is pegged to US dollar deposits and backed by short-term US Treasuries.

David Sacks, the White House’s crypto tsar and a senior AI adviser to Trump, said in an interview with CNBC that the bill’s passage would boost demand for US government debt. “If we provide the legal clarity and legal framework for this, I think we could create trillions of dollars of demand for our Treasuries practically overnight,” he said.

Bitcoin outperforms traditional risk assets

Bitcoin has emerged as one of the top-performing risk assets this year, having risen nearly 20% year-to-date. In contrast, the S&P 500 has slipped 0.48%, while the Nasdaq has gained 2.7%. Meanwhile, gold, a traditional safe-haven asset, has climbed about 21% over the same period.

Wednesday’s US 20-year US government bond auction revealed tepid demand, pushing Treasury yields sharply higher. Bond yields move inversely to prices. The auction result underscored mounting investor concerns about Washington’s ballooning debt burden, amid upcoming Trump’s proposed tax bill. The market reaction also followed Moody’s decision to downgrade the US credit outlook last Friday. Surging bond yields triggered renewed selling pressure across US assets, with stocks, the dollar and Treasuries all falling on Wednesday.

Despite its impressive rally, Bitcoin remains a highly volatile financial asset with limited fundamental support, unlike stocks which are underpinned by corporate earnings.