Today

If the United States federal government shutdown continues, millions of low-income Americans could lose access to a monthly benefit that pays for food.

About 42 million people receive money through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), sometimes called food stamps. The Department of Agriculture told states in an October 10 letter that if the shutdown continues, the programme would run out of money to pay for benefits in November.

President Donald Trump’s Republican administration is blaming the Democrats with Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins repeating a false healthcare talking point on October 16 on X: “Democrats are putting free health care for illegal aliens and their political agenda ahead of food security for American families. Shameful.”

The government shutdown stems from disagreements between Democrats – who want Congress, as part of approving federal funding, to extend expiring enhanced subsidies for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), through which uninsured Americans can buy health insurance – and Republicans, who want to extend federal funding first before negotiating over whether or how to extend the ACA subsidies.

SNAP is a federal programme operated by state agencies. Participants receive an average individual monthly benefit of about $190 or $356 per household. Recipients may use the benefits to buy fruit, vegetables, meat, dairy products, bread and other foods. The majority of SNAP households live in poverty.

Lawmakers and social media users have made several statements about SNAP with varying degrees of accuracy about the shutdown and the Republican tax and spending law that Trump signed in July. Here’s a closer look:

Social media posts say food stamps will disappear on November 1

Many social media posts have said food stamps are going away as soon as November 1.

“Let that sink in – just in time for the cold season and the month of giving thanks,” one Instagram post said.

That could happen for millions of people. But it might not happen for all of them, and it could happen throughout the month of November because the monthly date when people receive their benefits varies by state.

The Trump administration could use SNAP’s contingency fund to pay for nearly two-thirds of a full month of benefits, or it could transfer other Agriculture Department funds, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a liberal think tank. The administration has said it has found funding to continue the Women, Infants and Children programme, another food programme for low-income families.

According to an Agriculture Department funding lapse plan, SNAP “shall continue operations during a lapse in appropriations, subject to the availability of funding”.

An Agriculture Department letter told states to hold off on steps that would lead to people receiving their November benefits. Federal regulations require that reductions be made in a way that higher-income recipients lose more benefits than the lowest-income recipients.

We asked administration officials for more detail but received no response to our questions.

Many state officials – including in Illinois, New York, North Carolina, Texas and Wisconsin – said that if the shutdown continues, participants might not or will not receive benefits in November. A spokesperson for the Florida Department of Children and Families told PolitiFact that if the shutdown continues into November, benefits will not be issued.

California Governor Gavin Newsom said on Wednesday that he will deploy the National Guard and California Volunteers, a state agency, to support food banks and provide $80m in state money.

“Empty cupboards and stomachs are not abstract outcomes,” Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers told Rollins in a Wednesday letter. “They are the very real and near consequences of the dysfunction in Washington. These are also consequences you can prevent today.”

Meanwhile, food banks across the country have taken a hit from other Trump administration policies. ProPublica reported on October 3 that earlier in the year, the administration cut $500m in deliveries through the Emergency Food Assistance Program, which provides food to state distribution agencies.

So what have key lawmakers said on this issue and how true are their claims?

‘We are not cutting’ SNAP

– Mike Johnson, speaker of the US House of Representatives, on the TV programme Face the Nation on May 25

This is false.

Johnson spoke after the House passed a Republican-backed bill known at the time as the One Big Beautiful Bill, which included many of Trump’s policy priorities.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the nonpartisan number-crunching arm of Congress, estimated in May that 3.2 million fewer people per month on average would receive SNAP benefits over the next nine years based on the bill’s changes to work requirements and restrictions on states’ ability to waive the work requirements in areas with high unemployment.

A more recent August CBO analysis estimated the changes would reduce participation in SNAP by roughly 2.4 million people.

‘Nearly 25 cents of every $1 spent via SNAP goes to farmers and ranchers’

– Wisconsin state Representative Francesca Hong in a June 12 X post

This is true.

In a series of X posts, Hong said it wouldn’t be only families receiving food aid that would be hurt by the legislation.

A chart published this year by the Agriculture Department’s Economic Research Service showed that in 2023, farm establishments made 24.3 cents of every dollar spent on food at home, including at grocery stores and supermarkets.

‘About 20 percent of households with veterans rely upon’ SNAP

– House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries at a May 8 news conference

This is mostly false.

An April 2 study found that 8 percent of veterans rely on SNAP benefits. No state had a share higher than 14 percent. Studies with data from a few years earlier showed rates from 4.9 percent to 6.6 percent.

Louis Jacobson, Staff Writer Loreben Tuquero and Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reporter Madeline Heim contributed to this article.

Donald Trump has departed for Malaysia, where he’s set to attend the ASEAN summit and hold trade talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Speaking before he left, the US President criticised Canada over its ‘crooked ad’ about tariffs, and said he’d be open to meeting North Korea’s Kim Jong Un.

The United States has imposed multiple sanctions on Chinese companies for assisting the Russian military-industrial complex in its war against Ukraine. The US Department of Commerce and the Treasury alleged that several Chinese companies evaded US sanctions by selling sensitive technology needed by Russia to manufacture military weapons. One of these Chinese companies subject to US sanctions and its military dealings with Russia is “Sino Electronics Chinese Company,” which is considered as a part of a network of companies that has allegedly sent shipments worth approximately $200 million to Russia since the Chinese company was placed on the US sanctions list in September 2022. The shipments sent by the “Chinese Sino Network” to Russia included several microchips, cameras, and navigation equipment, technologies critical to Russian weapons used in its war with Ukraine, according to US accusations against Beijing.

 These measures include broad US sanctions in 2024 and 2025 targeting entities in China and several other countries that support Russia’s war efforts. In October 2024, the US Treasury Department imposed sanctions on two Chinese drone companies, accusing them of participating in the production and supply of long-range attack drones to the Russian Air Force. Immediately following, in May 2024, US sanctions targeted Chinese companies and companies in several other countries for allegedly supplying electronic components and chemicals used in the manufacture of Russian weapons and missiles. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen also warned that “the United States will take action against any Chinese companies that assist Russia in its efforts to obtain military supplies.” As a result of these US sanctions, Chinese banks have become more cautious in dealing with Russia, leading to a slowdown in trade between the two countries during 2024.

  Since July 2025, the United States has threatened to impose secondary sanctions on any entity that continues to cooperate with Russia in an attempt to isolate Moscow by striking its cross-border trade networks, particularly with China. Secondary sanctions target third parties that deal with the directly sanctioned country, Russia in particular.  The sanctions are not imposed because of the actions of the third party, but rather because of its economic ties to the sanctioned entity. Washington uses these sanctions to deter any entity that might indirectly contribute to supporting the sanctioned regime or helping it circumvent sanctions. In 2018, the United States imposed sanctions on a Chinese bank for allegedly conducting financial transactions with North Korea, even though the bank itself had not previously been subject to any sanctions.

 A series of US sanctions on China have been imposed, alleging its military cooperation with Russia in its war against Ukraine. In July 2025, US intelligence reports alleged that Chinese companies were shipping engines to the Russian arms company IEMZ Kupol by mislabeling them to evade sanctions.

The US Department of Commerce expanded its blacklist of Chinese companies and state-owned entities, alleging their cooperation with Russia and supporting it in its war against Ukraine. The US Department of Commerce added several Chinese companies to the US blacklist, including Shanghai Fudan Microelectronics, which was added to the US list of banned Chinese companies for supplying technology to the Russian military sector. Washington also imposed controls on the Chinese export sector, expanding export control restrictions to include Chinese companies that are 50% or more state-owned, as well as entities on the US blacklist. 

 Here, China has rejected all US accusations regarding its dealings with Russian military companies in its war against Ukraine. Beijing has repeatedly denied US accusations of providing military support to Russia. China has also taken several countermeasures, such as imposing sanctions on US companies, in a move to escalate trade tensions between the two countries. Regarding China’s response to US sanctions, China has publicly rejected all these accusations. At the same time, these US sanctions have raised concerns among Chinese banks and companies about secondary sanctions, which may indicate that these US measures are having an impact on trade relations between China and Russia.

 As for China’s official response to the US sanctions imposed on it for its dealings with Russia, the Chinese Foreign Ministry confirmed in an official statement that the United States, by demanding that countries stop purchasing Russian oil, is participating in threatening and undermining international trade.  In response to Trump’s threats regarding the purchase of Russian oil, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said in a statement that “China will take decisive countermeasures if its legitimate rights and interests are harmed, and that China opposes the United States using Beijing as a pretext to impose illegal unilateral sanctions on the Russian side.” The Chinese Foreign Ministry also stressed that “China has lodged a protest with Britain regarding the inclusion of Chinese companies on the sanctions list against Russia. Cooperation between Russian and Chinese companies should not be subject to interference or influence.” The Chinese Foreign Ministry also commented on the British sanctions imposed on it for allegedly dealing with Russian companies and entities, saying that “Beijing will take necessary measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests.”

 China has categorically rejected all unilateral US sanctions against it, and the punitive tariffs imposed by Trump have angered Beijing. However, unlike Europe or other countries, China has shown confidence, with official Chinese authorities declaring that “it will fight to the end.” An official statement issued by China on October 13, 2025, stated that “threatening to impose high tariffs is not the right way to negotiate with China. The United States must adjust its position.” Beijing has already responded by imposing counter-tariffs and restrictions on US exports, including rare earths.

 As for the nature of the sanctions directed against Russia in 2025, these new US sanctions focus on indirectly strangling the Russian economy by pressuring countries and companies that deal with Moscow in strategic sectors such as energy, metals, and technology. In July 2025, US President Donald Trump announced a 50-day deadline for reaching a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine; otherwise, tariffs of up to 100% would be imposed on countries importing Russian oil or gas. Meanwhile, the US Congress is discussing a bill that would impose tariffs of up to 500% on Russian exports, including secondary sanctions on financing or transporting entities.  Trump warned that all companies dealing with Russia, especially Chinese companies, entities, and institutions, particularly those operating in the technology and metals sectors, could be barred from entering the US market or using the international financial system.

  Finally, regarding the impact of these unilateral US sanctions on China and other countries for allegedly dealing with Russian companies, I believe these US threats will not go unchallenged, as they could undermine confidence in the global economic system and raise questions about who has the right to punish whom and under what international legitimacy? Applying this to Russia, we find that Moscow is linked to extensive trade networks with major economies in strategic sectors such as energy, minerals, and food. These Russian entanglements with global economies make attempts to isolate Moscow a test not only of Washington’s ability but also of the ability of the entire global system to bear the cost of confrontation.

The emotional speech against Islamophobia from the NYC mayoral race frontrunner comes a day before early voting begins.

New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani gave an emotional speech addressing “racist, baseless attacks” from his opponents, a day before early voting begins in the race he is projected to win.

Speaking outside a mosque in the Bronx on Friday, Mamdani criticised his opponents for bringing “hatred to the forefront”, noting that their Islamophobia not only affects him as the Democratic nominee for mayor but also close to one million Muslims living in New York.

“To be Muslim in New York is to expect indignity, but indignity does not make us distinct. There are many New Yorkers who face it. It is the tolerance of that indignity that does,” Mamdani said in his speech, less than two weeks ahead of the November 4 general election.

Mamdani, who is currently a member of the New York State Assembly, said that while he had tried to focus his election campaign on his core message of affordability, his opponents in recent days had shown that “Islamophobia has emerged as one of the few areas of agreement”.

His speech also came a day after his top opponent, former New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo, laughed after radio host Sid Rosenberg said that Mamdani “would be cheering” if another September 11 attack occurred.

Cuomo, who is a member of the Democratic Party but lost the Democratic primary election to Mamdani in June, responded in agreement with Rosenberg: “That’s another problem.”

Basim Elkarra, the executive director of Muslim advocacy group CAIR Action, described Cuomo’s appearance on the radio programme as “despicable, dangerous, and disqualifying”.

“By agreeing with a racist radio host who suggested a Muslim elected official would ‘cheer’ another 9/11, Cuomo has crossed a moral line,” Elkarra said.

“Cuomo’s willingness to engage in this kind of hate speech, on this kind of platform, shows exactly the kind of leader he is: someone who would rather stoke fear than bring people together,” he said.

Speaking on Friday, Mamdani said he had also been “slandered” by Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa on the debate stage, “when he claimed that I support global jihad”, and faced advertisements from Super Political Action Committees that “imply that I am a terrorist, or mock the way I eat”.

He also shared his memories of his “aunt who stopped taking the subway after September 11 because she did not feel safe in her hijab”, and a staff member who had the “word terrorist spray painted” on their garage, as well as the advice he had received that he “did not have to tell people” he was Muslim, if he wanted to win elections.

Top Democrat endorses Mamdani on eve of early voting

Earlier on Friday, Mamdani received a long-anticipated endorsement from Hakeem Jeffries, the leader of the Democratic Party in the US House of Representatives and the representative of New York’s eighth congressional district, which includes the Brooklyn neighbourhoods of East Flatbush, Coney Island and Brownsville.

While Mamdani has earned endorsements from top Democrats, including New York Governor Kathy Hochul, New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and independent Senator Bernie Sanders, the vocally pro-Palestinian candidate has struggled to win over other top New York Democrats, such as Senator Chuck Schumer.

Despite the reluctance of some establishment figures within the Democratic Party, Mamdani resoundingly won the party’s primary election to choose its candidate for the general election back in June.

Current NYC Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat who did not contest the primary after facing corruption allegations, endorsed Cuomo this week after withdrawing from the race, although his name will still appear on the ballot.

A recently published poll from AARP and Gotham Polling and Analytics shows Mamdani well ahead of his opponents with the support of 43.2 percent of voters.

He is followed by Cuomo with 28.9 percent and Sliwa with 19.4 percent, while 8.4 percent said they were undecided or preferred another candidate.

Cost of living was the main issue for nearly two-thirds of voters, with public safety and housing affordability also areas of concern, in the same poll.

Welcome to Bunker Talk. This is a weekend open discussion post for the best commenting crew on the net, in which we can chat about all the stuff that went on this week that we didn’t cover. We can also talk about the stuff we did or whatever else grabs your interest. In other words, it’s an off-topic thread.

The caption to this week’s top shot reads:

377th Test and Evaluation Group missile operators conduct mission operations at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif., Feb. 18, 2025. The 377 TEG, the nation’s only dedicated intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) test organization, oversaw an operational test launch of an Air Force Global Strike Command unarmed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile. Fired at 1 a.m. Pacific Time on Feb. 19, 2025, the missile traveled approximately 4,200 miles at speeds up to 15,000 miles per hour before impacting in the Pacific Ocean.

Also, a reminder:

Prime Directives!

• If you want to talk politics, do so respectfully and know that there’s always somebody that isn’t going to agree with you. 
• If you have political differences, hash it out respectfully, stick to the facts, and no childish name-calling or personal attacks of any kind. If you can’t handle yourself in that manner, then please, discuss virtually anything else.
• No drive-by garbage political memes. No conspiracy theory rants. Links to crackpot sites will be axed, too. Trolling and shitposting will not be tolerated. No obsessive behavior about other users. Just don’t interact with folks you don’t like. 
• Do not be a sucker and feed trolls! That’s as much on you as on them. Use the mute button if you don’t like what you see.  
• So unless you have something of quality to say, know how to treat people with respect, understand that everyone isn’t going to subscribe to your exact same worldview, and have come to terms with the reality that there is no perfect solution when it comes to moderation of a community like this, it’s probably best to just move on. 
• Finally, as always, report offenders, please. This doesn’t mean reporting people who don’t share your political views, but we really need your help in this regard.

The Bunker is open!

Pakistan’s diplomatic playbook for 2025 is shifting noticeably toward trade, sustainability, and the projection of soft power. Gone are the days when foreign policy revolved solely around security concerns or aid dependency. The country’s recent economic and diplomatic maneuvers suggest a clear intent to rebrand itself as a credible, reform-driven partner focused on growth, responsibility, and engagement. From seafood export approvals by the US to partnerships with France and major development financing commitments, Pakistan’s narrative is evolving, and for once, it’s a story of initiative rather than reaction.

The US government’s decision to extend Pakistan’s seafood export approval until 2029 is a quiet but significant achievement. The deal, worth roughly $600 million annually, underscores two critical things: the growing confidence in Pakistan’s sustainability standards and the country’s ability to meet global compliance norms. For years, Pakistani exporters have faced barriers due to outdated infrastructure and quality control issues. Now, improved regulations and environmental monitoring seem to be paying off. This approval not only secures a steady stream of revenue but also signals that Pakistani industries are capable of aligning with Western ecological and safety benchmarks, something that can serve as a model for other export sectors.

In a similar spirit, the Punjab government’s recent memorandums of understanding (MoUs) with France mark another leap toward deepening provincial and international trade ties. France’s interest in Pakistan’s Special Economic Zones (SEZs) reveals confidence in the country’s industrial potential. For Punjab, the partnership could attract sustainable technologies, investment in renewable energy, and expertise in urban development. It also decentralizes diplomacy, shifting some of the engagement from federal corridors to proactive provincial actors, an approach that could make economic cooperation nimbler and more region-specific.

At the macro level, multilateral institutions are showing renewed faith in Pakistan’s economic reforms. The World Bank and International Finance Corporation (IFC) have jointly pledged a staggering $40 billion for development and private sector growth. This isn’t charity; it’s a bet on Pakistan’s capacity to absorb and utilize global capital effectively. The World Bank’s concessional loans, particularly targeting education and climate resilience, fit neatly into Pakistan’s national development goals. Meanwhile, the IFC’s $20 billion allocation to the private sector and small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) speaks to an evolving understanding that long-term economic health depends on entrepreneurial vitality rather than government-led expansion alone.

Domestically, the banking sector is mirroring this new wave of confidence. The Bank of Punjab, for instance, has reported record profits, reflecting a resilient financial system despite broader global headwinds. A profitable and stable banking environment is a prerequisite for sustained trade diplomacy; it assures foreign investors that local institutions are capable of managing large inflows and transactions transparently. When financial institutions thrive alongside industrial and export sectors, it sends a reassuring message to international partners that Pakistan’s growth is not a temporary surge but a maturing cycle.

But economic diplomacy alone doesn’t build soft power. What sets Pakistan’s recent approach apart is the coupling of trade initiatives with cultural and environmental diplomacy. The government’s efforts to promote interfaith harmony, expand cultural exchanges, and invest in green infrastructure reflect a broader understanding of influence in the modern era. Soft power, after all, isn’t about dominance; it’s about attraction. Pakistan’s reforestation programs, ecotourism initiatives, and partnerships in climate resilience not only improve its environmental record but also enhance its moral credibility on the global stage. These projects project a vision of Pakistan as a responsible global citizen, one that contributes to shared planetary goals rather than merely negotiating for its own interests.

Tourism, too, plays a key role in this narrative. The revival of heritage sites, promotion of religious tourism for Sikh and Buddhist pilgrims, and international film collaborations are creating a gentler, more relatable image of Pakistan abroad. These cultural bridges complement trade diplomacy by humanizing the country in the eyes of investors and tourists alike. They help replace outdated stereotypes with more nuanced perceptions of a nation that’s young, creative, and striving for balance between tradition and modernity.

This pivot toward soft power and trade diplomacy is not accidental; it’s strategic. Pakistan seems to recognize that credibility in global markets depends not just on economic incentives but on the consistency of reform and image. The focus on sustainability and governance reforms aims to reduce dependency on loans and shift toward mutually beneficial trade partnerships. In doing so, Pakistan positions itself not as a passive recipient of aid but as a contributor to global growth.

Critically, these moves also reflect a certain self-awareness. The emphasis on sustainability, whether in fisheries, industry, or climate policy, acknowledges that the old model of extractive growth is no longer viable. Similarly, engaging institutions like the World Bank and IFC shows that Pakistan understands the importance of credibility and transparency in attracting international capital. Trade diplomacy, when backed by responsible domestic governance and inclusive growth, becomes more than an economic tactic; it turns into a long-term strategy for stability and respect.

That said, this strategy will need to be carefully managed. The challenge isn’t just to secure deals but to ensure they deliver equitable benefits. For instance, trade approvals and foreign investments must be accompanied by support for small exporters, labor reforms, and environmental safeguards. Otherwise, the benefits will stay concentrated among elites, undermining the very soft power Pakistan seeks to build. Likewise, diplomatic capital must not be squandered on short-term optics or domestic political point-scoring. Consistency, patience, and institutional continuity will determine whether this new vision can endure.

In many ways, Pakistan’s 2025 diplomacy embodies a pragmatic realism. It doesn’t reject global partnerships or rely excessively on one bloc. Instead, it seeks balance between East and West, between economic pragmatism and moral purpose. By intertwining trade with culture, sustainability, and finance, the country is sketching the contours of a diplomacy that’s as much about persuasion as negotiation. And in a fragmented world increasingly defined by narratives rather than alliances, that’s a powerful pivot.

Recommendations

·       Establish specialized trade diplomacy desks in embassies to promote sectoral exports, green investment, and SME partnerships.

·       Strengthen provincial economic offices abroad to attract investors in key sectors like textiles, agri-tech, and renewable energy.

·       Implement domestic policies for export diversification and improve digital trade facilitation to empower smaller producers.

·       Expand cultural diplomacy programs, including art, film, sports, and education exchanges, to enhance people-to-people connections and global goodwill.

·       Ensure policy consistency and transparency across all levels of government to solidify Pakistan’s reputation as a credible, reform-driven partner in global trade and diplomacy.

South Africa, Nigeria, Mozambique, Burkina Faso removed from Financial Action Task Force’s financial crimes list.

A global money-laundering watchdog has taken South Africa, Nigeria, Mozambique and Burkina Faso off its “grey list” of countries subjected to increased monitoring.

The Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF), a financial crimes watchdog based in France, on Friday said it was removing the four countries after “successful on-site visits” that showed “positive progress” in addressing shortcomings within agreed timeframes.

The FATF maintains “grey” and “black” lists for countries it has identified as not meeting its standards. It considers grey list countries to be those with “strategic deficiencies” in their anti-money laundering regimes, but which are nonetheless working with the organisation to address them.

FATF President Elisa de Anda Madrazo called the removal of the four “a positive story for the continent of Africa”.

South Africa revamped its tools to detect money laundering and terrorist financing, she said, while Nigeria created better coordination between agencies, Mozambique increased its financial intelligence sharing, and Burkina Faso improved its oversight of financial institutions.

Nigeria and South Africa were added to the list in 2023, preceded by Mozambique in 2022 and Burkina Faso in 2021.

Officials from the four countries – which will no longer be subject to increased monitoring by the organisation – welcomed the decision.

Nigerian President Bola Ahmed Tinubu said the delisting marked a “major milestone in Nigeria’s journey towards economic reform, institutional integrity and global credibility”, while the country’s Financial Intelligence Unit separately said it had “worked resolutely through a 19-point action plan” to demonstrate its commitment to improvements.

Edward Kieswetter, commissioner of the South African Revenue Service, also cheered the update but said, “Removing the designation of grey listing is not a finish line but a milestone on a long-term journey toward building a robust and resilient financial ecosystem.”

Leaders in Mozambique and Burkina Faso did not immediately comment, though Mozambican officials had signalled for several months that they were optimistic about being removed.

In July, Finance Minister Carla Louveira said Mozambique was “not simply working to get off the grey list, but working so that in the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing, when the FATF makes its assessment in 2030, it will find a completely different situation from the one detected in 2021,” MZ News reported at the time.

More than 200 countries around the world have pledged to follow the standards of the FATF, which reviews their efforts to combat money laundering, as well as terrorist and weapons financing.

The FATF’s black or “high-risk” list consists of Iran, Myanmar and North Korea.

Study finds that rates soar to 90 percent in some regions as humanitarian crises compound childhood exploitation.

Nearly two-thirds of South Sudanese children are engaged in the worst forms of child labour, with rates reaching as high as 90 percent in the hardest-hit regions, according to a government study released with the charity Save the Children.

The National Child Labour Study, published on Friday, surveyed more than 418 households across seven states and found that 64 percent of children aged between five and 17 are trapped in forced labour, sexual exploitation, theft and conflict.

The findings reveal a crisis far more complex than poverty alone, intensified by relentless flooding, the spread of disease, and conflict that have uprooted families and left millions on the brink of hunger.

In Kapoeta South, near the border with Uganda, nine out of 10 children work in gold mining, pastoralism and farming instead of attending school, the report said.

Yambio region, the country’s southwest, recorded similarly dire rates, with local conflict and child marriage driving children into labour.

Children typically start with simple jobs before being drawn into increasingly dangerous and exploitative work, the report found. About 10 percent of those surveyed reported involvement with armed groups, particularly in Akobo, Bentiu and Kapoeta South counties.

The types of exploitation children face differ by gender. Boys are more likely to work in dangerous industries or join armed groups, while girls disproportionately face forced marriage, household servitude and sexual abuse.

‘A crisis that goes beyond poverty’

Knowing the law does not stop child exploitation, researchers found.

The surveys showed that 70 percent of children stuck in dangerous or illegal work lives came from homes with adults who were familiar with legal protections. Two-thirds of children were unaware that help existed.

“When nearly two-thirds of a country’s children are working – and in some areas, almost every child – it signals a crisis that goes beyond poverty,” said Chris Nyamandi, Save the Children’s South Sudan country director.

South Sudan’s child labour prevalence vastly exceeds regional patterns. While East Africa has the continent’s worst record at 30 percent, according to ILO-UNICEF data, South Sudan’s 64 percent is more than double that figure.

“Education remains the strongest protective factor,” Nyamandi said, noting that children who attend school are far less likely to be exploited.

The government acknowledged the crisis at the report’s launch in Juba. Deng Tong, undersecretary at the Ministry of Labour, said officials would use the evidence as a “critical foundation for action”.

The report comes as nearly one million people have been impacted by severe flooding across South Sudan, with 335,000 displaced and more than 140 health facilities damaged or submerged.

The country faces a related malaria outbreak with more than 104,000 cases reported in the past week, while 7.7 million people confront acute hunger, the United Nations said.

South Sudan has also been gripped by fears of renewed civil war. A fragile 2018 peace deal between President Salva Kiir and First Vice President Riek Machar appears increasingly strained, with armed clashes now occurring on a scale not seen since 2017, according to UN investigators.

Machar was arrested in March and charged in September with treason, murder and crimes against humanity. He has rejected all charges.

About 300,000 people have fled the country this year as violence has escalated.

Move to close Vilnius, Kaunas airports and border comes after helium balloons drifted into the country’s territory.

NATO member Lithuania has closed its two biggest airports and shut crossings on its border with Belarus after helium weather balloons drifted into its territory, the third such incident in the Baltic nation this month.

European aviation has repeatedly been thrown into chaos in recent weeks by drone sightings and other air incursions, including at airports in Copenhagen, Munich and the Baltic region.

The Vilnius and Kaunas airports were closed on Friday for safety reasons until 2am (23:00 GMT), while the Belarus border crossings will remain shut until midday on Sunday, authorities said.

Lithuania has said balloons are sent by smugglers transporting contraband cigarettes, but it also blames Belarus President Alexander Lukashenko, a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, for not stopping the practice.

“The National Security Commission will meet next week to assess … what can be done short-term that would be painful to the smugglers and to Lukashenko’s regime, which allows them to thrive,” Lithuania’s Prime Minister Inga Ruginiene said in a statement.

Lithuania’s National Crisis Management Centre said “tens of balloons” had been detected by radar on Friday.

Vilnius airport also closed on Tuesday of this week and on October 5, when smuggler balloons entered the capital city’s airspace, authorities said.

The incident comes after two Russian military aircraft briefly entered Lithuania’s airspace in what appeared to be a new provocation from Moscow.

Lithuania’s armed forces said in a statement that the two aircraft may have been conducting refuelling exercises in the neighbouring Russian exclave of Kaliningrad when they flew 700 metres (0.43 miles) into the country at 6pm local time (15:00 GMT) on Thursday.

“This is a blatant breach of international law and territorial integrity of Lithuania,” Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda said on X in response to that incursion, adding that his country would summon Russian embassy representatives to protest against reckless and dangerous behaviour.

Russia’s Ministry of Defence, however, denied the incursion had taken place.

It said the flights were conducted “in strict compliance” with rules and “did not deviate from their route and did not violate the borders of other states”.

Russian aircraft and drones have reportedly also violated airspace in Estonia and Poland in recent weeks.

The events have heightened anxiety that Russia’s Putin might be testing NATO’s defensive reflexes.

The U.S. Navy’s supercarrier USS Gerald R. Ford and at least a portion of the rest of its strike group have been ordered to Latin American waters. This represents a new and especially significant deployment of U.S. forces into the Western Hemisphere amid a steady escalation in the scale and scope of ostensible counter-narcotics operations. Strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats have now become routine, and the possibility that the campaign could extend to targets on land, particularly in Venezuela, continues to grow.

Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s top spokesperson, made the unexpected announcement about Ford, which is currently on a scheduled deployment in the eastern end of the Mediterranean Sea on a scheduled deployment.

“In support of the President’s [Donald Trump] directive to dismantle Transnational Criminal Organizations (TCOs) and counter narco-terrorism in defense of the Homeland, the Secretary of War [Pete Hegseth] has directed the Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group and embarked carrier air wing to the U.S. Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) area of responsibility (AOR),” Parnell said in a statement. “The enhanced U.S. force presence in the USSOUTHCOM AOR will bolster U.S. capacity to detect, monitor, and disrupt illicit actors and activities that compromise the safety and prosperity of the United States homeland and our security in the Western Hemisphere. These forces will enhance and augment existing capabilities to disrupt narcotics trafficking and degrade and dismantle TCOs.”

Ford, the Navy’s newest carrier, currently has a full air wing embarked, which includes F/A-18E/F Super Hornet fighters, EA-18G Growler electronic warfare jets, E-2D Hawkeye airborne early warning and control planes, C-2A Greyhound Carrier Onboard Delivery (COD) aircraft, and MH-60R/S Seahawk helicopters. The rest of its strike group includes four Arleigh Burke class destroyers – USS Winston S. Churchill, USS Bainbridge, USS Mahan, and USS Forrest Sherman – and likely at least one attack submarine.

USNI News has reported that it is currently unclear which of Ford’s escorts may accompany it to the SOUTHCOM AOR, citing an unnamed source. The outlet noted that, at least as of Monday, the USS Forrest Sherman and USS Mitscher were operating independently in the Red Sea and Arabian Sea, respectively

It is likely to take Ford at least a week to get back across the Mediterranean and then the Atlantic Ocean. Where exactly within the SOUTHCOM AOR the carrier and elements of its strike group might take up station remains to be seen.

Regardless, just pulling Ford from a scheduled deployment is a major development and follows an already substantial build-up of U.S. naval, air, and other assets in and around the Caribbean. As of last week, approximately 10,000 U.S. personnel, in total, were forward deployed in the region. Fox News has reported that the Navy is now set to see roughly 14 percent of its combat fleets operating within SOUTHCOM’s AOR.

🚨 Today, the U.S. announced its 7th strike in SOUTHCOM, destroying a boat affiliated with a Colombian cartel. The U.S. has massed 10,000+ troops in the region, with most in Puerto Rico and on 12 U.S. Navy ships. Also:

– USAF B-52H bombers + USMC F-35B fighters conducted a… pic.twitter.com/PyYyZlWSxC

— Ian Ellis (@ianellisjones) October 19, 2025

The Navy’s aircraft carrier strike groups, in general, are at the very top of the U.S. military’s power-projection assets, offering immense capability to exercise control over surrounding sea and airspace, as well as to launch strikes on targets on the water and ashore hundreds of miles away in any direction. They also provide huge floating bases that can be utilized in other ways, including as launch points for major special operations forces missions.

Even if only a portion of the Ford Carrier Strike Group ultimately deploys to the SOUTHCOM AOR, it would still represent a major boost in capabilities and operational capacity in the theater. There are already multiple Arleigh Burke class destroyers, as well as a Ticonderoga class cruiser, in the region that could also join with Ford and its escorts, including to help provide protection for the carrier. The overall threat picture is not high, though one still does exist. It is worth noting that carrier strike groups also train heavily before deployments to be a deeply integrated, singular fighting force, something that would not exist with warships already in the Caribbean. Still, this combination of naval forces would likely be more than enough to suffice in this scenario.

Altogether, Ford‘s impending arrival can only signal a new and substantial escalation in U.S. operations in the region. As noted, American forces are now regularly striking small boats alleged to be involved in drug smuggling. Just earlier today, Secretary of War Hegseth announced the ninth such strike known to have occured since the start of September. To date, seven of the strikes have targeted boats in the Caribbean, while two more have occured in the Eastern Pacific Ocean.

Overnight, at the direction of President Trump, the Department of War carried out a lethal kinetic strike on a vessel operated by Tren de Aragua (TdA), a Designated Terrorist Organization (DTO), trafficking narcotics in the Caribbean Sea.

The vessel was known by our… pic.twitter.com/lVlw0FLBv4

— Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (@SecWar) October 24, 2025

All of this also comes amid U.S. government efforts to put particular pressure on Venezuelan strongman Nicolas Maduro. Just yesterday, Air Force B-1 bombers conducted a show of force close to Venezuela’s coast. Last week, Air Force B-52 bombers, accompanied by U.S. Marine Corps F-35B Joint Strike Fighters, conducted a similar mission that officials later described as a “bomber attack demonstration.”

There has been a steady drumbeat of reports in recent weeks pointing to the growing possibility of direct action of some kind against Maduro’s regime. President Trump said on Wednesday that his administration was moving to target drug cartels on land, though he did not elaborate on what that might entail or where such operations might occur. He also confirmed last week that he had authorized the CIA to engage in covert operations against the Venezuelan government. Maduro has been under indictment in the United States since 2020 for drug trafficking and other charges, and American authorities currently have a $50 million bounty out for his capture.

While it will take some time for the elements of the Ford Carrier Strike Group to arrive in Latin American waters, that they are on their way already signals U.S. operations in the region are entering a new phase.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Last year, Reliance Industries Ltd signed a deal with Russian major Rosneft to import nearly 500,000 barrels per day.

India’s top importer of Russian oil, the conglomerate Reliance Industries Ltd, says it will abide by Western sanctions, ending several days of speculation about how the company will manage new measures targeting Russia’s two largest oil companies.

Reliance “will be adapting the refinery operations to meet the compliance requirements”, a company spokesperson said in a statement on Friday, while maintaining its relationships with suppliers.

“Whenever there is any guidance from the Indian Government in this respect, as always, we will be complying fully,” the statement added.

On Wednesday, the United States Treasury Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Russian majors Rosneft and Lukoil for the first time as President Donald Trump becomes increasingly frustrated with Russia’s unremitting war on Ukraine.

US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent said the move was the result of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “refusal to end this senseless war” and encouraged allies to adhere to the new sanctions.

The following day, the European Union adopted its 19th package of measures against Russia, which includes a full transaction ban on Rosneft. The EU has previously said that, starting January 21, it will not receive fuel imports from refineries that received or processed Russian oil 60 days prior to shipping.

Reliance, chaired by billionaire businessman Mukesh Ambani, operates the world’s biggest refining complex in western Gujarat. The company has purchased roughly half of the 1.7-1.8 million barrels per day (bpd) of discounted Russian crude shipped to India, the news agency Press Trust of India reported this week.

In 2024, Reliance signed a 10-year deal with Rosneft to buy nearly 500,000 bpd, Reuters reported at the time. It also buys Russian oil from intermediaries.

Reliance did not offer details on how, exactly, it planned to navigate the sanctions – nor the fate of the 2024 Rosneft agreement – but emphasised it would comply with European import requirements.

“Reliance is confident its time-tested, diversified crude sourcing strategy will continue to ensure stability and reliability in its refinery operations for meeting the domestic and export requirements, including to Europe,” the company spokesperson said.

The sanctions also arrive as India navigates the fallout from Trump’s tariffs on Indian exports, which rose to 50 percent starting in August as a penalty for importing Russian oil. China and India are the world’s largest importers of Russian crude.

Trump has claimed multiple times over the past month that India has agreed to stop buying Russian oil as part of a broader trade deal, an assertion the Indian government has not confirmed.

Neither India’s Ministry of External Affairs nor oil ministries have responded since the sanctions were announced on Wednesday.

Canadian PM Mark Carney says Ottawa “can’t control” US trade policy but will “stand ready” to resume talks “when the Americans are ready.” His remarks came after President Donald Trump halted negotiations and accused Canada of “cheating” over ads opposing US tariffs.

Footage shows Israeli protesters blocking aid trucks at the Kerem Shalom crossing. They say Hamas broke ceasefire terms. WHO warns deliveries remain only a “fraction of what’s needed” and estimates $7 billion to rebuild Gaza’s shattered health system.