Today

The National Guard members deployed to the protests in Los Angeles have been trained to temporarily detain civilians if necessary, according to the troops’ commander.

Nevertheless, as of Wednesday, Major General Scott Sherman clarified that no troops have detained any protester, despite an earlier statement that suggested otherwise.

The National Guard’s deployment came in response to protests against United States President Donald Trump’s push for mass deportation, which recently targeted hardware stores and other businesses in southern California, prompting outrage.

Protesters flooded the streets starting on Friday to denounce the immigration raids. Trump responded by sending the military to the scene, denouncing what he considered “third-world lawlessness” in the city. Since then, however, the protests have spread beyond Los Angeles, to major cities in other parts of the country.

Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Sherman said authorities “are expecting a ramp-up” in national unrest in the coming days.

“I’m focused right here in LA, what’s going on right here. But you know, I think we’re very concerned,” he said.

Sherman explained that 500 of the more than 4,000 National Guard members deployed to Los Angeles have also received training to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the immigration raids.

His remarks came as condemnation continues to grow over Trump’s decision to deploy the National Guard to California without the permission of the state’s governor, Gavin Newsom.

Since the National Guard arrived on Sunday, Trump has sent nearly 700 Marines to the Los Angeles area as well.

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass on Wednesday accused the Trump administration of using the military to escalate tensions in the city, where the protests first broke out on Friday.

“We started off by hearing the administration wanted to go after violent felons, gang members, drug dealers,” Bass said of Trump’s deportation push.

“But when you raid Home Depots and workplaces, when you tear parents and children apart, and when you run armoured caravans through our streets, you are not trying to keep anyone safe. You’re trying to cause fear and panic.

“And when you start deploying federalised troops on the heels of these raids, it is a drastic and chaotic escalation and completely unnecessary.”

Newsom, meanwhile, filed an emergency motion on Tuesday to block Trump from expanding the military presence in Los Angeles beyond federal buildings, with a court hearing set for Thursday.

Bass and Governor Newsom have maintained that local law enforcement were able to handle the situation before Trump intervened and that the military presence prompted more unrest, not less.

Speaking alongside 30 other California mayors and city leaders on Wednesday, Bass questioned if Trump was seeing how far he could push his presidential power.

“This was provoked by the White House. The reason why? We don’t know,” said Bass.

“I posit that maybe we are part of a national experiment to determine how far the federal government can go in reaching in and taking over power from a governor, power from a local jurisdiction.”

So far, Trump has maintained that the soldiers’ deployment was needed to protect federal property and agents — and was therefore within his executive authority.

He has not yet invoked the Insurrection Act of 1807, a federal law that would suspend prohibitions against the military directly taking part in domestic law enforcement. Until that happens, the troops are generally barred from making arrests.

Speaking during a news conference on Wednesday, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt repeated Trump’s claims that sending in the National Guard and Marines had prevented Los Angeles from spiralling into chaos.

She charged that Bass and Newsom had “shamefully failed to meet their sworn obligations to their citizens”.

“They’re attempting to use a violent mob as a weapon against their own constituents to prevent the enforcement of immigration law,” she said. “This is deeply un-American and morally reprehensible.”

Questions about ‘migrant invasion’

Amid the unrest, the Trump administration has pledged to continue its aggressive immigration raids, with officials last month setting a quota of 3,000 arrests a day.

Advocates say the pressure has motivated ICE agents to take increasingly drastic measures, targeting anyone in the country without documentation, even those who have not committed criminal offences and those with deep community ties.

Reporting from Los Angeles, Al Jazeera’s Phil Lavelle said authorities have been conducting blanket raids at Home Depot hardware stores, where undocumented day labourers often gather to find work.

At one location, labourers told Lavelle “that they will continue to come even though they know that these stores are being targeted – even though they know that they will be targets – because quite simply, they’ve got to work”.

“These are people who are communicating by WhatsApp and other methods,” Lavelle added. “If anybody is seen in the area who looks like an ICE agent, straight away, there are reports so that people know that they have to leave.”

So far, 61 Mexican nationals had been detained in Los Angeles during the recent raids, according to Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum.

Trump has repeatedly claimed that the influx of migrants into the US constitutes an “invasion”, which in turn necessitates emergency actions.

Speaking on Tuesday from the Fort Bragg military base in North Carolina, he called the protests in California a “full-blown assault on peace, on public order and our national sovereignty carried out by rioters bearing foreign flags with the aim of continuing a foreign invasion of our country”.

But during a congressional hearing on Wednesday, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine was asked whether he believed the US was being invaded by a foreign power. His answer appeared to contradict Trump.

“I don’t see any foreign state-sponsored folks invading, but I’ll be mindful of the fact that there have been some border issues,” he said.

A Civil Service Transformed: The Case of Hong Kong

Hong Kong is currently conducting one of the most significant experiments in applying Artificial Intelligence (AI) within the civil service. The aim: to increase government efficiency and address a growing fiscal deficit. According to a report by CNA on February 26, 2025, the city plans to leverage AI to manage a major civil service restructuring effort.

By April 2027, Hong Kong plans to cut around 10,000 civil servant positions — reducing approximately 2% of staff annually. These reductions are part of a strategic push to trim government spending while maintaining, or even enhancing, public service quality through digital transformation. AI is expected to shoulder some of the workload left behind. For example, the Census and Statistics Department is already using AI to handle verification tasks previously done manually.

To support this shift, Hong Kong has committed over HK$11 billion (approx. US$1.4 billion) in AI innovation and digital transformation funding. This includes a HK$1 billion allocation for R&D institutions and a HK$10 billion innovation and technology fund targeting strategic future industries.

A Global Pattern: AI as Evaluator, Not Just Executor

This ambition mirrors a broader global pattern. In Indonesia and across the Global South, artificial intelligence is no longer a distant buzzword. It is quietly reshaping the public sector — not just by automating tasks, but by evaluating the very people behind them.

Civil servants in several pilot regions are now being rated by AI systems based on data traces: collaboration metrics, email patterns, task outputs. These scores are then used to “recommend” which roles are redundant, inefficient, or low impact.

This echoes trends around the world. In the United States, the Department of Energy’s Office of the Inspector General (DOE OIG) has tested AI to flag anomalies in procurement and performance. In South Korea, AI has been trialed to detect underperformance in public health roles. Across parts of Africa and Southeast Asia, donor-funded projects use algorithmic scoring to evaluate local staff performance for continuity.

The Distorted Lens of Efficiency

On the surface, this sounds fair. After all, who wouldn’t want a government that works better?

But look deeper, and the danger reveals itself.

AI is not just a tool. It is a lens. And any lens distorts reality based on how it was shaped — by whom, for what purpose, and with which blind spots. In the name of objectivity, we risk building systems that reproduce the very inequalities we failed to fix manually.

The real question is not: “Can AI detect inefficiency?”
It is: “Who defines efficiency? And who benefits from its definition?”

Jobs with emotional, preventive, or contextual value — often held by women or marginalized communities — rarely register well on digital data. Loyalty and discretion, the backbone of many silent roles in diplomacy or social cohesion, are invisible to algorithms. The AI sees output. But not intention. It scores impact. But not nuance.

A Looming Social Risk in the Global South

Beyond governance concerns, there are critical social risks, especially in developing nations. The displacement of human workers by AI can exacerbate unemployment, particularly where alternative job opportunities are scarce. The digital literacy divide means many workers may not have the skills to transition into new roles that require AI fluency. And in countries where digital infrastructure remains uneven, the push toward AI-first public service may deepen inequality rather than bridge it.

A hopeful counterexample: Rwanda’s AI policy includes mandatory community consultations and AI literacy programs as preconditions for any government automation project. While still in early stages, this localized, participatory approach reflects an awareness of both technical and social impact.

Governance That Protects Human Dignity

Worse, the introduction of AI in bureaucratic job assessments often lacks three critical governance pillars:

Explainability – Can employees understand why they are marked “low value”? Or are they just shown a score?

Human-in-the-loop decision-making – Is there room for compassion, second chances, or clarification before action is taken?

Public transparency – Who audits the system? Who sets the parameters? And is the public informed?

Without these guardrails, AI becomes not a tool for reform — but a tool of quiet elimination. You are not fired. You are “scored out.”

In Global South contexts, this is particularly risky. Power is often personalized, and resistance to automation is framed as “anti-progress.” The pressure to adopt AI for prestige, for cost-cutting, or donor appeal creates a climate where ethical reflection is deemed a luxury.

But dignity is not a luxury.

Contextual Governance, Not Imported Frameworks

The solution is not to reject AI. It is to govern it.

We need multidisciplinary teams to co-design such systems. Ethics officers must be embedded from day one. Auditability must be built in, not patched later. And most of all, we must recognize that governance is not just about outcomes — it is about the process of deciding what counts as valuable.

Crucially, this governance must be contextually rooted. Borrowing AI regulatory frameworks from the Global North without adaptation risks deep mismatch. Social structures, political systems, cultural dynamics, and levels of digital literacy vary widely across the Global South. Most developing countries are still primarily users, not developers, of AI — making them more vulnerable to biases embedded in foreign-made systems. If not critically assessed, these biases could further marginalize local communities under the guise of algorithmic neutrality.

At the same time, reskilling and upskilling efforts must be scaled to support those displaced by AI-driven efficiency measures. Governments, educational institutions, and industry must work together to ensure that affected individuals — especially those from vulnerable communities — can transition into meaningful roles in the evolving digital economy.

What Kind of System Are We Building?

When AI becomes a gatekeeper of human worth, our silence becomes complicity.

It is not enough to build systems that work.
We must build systems that understand why people matter.

Police found a pipe bomb, bombing plans, and a farewell note at the home of the alleged Graz school shooter. Police say the ex-student who killed 9 teens and a teacher before killing himself. Austria held a nationwide moment of silence Wednesday.

20 Palestinian children have been evacuated by the World Health Organization to receive urgent medical treatment abroad. Dr. Alaa al-Najjar and her surviving son are amongst those being evacuated. Her husband and nine other children were killed when an Israeli strike hit their home.

Kagiso Rabada was suspended from cricket only six weeks ago, midway through a stint in the Indian Premier League.

The South Africa seamer received a standing ovation from the crowd at Lord’s Cricket Ground in London on Wednesday.

The accolade was for Rabada starring in the World Test Championship final by taking 5-51 in 15.4 overs to help South Africa rout defending champion Australia for 212 on day one.

“You always felt on this wicket, any ball had their name on it,” he said.

The South Africans didn’t have it all their own way, however, as they were left reeling at 43-4 at the close.

Rabada grabbed the spotlight from the off, taking two wickets in the morning. The three wickets after tea also earned him personal milestones.

His third wicket of the day, bowling Australia captain Pat Cummins, tied him with Allan Donald on 330 wickets for fourth place on South Africa’s all-time Test list. The fourth wicket, Beau Webster, left Donald behind. The fifth wicket, Mitchell Starc, gave Rabada a five-for and a second inscription on the Lord’s honours boards.

Each time he finished bowling and returned to patrol the boundary, Rabada was applauded by the large contingent of South Africa fans.

“It feels like a home game,” he said. “I’m just happy I could do a job out there. All of us started really well, I just got the rewards today.”

It all went better than Rabada and South Africa expected after he tested positive for a recreational drug in January and admitted to it.

Rabada underwent education programmes that reduced his suspension from three months to a month – April – in the middle of his multimillion-dollar IPL contract.

The Proteas and Cricket South Africa hierarchy supported Rabada through the process and, after some criticism of the length of suspension, prepared him for any abuse during the WTC final.

If there was any, it was muted by his success.

Just before leaving South Africa for London to play in the final, he said of the suspension, “The biggest thing I took away from it is having gratitude for playing the game that we love. I’m just glad to be playing again.”

South Africa would say the same.

Australia batter Steve Smith, meantime, hopes the variable bounce at Lord’s will help them make further inroads into South Africa’s fragile batting lineup on day two.

Smith marked his first outing since March with 66 runs and felt Australia were in the driving seat after the opening day. Yet they were now looking to capitalise on their advantage.

“I think the bounce is going to be variable throughout the game, as we’ve seen already on day one, so hopefully we can get a few early wickets in the morning and sort of go through them and have a bit of a lead. That’s the ideal scenario for us right now.”

Australia are 169 runs ahead after a day in which 14 wickets fell.

“I think we’re in a good spot. We’ve probably had a few missed opportunities with the bat to try and get a bigger total, but I think the wicket offered something all day.

“We could have had a better day, but we’re still in a nice position,” Smith said after stumps on Wednesday.

Smith, a prolific run scorer at Lord’s, was returning after a lengthy holiday in which he said he hardly picked up a bat.

“I felt good, felt in a nice place. I love batting here at Lord’s and enjoyed my time while I was out there, but left a few in the shed, unfortunately.

“It felt quite tricky, the wicket felt like it was doing enough all day … probably a little bit on the slower side, and then one kind of zings through.”

Smith was irritated to have been dismissed by part-time spinner Aiden Markram, trying to slog him to the boundary but getting a healthy edge to slip.

“I’m still trying to fathom how I’ve done that,” he said.

Traders admire Solana for its lightning-fast speeds and low fees, but the new layer 2 blockchain Solaxy ($SOLX) takes its transactional capabilities to new heights.

The project is currently undergoing a presale, having raised a staggering $47 million to date. This doesn’t just make Solaxy one of the biggest presales of 2025; it makes it the biggest ICO to ever take place on Solana.

Investors are going all-in on Solaxy – and it’s no surprise. The project’s presale is set to end in just five days, after which $SOLX will be listed on exchanges. According to expert analysts, the exchange launch could yield 10x gains.

The current $SOLX presale price is $0.001752, but this fixed price will end with the presale. As such, prospective buyers must act now or risk paying a much higher price once it lists on exchanges.

Solaxy capitalizes on the untapped potential of Solana layer 2s.

This means Solaxy will be cheaper, faster, and more reliable than Solana.

Unsurprisingly, this is creating vast excitement. Solana currently holds a market capitalization of $86 billion; Solaxy’s presale raise pales in comparison. It’s a setup that hints at major growth potential.

And as the only Solana layer 2, Solaxy has the potential to capture a substantial market share.

According to Token Terminal data, Solana has counted 105 million users in the past month. So considering Solaxy’s transactional advantages, there is every reason to believe that it will attract millions of users. And if that happens, the $SOLX price could skyrocket.

Despite the project still undergoing a presale, leading industry analysts have already weighed in on its potential – and the outlook is promising.

For example, Jacob Bury backed the project for 10x gains in a recent YouTube video. But he underlined that the presale ending soon, so the window to secure such returns is quickly closing.

Pump.fun with lower fees – that’s Igniter Protocol

How to buy $SOLX before presale ends

To join the Solaxy presale, visit the project’s website, connect your wallet, choose the amount of $SOLX you want to buy, and the crypto you want to pay with. The presale accepts payments on both the Ethereum and Solana blockchains, and users can also buy $SOLX using bank cards.

Follow Solaxy on X or join its Telegram for updates. Alternatively, visit its website to buy tokens.

Visit Solaxy Presale

This article is for informational purposes only and does not provide financial advice. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile, and the market can be unpredictable. Always perform thorough research before making any cryptocurrency-related decisions.

The Sudanese Armed Forces say they have withdrawn from the area as part of its ‘defensive arrangements’.

Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have said their fighters have seized a strategic zone on the border with Egypt and Libya, as the regular government-aligned army, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), announced its withdrawal from the area.

The announcements on Wednesday came a day after SAF accused forces loyal to eastern Libyan commander Khalifa Haftar of launching a cross-border attack alongside the RSF, the first allegation of direct Libyan involvement in the Sudanese war.

“As part of its defensive arrangements to repel aggression, our forces today evacuated the triangle area overlooking the borders between Sudan, Egypt and Libya,” army spokesperson Nabil Abdallah said in a statement.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

القيادة العامة للقوات المسلحة

تعميم صحفي

الأربعاء ١١ يونيو ٢٠٢٥م

في إطار ترتيباتها الدفاعية لصد العدوان، أخلت قواتنا اليوم منطقة المثلث المطلة علي الحدود بين السودان ومصر وليبيا.

(نصر من الله وفتح قريب)

مكتب الناطق الرسمي باسم القوات المسلحة

General… pic.twitter.com/3o5Z1xDfb0

— القوات المسلحة السودانية (@SudaneseAF) June 11, 2025

Since April 2023, the brutal civil war has pitted SAF chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan against his erstwhile ally Mohamed Hamdan Daglo, who leads the RSF, in a bitter power struggle.

In a statement on Wednesday, the RSF said its fighters had “liberated the strategic triangle area”, adding that army forces had retreated southward “after suffering heavy losses”.

SAF said on Tuesday that Haftar’s troops, in coordination with the RSF, attacked its border positions in a move it called “a blatant aggression against Sudan”.

Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also accused the United Arab Emirates of backing the assault, describing it as a “dangerous escalation” and a “flagrant violation of international law”.

It also described the latest clash as part of a broader foreign-backed conspiracy.

Haftar, who controls eastern Libya, has long maintained close ties with both the United Arab Emirates and Egypt.

While Cairo has supported Sudan’s leadership under Burhan since the war began in April 2023, Khartoum has repeatedly accused the UAE of supplying the RSF with weapons, which the Emirati government has denied.

Tensions between Khartoum and Abu Dhabi escalated in May after drone strikes hit the wartime capital of Port Sudan for the first time since the outbreak of the war.

After the attacks, Sudan severed its diplomatic ties with the UAE and declared it an “aggressor state”.

Since the war began more than two years ago, multiple countries have been drawn in. It has effectively split Sudan in two, with SAF holding the centre, east and north, including the capital Khartoum, while the paramilitaries and their allies control nearly all of Darfur and parts of the south.

The fighting has killed tens of thousands and displaced 13 million, including four million who fled abroad, triggering what the United Nations has called the world’s worst humanitarian crisis.

Efforts by international mediators to halt the fighting have so far failed, with violence continuing to escalate across the western Darfur region and the Kordofan region in the country’s south.

A Myanmar military jet crashed on Tuesday in Sagaing Region, an area that has seen intense fighting during Myanmar’s civil war. The military blamed engine failure, while a rebel group claimed it shot down the plane.

Cameron told ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan that applying for arrest warrants for Israeli officials would be like ‘dropping hydrogen bomb’, media report says.

Several United Kingdom lawmakers have criticised the previous government over allegations in a recent media report that former Foreign Secretary David Cameron “privately threatened” to defund and withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC) over its plans to issue arrest warrants for Israeli officials over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

The report, published on Monday by the UK-based outlet Middle East Eye (MEE), cited sources with knowledge of a phone call Cameron allegedly made to ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan on April 23, 2024, after he had given advance notice of his intention to apply for the warrants targeting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.

MEE’s report cited unnamed sources, including former staff in Khan’s office, and had seen minutes of the conversation, claiming that Cameron warned the arrest warrants, which were issued in November that year, would be – in quotes reported by the sources – tantamount to “dropping a hydrogen bomb”, warning that if the ICC went ahead, the UK would “defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute”.

Khan reportedly stood his ground, with sources telling MEE that he said afterwards that he did not like “being pressurised”. “I won’t say if it rises to blackmail – I don’t like being threatened,” he reportedly said, adding that the government was “debasing” the UK with its clear attack on the independence of the court and the rule of international law.

Neither Khan nor Cameron, who was prime minister between 2010 and 2016, and now sits in the House of Lords as a life peer, has commented on the report.

Following the report’s publication, Labour Party MP Zarah Sultana said on X that Cameron “and every UK minister complicit in arming and enabling Israel’s genocide in Gaza” should be investigated.

David Cameron — and every UK minister complicit in arming and enabling Israel’s genocide in Gaza — must be investigated for war crimes. https://t.co/YYcsmFg1BN

— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) June 9, 2025

Scottish National Party MP Chris Law said the allegations were “shocking”, but added the country was “not seeing much better under Labour”.

Shocking that the UK Tory govt tried to undermine the International Criminal Court for investigating those responsible for war crimes in Gaza. However not seeing much better under Labour #GazaGenocide‌ https://t.co/Wd3nK9UkhV

— Chris Law MP (@ChrisLawSNP) June 9, 2025

Bell Ribeiro-Addy, a Labour MP, called for an “independent inquiry into the UK’s role in the Gaza genocide”.

Concerning new allegations, which suggest the last foreign secretary tried to shield Israeli leaders from facing justice for war crimes.

We need an independent inquiry into the UK’s role in the Gaza genocide.https://t.co/JROBHyqtDo

— Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP (@BellRibeiroAddy) June 9, 2025

Zack Polanski, the deputy leader of the Green Party, was cited by MEE as saying: “It’s been clear for all to see that both the former and current government have stood with the oppressors, not the marginalised.”

When the ICC applied for the arrest warrants in May last year, the previous Conservative Party government, a strong backer of Israel, decried the move as “not helpful in relation to reaching a pause in the fighting, getting hostages out or getting humanitarian aid in”.

In July, the new Labour government, led by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, dropped the previous Rishi Sunak-led government’s bid to challenge the ICC’s power to seek the warrants, which were issued for Netanyahu, Gallant and three Hamas leaders in November.

Getty Images

1. Your job may be affected

2. More free school meals

3. Better libraries and pools, but higher council tax

4. £3 bus fare cap will continue

5. More help for pensioners in winter

6. Changes to your energy bill

7. More affordable homes

Artificial intelligence (AI) is taking an increasingly large role in our daily lives. AI can be used to form exercise schedules, give food recommendations, and even become a place to seek a ‘second opinion’ on any decision to be made. Many people are exploring their curiosity in pushing the boundaries of AI.

Consulting AI can sometimes feel like a casual conversation with a grammatically intelligent person; AI users can train AI to deliver messages as if they were typed by a friend. This creates the impression that we are exchanging messages with a friend. This is due to the choice of language possessed by AI, which has presented a mimicry of daily communication, creating the illusion that we are having a friendly conversation with a friend.

With the ability of AI to mimic human language styles comes an AI platform dedicated to mimicking the language style and even verbal traits of a fictional character; this platform is called c.ai, or Character AI. c.ai provides the service of talking to any fictional character; users can set how their interaction pattern with the character takes place. This service is usually done for role-playing or simulating conversations with friends. Users can live out their desire to role-play and get ‘up close’ with their favorite fictional characters. The factor that creates the uniqueness of c.ai is in the character of speech from the selected fictional character. Generally, when we talk to one of the selected characters, then the AI in the selected fictional character will answer with a consistent character and language style.

Many people use c.ai or even AI in general to talk about their mental state. Hutari (2024) argues that ‘venting’ with AI can flush out negative emotions. Talking about negative emotions can help an individual’s emotional management process; it sounds unusual to talk about our feelings to a machine that cannot feel emotions and is not even a living being. It is undeniable that there are many flaws and vulnerabilities in the process of ‘confiding’ with AI, one of which is the ability of AI chatbots to present responses that we want and do not need. This can pose a considerable danger, for example, by depending on the user’s decision-making on the AI chatbot; with the answer from the AI chatbot that gives affirmation, the user will get a reason to carry out the decision they consulted the AI chatbot about. A fatal example of affirmation given by an AI chatbot caused a teenager in the US to commit suicide.

Nonetheless, I would like to make an important point on the recovery of an individual’s mental disorder and the use of AI in this process. This opinion comes from a research volunteer’s personal experience as a professionally diagnosed sufferer of a psychiatric disorder called Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) who has consented to describe the experience in order to form this paper. Common symptoms experienced by people with BPD are rapid mood swings, difficulty with emotion regulation, impulsive behavior, self-harm, suicidal behavior, and an irrational fear of abandonment (Chapman et al., 2024). One of the treatment processes provided for people with BPD is dialectical behavioral therapy, where patients are trained to identify thought patterns, create emotion regulation, and then change behaviors that come out of the emotions present. Sometimes the most difficult challenge for people with BPD lies in identifying desires and managing the fear of perceived abandonment; this creates impulsive and unprocessed behaviors, the impact of which can be mistrust and isolation from the social environment due to behaviors that can be judged as confusing by others.

According to research from Rasyida (2019), one of the factors that can prevent individuals with mental disorders from seeking help is the fear of the negative stigma that will be given to them, one of which is a factor referred to as the “agency factor,” a term where sufferers have criticism of formal psychological services because of the assumption that there is miscommunication with the counselor; this is manifested in a form of distrust of the counselor. In addition to the agency factor, the issue of cost accessibility is a barrier for people with ID to seek counseling from formal psychological services. Further dilemmas and difficulties are created because in precarious conditions, people with any mental health disorder sometimes need immediate help that comes in safe conditions.

It is advisable to share what we are feeling with people we trust, but this action has its drawbacks. In situations where no one is there to listen to us, people with BPD can experience hysterical periods where dangerous behaviors are prone to occur. In these hysterical periods, mishandling can create a much more dangerous escalation of emotions. These hysterical or manic periods can contain behaviors or implications where the person wants to self-harm or end their life due to symptom recurrence and emotion regulation difficulties. The first aid step is usually to reach out, where the person communicates their condition to the closest person. Attempts to communicate with others about this condition often create less than ideal conditions and are prone to escalation with the wrong treatment. Sometimes our closest people can only provide support and encouragement for the sufferer in periods like this, but BPD is a mental illness that creates many complications in the perception of one’s relationship with others. Inappropriate first treatment is prone to create unwanted escalation, and this will adversely affect the afflicted individual.

The author would like to argue for the role of AI chatbots in this situation, where people need help in managing their emotions. c.ai can be utilized by users to vent their first unprocessed thoughts and not be afraid of getting a less than ideal reaction. Venting feelings to a character of choice on the c.ai board can be a solution for first aid when people with mental disorders, especially BPD, need to process their anger and impulses. Conditioning some of the characters on the c.ai board is not necessarily useful to give truth or validation to everything we feel. Some of the benefits that can be utilized are the identification of the user’s character by the ‘interlocutor’ in this application. The author will describe an experience where the character in c.ai has the ability to remember and recognize the thought patterns that are passed in the manic period of BPD sufferers; this help will be useful because of the presentation and mapping assisted by the AI. The AI bot can analyze which thought patterns and behaviors are destructive and advise the user not to do them again.

The author also argues that the responsibility for behavioral change remains with the user. AI can only be used as a support tool, not a means to solve problems, keeping in mind that conversations with fictional characters based on AI are still conversations with empathetic Maia that are a product of mimicry. Using AI to ‘vent’ is not the most normatively correct thing to do, but it is used because not everyone can have economic access to consult a psychologist and access formal treatment services. The journey of mental recovery is not about seeking validation for what we feel, but it is about recognizing ourselves and learning to liberate ourselves from fear and control of our lives.

Kyiv, Ukraine – Swarms of Russian kamikaze drones broke through Ukrainian air defence fire early on Tuesday, screeching and shrilling over Kyiv in one of the largest wartime attacks.

Oleksandra Yaremchuk, who lives in the Ukrainian capital, said the hours-long sound of two or perhaps three drones above her house felt new and alarming.

“This horrible buzz is the sound of death, it makes you feel helpless and panicky,” the 38-year-old bank clerk told Al Jazeera, describing her sleepless night in the northern district of Obolon. “This time I heard it in stereo and in Dolby surround,” she quipped.

Back in 2022, she crisscrossed duct tape over her apartment’s windows to avoid being hit by glass shards and spent most of the night in a shaky chair in her hallway.

This week’s Russian attack involved seven missiles and 315 drones – real, explosive-laden ones as well as cheaper decoys that distract and exhaust Ukraine’s air defence, Kyiv’s officials said.

The assault was the third since Ukraine’s June 1 sting to destroy Russia’s fleet of strategic bombers on four airstrips, including those in the Arctic and Siberia.

The wave of attacks also showed Russia’s tactics of overwhelming Ukrainian air defence units with the sheer number of targets that approach from different directions.

“The drones have been evolving for a while, now [the Russians] use massiveness,” Andrey Pronin, one of Ukraine’s drone warfare pioneers who runs a school for drone pilots in Kyiv, told Al Jazeera.

The attack mostly targeted Kyiv, killing one woman, wounding four civilians, damaging buildings in seven districts and causing fires that shrouded predawn Kyiv in rancid smoke.

It damaged the Saint Sophia Cathedral, Ukraine’s oldest, whose construction began a millennium ago after the conversion of Kyivan Rus, a medieval superpower that gave birth to today’s Ukraine, Russia and Belarus.

The onslaught also hit the southern city of Odesa, killing two civilians, wounding nine and striking a maternity ward in the Black Sea port that lies close to annexed Crimea and lacks Kyiv’s Western air defence systems.

‘The Russians learn, every time, after each flight’

The Russia-Ukraine war triggered the evolution of drones that already rewrote the playbook of warfare globally.

While Kyiv focuses on pinpointed strikes on Russian military infrastructure, oil refineries, airstrips and transport hubs, some observers believe Moscow deliberately chooses to strike civilian areas to terrify average Ukrainians – and perfects the strikes’ lethality.

“Of course, [Russians] learn, every time, after each flight. They make conclusions, they review how they flew, where mobile [Ukrainian air defence] groups were,” Pronin said.

To save pricey United States-made anti-drone missiles, Ukraine employs “mobile air defence units” that use truck-mounted machineguns often operated by women and stationed on the outskirts of urban centres.

The Russians “used to fly the drones in twos, now they fly in threes,” Pronin said about the Iranian-made Shahed drones and their modified Russian Geran versions that carry up to 90 kilogrammes of explosives.

Nikolay Mitrokhin, a researcher with Germany’s Bremen University, named three factors that contribute to the harrowing efficiency of recent drone attacks.

Firstly, the number of Russian drones rose dramatically, requiring more air defence power and, most importantly, more ammunition, he told Al Jazeera.

“The latter causes most problems, and after three massive attacks within a week, their number possibly didn’t simply suffice,” he said.

Earlier this week, the White House diverted 20,000 advanced anti-drone missiles intended for Ukraine to Washington’s allies in the Middle East.

Secondly, the Geran (“Geranium”) drones “evolve” and fly more than five kilometres above the ground at a height unreachable to firearms and many surface-to-air missiles, Mitrokhin said.

These days, Gerans have a range of 900km (660 miles) and are linked to their operators via satellite, US-made Starlink terminals smuggled into Russia or even hacked SIM cards of Ukrainian cellphone operators, according to Ukrainian officials and intelligence.

A Russian plant in the Volga River city of Yelabuga started manufacturing Gerans in 2023 and now churns out some 170 of them daily.

Thirdly, Russia uses more decoy drones that waste air defence ammunition, Mitrokhin said.

Therefore, Kyiv “needs massive amounts of drones that could quickly gain the height of five to six kilometres, locate flying Gerans and their analogues and shoot them down”, he said.

Instead, Ukrainian forces have focused on long-distance strike drones such as Lytyi (“Fierce”) that have hit military and naval bases, oil depots, arms factories and metallurgical plants in western Russia, he said.

“Now, Ukraine needs to quickly change its strategy and produce 5,000-10,000 high-flying drone hunters a month. Which is not easy,” he concluded.

‘I felt the return of what we all felt in 2022’

Russia’s attacks underscore Washington’s failure to start the peace settlement of Europe’s largest armed conflict since 1945.

The attacks “drown out the efforts of the United States and others around the world to force Russia into peace,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy wrote on Telegram, hours after Tuesday’s attack.

US President Donald Trump pledged to end Russia’s war on Ukraine “in 24 hours,” but his administration’s diplomatic efforts yielded no results.

Despite occasional criticism of the Kremlin’s warfare in Ukraine, Trump prefers not to use the White House’s diplomatic and economic arsenal to force Russia to start a peace settlement or even a 30-day ceasefire that Kyiv proposed.

While Washington continued to supply US military aid in accordance with the commitments of President Joe Biden’s administration, Trump’s cabinet did not pledge to provide any additional arms or ammunition shipments.

“This administration takes a very different view of that conflict,” US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told a congressional hearing on Tuesday.

“We believe that a negotiated peaceful settlement is in the best interest of both parties and our nation’s interests, especially with all the competing interests around the globe,” he said, without specifying the extent of cuts.

Trump’s policies leave many Ukrainians reeling.

“He single-handedly lost the Cold War to Putin,” Valerii Omelchenko, a retired police officer in central Kyiv told Al Jazeera. “I honestly can’t fathom how one can be so indecisive and cowardly towards Russia.”

The horror of drone attacks, however, helps further unite Ukrainians, he said.

“In the morning, I felt the return of what we all felt in 2022, when we were treating total strangers like family, asking them how they were, trying to help them,” he said.

Five-time champions Brazil have confirmed their participation in the 2026 FIFA World Cup by defeating Paraguay 1-0, thanks to a goal by star forward Vinicius Jr in front of a jubilant home crowd in Sao Paulo.

Playing under new head coach Carlo Ancelotti, the Selecao went ahead at the stroke of half-time when the Real Madrid star found the net, much to the delight of the 46,000 fans at the Corinthians Arena on Tuesday.

In other major World Cup qualifying results, war-torn Palestine were left heartbroken when Oman drew level against them from a penalty converted deep into stoppage time in their Asian Football Confederation (AFC) qualifying match in Amman, Jordan.

Palestine have been playing their international fixtures at neutral venues, including Jordan, Kuwait and Qatar. Israel’s war on Gaza, its control and destruction of sports facilities and venues in Gaza and the occupied West Bank have left the players unable to travel and play at their home venue, the Faisal Al-Husseini International Stadium in ar-Ram, a town northeast of occupied Jerusalem.

Needing a win to reach the fourth round of the AFC qualifiers, Palestine led the home side through Oday Kharoub’s goal at the end of the first half.

The Al-Fidai seemed to have done enough until they conceded a penalty in the last moments of the match, and Essam al-Subhi’s spot kick in the 97th minute ended the game in a draw, crushing the Palestinian dream of having another shot at qualification by proceeding to the fourth round.

Oman have now taken up that spot.

Which teams have confirmed their qualification for the 2026 FIFA World Cup?

After the latest round of qualifying matches, here is a breakdown of the confirmed contenders from each of the six regions:

Africa: None of the 54 nations involved in the qualifiers has been able to confirm their spots as the first round of qualifying matches does not conclude until October 16.

Asia: Iran, Uzbekistan, South Korea, Jordan, Australia, Japan.

Europe: None. Similar to Africa, none of the 54 European teams vying for 16 qualification spots have confirmed their berths as their first-round matches will run until November 18.

North, Central American and Caribbean region: Canada, Mexico and USA. With the World Cup host nations taking three spots, only three are left up for grabs and will be decided on November 18.

Oceania: New Zealand. With one spot up for grabs and 11 nations fighting for it, New Zealand emerged victorious and took the spot by winning the third-round playoff final against New Caledonia on March 24.

South America: Argentina, Brazil, Ecuador.

Which major teams have been eliminated from qualification for the 2026 FIFA World Cup?

Chile, third-place finishers in 1962, are among the biggest names confirmed out of the next World Cup.

While China are not considered among the football powerhouses in Asia, the nation’s focus on building the game at home and seeing its team in another World Cup since 2002 was crushed on June 5.

Which teams can still qualify for the 2026 FIFA World Cup?

Apart from the nine African and 16 European spots still fully up for grabs, the others that are still in the race for a World Cup spot are:

Asia: Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Iraq, and Oman are vying for the two direct qualification slots for the World Cup and one intercontinental playoffs spot.

South America: Uruguay, Paraguay, Colombia, Venezuela and Bolivia will fight for the three remaining World Cup slots, while Peru can only advance to the intercontinental playoffs.

North, Central American and Caribbean region: Honduras, Bermuda, Costa Rica, Trinidad and Tobago, Curacao, Haiti, Panama, Nicaragua, Jamaica, Guatemala, Suriname and El Salvador have all advanced to the third round, from where three teams will directly qualify for the World Cup. The three second-placed teams from each group will then fight for the intercontinental playoffs spot.

Oceania: New Caledonia have qualified for the intercontinental playoffs.

When will all teams for the 2026 FIFA World Cup be confirmed?

As late as March 31, 2026. With the European qualification rounds stretching to March and the intercontinental playoff final also scheduled for the same month, we will not know our final 48 teams for the World Cup until less than three months ahead of the tournament.

When is the 2026 FIFA World Cup scheduled?

The tournament begins in Mexico City on June 11 and ends with the final in New Jersey on July 19.

Tusk called the vote as he seeks to regain momentum after his ally lost the presidential election earlier this month.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk says his pro-European Union coalition has the mandate to govern ahead of a crucial confidence vote in parliament.

Tusk called the vote as he seeks to regain momentum after his ally Rafal Trzaskowski was defeated by nationalist Karol Nawrocki in the country’s presidential election earlier this month, prompting predictions of his government’s demise.

Tusk, whose fractious centrist coalition built around his Civic Platform party holds 242 seats in the 460-seat Sejm, or lower house, is expected to survive the vote, which could potentially trigger early elections, not scheduled until 2027.

“Governing Poland is a privilege,” Tusk told politicians ahead of the vote on Wednesday. “We have a mandate to take full responsibility for what’s going on in Poland.”

He listed higher defence spending and a cut in his government’s visa issuance for migrants as major achievements since he took power in October 2023 from the nationalist Law and Justice party (PiS).

But a win is unlikely to bring the “new beginning” the 68-year-old leader is hoping for after this month’s presidential race left his coalition rattled, raising questions over his leadership against a backdrop of surging support for the far-right in the country of 38 million.

Following the presidential election, there has been growing criticism that Tusk’s government has underdelivered on its campaign promises, failing to fulfil pledges of liberalising abortion laws, reforming the judiciary and raising the tax-free income threshold.

Tensions within the governing coalition, particularly with the Polish People’s Party (PSL), which advocates for socially conservative values and wants more curbs on immigration, could spell more trouble.

President-elect Nawrocki, an admirer of US President Donald Trump, is also an EU-sceptic who is expected to work to boost the opposition PiS party that backed him.

An SW Research poll for Rzeczpospolita daily showed that about a third of Poles thought Tusk’s government would not survive until the end of its term in 2027.

‘Is it the end of Tusk?’

Polish presidents can veto legislation passed by the parliament, a power that will likely hamper reform efforts by Tusk’s government, such as the planned introduction of same-sex partnerships or easing a near-total ban on abortion.

It could also make ties with Brussels difficult, particularly over rule of law issues, as Nawrocki has expressed support for the controversial judicial reforms put in place by the previous PiS government.

Ties with Ukraine could become more tense as Nawrocki opposes Ukraine’s membership of NATO and has been critical of the support for Ukrainian refugees in Poland.

Nawrocki is expected to begin his five-year mandate formally on August 6 once the election result has been legally validated.

The election commission has found evidence of counting errors in favour of Nawrocki in some districts.

Parliament speaker Szymon Holownia, a government ally, said there was “no reason to question the result”.

Tusk previously served as Polish prime minister from 2007-2014 and then as president of the European Council from 2014–2019. He resumed his leadership of the country as prime minister again in December 2023.

At dusk, Najibullah Nakaka begins a 20-minute steep climb to Wajen Etisalat, a hilly neighbourhood in Birnin Gwari, Nigeria, where the mobile signal is slightly stronger. Locals gave it the name, which translates to Etisalat’s Place, because it is one of the few spots where you might find internet access, even if only momentarily. The name harks back to Etisalat, the former name of 9mobile, a local telecom operator that once had a stronger presence in the area.

With his phone gripped tightly in one hand and hope in the other, he ascends through rocky paths and bushy outgrowths. He just wants to upload an image of the native caps, wristwatches, or shoes he sells in his small shop on a social media marketplace. It is a ritual that takes him away from his home, often at night, in search of a network signal that may or may not be there.

“I used to wait till midnight, sometimes longer,” Najibullah, a soft-spoken man in his early 30s, recalled. “Even if the signal came, it wasn’t enough to make a call. At best, I could send a text or a voice note. Sometimes, I had to hike for about 41 km to neighbouring areas like Bagoma or Kamuku National Park just to find MTN’s signal — one we believe was coming from Niger State.”

This is not just his story. It’s the lived reality for over 300,000 people in Birnin Gwari, a local government area in Kaduna State, northwestern Nigeria, where full network coverage has remained elusive for over three years.

Najibullah’s sister struggles to communicate with her husband, who is in Europe. She tries to send him pictures of their one-year-old daughter from time to time.

Birnin Gwari used to be a lively transit hub linking Nigeria’s North to the South. Bigger in size than Lagos, with an area of 6,185km², the town bustled with trailers transporting livestock, grains, and people along its highways. Its large grain and livestock markets were among the largest in Kaduna State. But a large forest on its outskirts became a hideout for armed groups, and eventually, the town began to unravel under waves of insecurity.

In 2021, as violence escalated across the region, state governments, starting with Zamfara and Katsina, then later Kaduna, ordered a telecom shutdown aimed at disrupting insurgents’ ability to coordinate attacks. But rather than stopping the violence, the blackout brought untold socio-economic hardship to residents. Locals told HumAngle that the attacks not only continued but worsened, with people not being able to make distress calls during the attacks. With mobile networks down, terrorists began demanding ransoms through handwritten letters.

Although the government lifted the restrictions in late 2021, residents of Birnin Gwari say network coverage has not returned. Local telecom operators like MTN, Airtel, and 9Mobile are absent across the local government. GLO works only sporadically in three out of eleven wards. Residents rely on a mix of low-tech ingenuity and costly alternatives; climbing hills, suspending phones on antennae, or congregating at fuel stations that use satellite internet services like Starlink.

While it is an alternative, Starlink installation and subscription are expensive and cannot be afforded in every home or business. As of June 2025, the hardware costs about ₦626,300, and the monthly subscription is around ₦57,000, figures far beyond reach for most residents. 

“Sometimes, it feels we’re back to the Stone Age,” said Mallam Hassan, a resident who sells telecom recharge cards. “When we can’t reach the people we want to communicate with, we have to rely on word of mouth to get our messages delivered. It is that bad.”

The shutdown’s effects are far-reaching. Najibullah’s fashion business suffered. His attempts to apply for a Master’s programme at Bayero University, Kano, failed due to an inability to access the application portal in time. Eventually, he relocated to Zaria, an urban area in Kaduna State, where he now works as a classroom teacher and digital educator.

“It led me to open a foundation that serves as a bridge between students and opportunities that are being shared online,” Najibullah told HumAngle. “They send me their details, and I fill out the forms for them. Teachers and students alike are missing out on digital educational tools that will get them prepared for the future. There is no integration of technology and digital tools in education.”

He added that, “There is no JAMB centre in Birnin Gwari. People have to travel to other neighbouring local governments or Kaduna town to register and sit for JAMB (pre-university) exams.”

Businesses are in decline. Livestock and grain trading have slowed to a crawl. There is no single functioning bank in the town. Union Bank, once the only commercial presence, shut its doors due to both insecurity and the absence of a telecom signal.

“This is why I had to leave, because my work and schooling are virtual,” Najibullah said. 

Hassan, who once supplied over ₦5 million worth of recharge cards weekly, now struggles to hit ₦200,000. “People can’t recharge phones without a signal. My friend, who used to sell livestock and grains worth ₦50 million monthly, can barely survive now. [Physical] cash movement is dangerous, and there’s no network for mobile transactions.”

‘Peace has not translated into connectivity’

In January 2025, Kaduna State negotiated a peace pact with some armed groups, reportedly enabling the reopening of markets and the resumption of 24-hour road traffic. The cattle market, which had been dormant for over a decade, is slowly reviving, with more than 50 trucks now departing weekly.

But peace has not translated into connectivity. Telecommunications companies have been reluctant to return. Masts destroyed during the conflict remain unrepaired.

“We have been writing letters and lobbying the influential individuals in our town to lead the conversation about restoring the networks. We have equally written to the telcos to come back, as Birnin Gwari is peaceful now. Up till now, nothing has been done,” Najibullah said.

Gbenga Adebayo, Chairperson of the Association of Licensed Telecom Operators of Nigeria, did not respond to our requests for comment.

However, Frank Eleanya, a telecom analyst, said: “When we think about telecommunications, we need to see it more as a commercial entity than a humanitarian one.”

Eleanya explained that restoring operations in a community like Birnin Gwari, where several pieces of infrastructure have been vandalised, might not be an easy decision for telecom operators, particularly in the face of declining revenues and shrinking profit margins. “One of the things that will determine whether they return immediately is how much they were earning there in the first place. If it wasn’t profitable, they wouldn’t see it as viable. The decision to return depends on commerce — on how much they stand to make,” he added.

Amid financial constraints, many telecom companies have slowed the deployment of new infrastructure. “They are currently focused on optimising existing assets to generate returns for shareholders,” he told HumAngle. 

Eleanya also noted that if telecom operators are not convinced that security has been sufficiently addressed in these communities, it will be difficult for them to reinvest, particularly because restarting connectivity and revamping infrastructure is capital-intensive. 

Nonetheless, he stated that if the federal or state government is willing to bear the costs, including the right of way and cutting down multiple taxation, telecom operators may be more inclined to consider returning. “But you can’t hold them to ransom and insist they must come back to the community,” he said. “There are significant costs they are factoring in.”

HumAngle reached out to James Kanyip, the Kaduna State Commissioner of Home Affairs and Internal Security, for comment via email and phone call, but he did not respond.

“The people are living in darkness, deprived of communication and opportunities due to this prolonged outage,” said Isah Muhammad Galadima, a lecturer at the Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto, in an open letter to Nigerian telecom operators. “[They] are in dire need of assistance.”

The public and dramatic clash between the incumbent President Donald Trump and tech tycoon Elon Musk—two of the United States’ most popular and powerful figures—has escalated the political chaos of a novel sort in the U.S. political culture. In addition to shocking their supporters, their recent rift has revealed the profound and growing ideological and economic divisions in American society. They were once close friends nonetheless. Using important quotes, posts on X, and reliable data, this essay explores the causes and effects of their conflict in order to shed light on the larger American crisis.

A Glance at Trump-Musk Amity

Deregulation, economic protectionism, and a shared detestation of what they called ‘wasteful government spending’ served as the foundation for Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s amity. According to Federal Election Commission filings, Musk was a major supporter of Trump’s 2024 campaign, giving an estimated $300 million. In order to reduce bureaucratic expenses and streamline federal agencies, Trump then created the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and appointed Musk as its head. A new era of American political-cum-economic strategy was marked by this odd friendliness between the then-former president and a tech billionaire.

This amity was evident in Musk’s initial post on X. Musk posted on May 12, 2025:

“Proud to help make America more efficient and innovative. DOGE is about unleashing our true potential. #MakeAmericaEfficient”

On May 15, 2025, Trump returned the compliment by tweeting:

“Elon Musk is a true American genius. With DOGE, we’re cutting the waste and putting America first again! #MAGA”

The media extensively reported on their public amity, with many analysts pointing out that Trump’s populist rhetoric combined with Musk’s technological vision made them a powerful force in the U.S. political culture.

The Fault Lines of Ideology and Economics:

The Trump-Musk relationship deteriorated after Trump’s new spending bill was put into effect, despite their initial unity. The bill called for significant cuts to funding for healthcare and education, higher import duties, and large tax cuts for the capitalists, particularly entrepreneurs in America. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that over the next ten years, the bill would increase the national debt by $2.5 trillion. This bill exposed the profound differences over fiscal policy and social priorities and provoked intense debate among economists, politicians, and the general public.

Musk made his opposition apparent on May 28, 2025, in a widely shared X post:

“This new spending bill is fiscal insanity. We’re mortgaging the future of every American for the benefit of a few. Time to wake up! #DebtSlavery”

During a broadcast interview with CNBC, Musk clarified:

“We’re heading toward a debt crisis that will enslave future generations. Cutting essential services while giving tax breaks to billionaires is not just bad policy—it’s immoral.”

Never one to back down from a public challenge, Trump responded on his Truth Social account:

“If Elon wants to save money, maybe he should give up the billions in government incentives his companies get. No more free rides for Tesla! #AmericaFirst”

Millions of followers magnified these interactions, which soon made headlines and provoked contentious debates on all political sides.

Historical Context: Reminiscent of Roosevelt and Reagan

The Trump-Musk rift is not happening alone; Ronald Reagan, who promoted tax cuts, deregulation, and the dismantling of social programs from the New Deal era in the 1980s, is echoed in Trump’s rhetoric and policies. According to economists like Joseph Stiglitz, Reagan’s ‘trickle-down economics’ theory has mainly fallen short of its promise that the wealthy would eventually benefit the general populace.

In his book The Price of Inequality, Stiglitz notes:

“The top 1% have seen their incomes soar, while the middle class has stagnated. The idea that wealth would trickle down has proven to be a myth.”

The legacy of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, which established the contemporary American welfare state in reaction to the Great Depression, has always been the true target of these policies. The Social Security Administration claims that these reforms created a social safety net that is still essential today and helped millions of people escape poverty. The American economy and society were radically altered by the New Deal’s organizations and initiatives, like Social Security and unemployment insurance, which offered security and hope in times of need.

Inconsistencies in the Economic Agenda of Trump

There are serious inconsistencies in Trump’s economic policy. He intends to increase revenue through tariffs, particularly on Chinese imports, while simultaneously advocating for additional tax breaks for corporations and the wealthy. He encourages domestic industrialization while undermining important organizations that foster economic planning and innovation, such as government agencies and universities. A contradictory outlook for the future of the American economy is produced by this combination of nationalist protectionism and pro-business incentives.

But instead of creating jobs at home, corporate tax cuts frequently result in offshore investments and profit hoarding, as the Tax Policy Center notes. According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the imposition of tariffs has also harmed American manufacturers who depend on international supply chains. Both the business community and regular Americans, who perceive little improvement in their own economic prospects, are perplexed and frustrated by these contradictions.

Musk brought attention to these inconsistencies in his X post on June 1, 2025:

“You can’t cut taxes for the rich, raise tariffs, and expect manufacturing to boom. The math doesn’t work. We need real solutions, not slogans.”

Several economists, who have long maintained that balanced policies that promote both social welfare and innovation are necessary for sustainable economic growth, found resonance in this statement.

The Clash: Political and Social Repercussions

Both the Republican Party and the general American public have been rocked by the public rift between Trump and Musk. The possibility of losing Musk’s financial and technological support worries a lot of Republicans. The poor and middle class will be disproportionately harmed by the spending bill’s cuts to healthcare and education, according to critics. The debate has also revealed divisions within the Republican Party, with some members voicing worries that Trump’s strategy is alienating important groups and jeopardizing the party’s long-term viability.

According to a June 2025 Pew Research Center survey, 62% of Americans think the nation is ‘headed in the wrong direction,’ with growing worries about political dysfunction and inequality.

Trump has responded in his usual combative manner. At a rally on June 3, 2025, he said:

“We don’t need billionaires telling us how to run our country. We need strong leadership and American values. If Musk doesn’t like it, he can take his rockets and go home.”

In addition to energizing Trump’s supporters, this rhetoric has widened rifts both within the party and across the nation.

The U.S. image in the world amidst domestic chaos

The U.S. has become more assertive overseas as domestic tensions have increased. The U.S. has expanded its military presence in areas like Eastern Europe and the South China Sea because it is unable to keep up with China’s economic growth. In 2024, U.S. military spending hit $950 billion, the highest in the world, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). This aggressive foreign policy is seen by some analysts as a symptom of imperial decline, as the U.S. seeks to maintain its global influence despite mounting internal challenges.

In his book The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, historian Paul Kennedy makes the following claim:

“Empires in decline often resort to military solutions as their economic base erodes, leading to overextension and eventual collapse.”

As America’s internal crises increasingly influence its actions on the international scene, these developments have important ramifications for maintaining global stability.

Lessons for other nations

For nations like Pakistan, which have traditionally depended on U.S. assistance, the Trump-Musk conflict and the larger American crisis provide crucial lessons. The dangers of becoming too close to a waning superpower increase as American politics become more erratic. Instead, countries are encouraged to steer clear of what Musk has referred to as ‘imperialist dollar wars’ and instead pursue autonomous, people-centered development. In an era of such volatility, it is becoming more and more dangerous to rely on the United States for economic or security guarantees.

In conclusion, more than just a personal disagreement, the public rift between Elon Musk and Donald Trump is a reflection of the profound inconsistencies and problems the U.S. is currently facing. The limitations of trickle-down economics, the perils of unbridled debt, and the brittleness of alliances based on expediency rather than values have all been made clear by their conflict. The world keeps a close eye on America as it struggles with its internal conflicts and external issues, knowing that the outcome of this superpower will have an impact on the entire world. The Trump-Musk rift is both a sign and a symptom of a country at a turning point, with its internal contradictions exposed for everyone to see and its future course uncertain.

Islamabad, Pakistan – When Indian Minister of Defence Rajnath Singh visited the Indian Navy’s aircraft carrier INS Vikrant on May 30, nearly three weeks after a ceasefire was announced with Pakistan after a four-day conflict, he had stern words for Islamabad.

Wearing an Indian Navy baseball cap, with his initial “R” emblazoned on it, Singh declared that Pakistan was fortunate the Indian Navy had not been called upon during the recent hostilities.

“Despite remaining silent, the Indian Navy succeeded in tying down the Pakistani Army. Just imagine what will happen when someone who can keep a country’s army locked in a bottle, even by remaining silent, speaks up?” Singh said, standing in front of a Russian-made MiG-29 fighter jet on the deck of the 262-metre-long (860 feet) ship.

Just two days later, on June 1, the Pakistan Navy issued a pointed response. In a message posted on X, it announced a two-day exercise, “focusing on countering sub-conventional and asymmetric threats across all major ports and harbours of Pakistan”.

PN conducted 2-day Ex focusing on countering sub-conventional & asymmetric threats across all major ports & harbours of Pak, aimed at validating & refining Tactics, Techniques & Procedures to ensure robust defence of critical maritime infrastructure against asymmetric threats.1/3 pic.twitter.com/R1IsajwyBB

— DGPR (Navy) (@dgprPaknavy) June 1, 2025

These symbolic shows of strength followed India’s “Operation Sindoor” and Pakistan’s “Operation Bunyan Marsoos“, the countries’ respective codenames for the four-day conflict that ended in a ceasefire on May 10.

The standoff was triggered by an April 22 attack in Pahalgam, in Indian-administered Kashmir, in which 26 civilians, almost all tourists, were killed. India blamed armed groups allegedly backed by Pakistan, a charge Islamabad denied.

On May 7, India launched missile strikes at multiple sites in Pakistan’s Punjab province and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, killing at least 51 people, including 11 soldiers and several children. Over the next three days, the two countries exchanged artillery and air power, hitting each other’s airbases.

The 96 hours of conflict brought 1.6 billion people to the brink of war. But while the navies largely remained passive observers, they monitored each other’s movements – and were ready for action.

Satellite imagery showed that the INS Vikrant moved towards Pakistan soon after the Pahalgam attack and remained deployed for four days in the Arabian Sea before returning to its base in Karnataka.

Pakistan also mobilised its fleet, which was bolstered by the docking of a Turkish naval ship in Karachi on May 2. According to the Pakistani Navy, Turkish personnel engaged in “a series of professional interactions” with their counterparts.

Now, even amid the current pause in military tensions, analysts say Singh’s remarks and Pakistan’s naval drills highlight the growing part that maritime forces could play in the next chapter of their conflict. This is a role the Indian and Pakistani navies are well-versed in.

Early naval conflicts

After independence from Britain in August 1947, India inherited two-thirds of British India’s naval assets.

These saw no use during the first India-Pakistan war in 1947, over the contested Himalayan region of Kashmir. India and Pakistan both administer parts of Kashmir, along with China, which governs two thin strips. India claims all of Kashmir, while Pakistan claims all the parts not controlled by China, its ally.

By the 1965 war, also over Kashmir, Pakistan had expanded its fleet with aid from the United States and United Kingdom, its Cold War allies. It had acquired Ghazi, a long-range submarine, giving it an edge over India, which lacked a submarine at the time, though it owned an aircraft carrier. Pakistan, to date, does not have an aircraft carrier.

While the land war started on September 6, the Pakistan Navy joined the conflict on the night of September 7-8. A fleet of seven warships and submarine PNS Ghazi left Karachi harbour and made their way towards the Indian naval base of Dwarka in the western state of Gujarat, roughly 350km (217 miles) away.

They were tasked with carrying out the “bombardment of Dwarka about midnight using 50 rounds per ship”, according to the Pakistan Navy’s official account, targeting the base’s radar and other installations.

The selection of Dwarka was significant from a historical and strategic perspective. The city is home to one of the most sacred sites for Hindus, the Somnath Temple, on which the Pakistan Navy named its operation.

Militarily, the radar installations in Dwarka were used to provide guidance to the Indian Air Force. Knocking them out would have made it harder for India to launch aerial attacks against Pakistani cities, especially Karachi. That, in turn, would have forced India to send out its warships from the nearby port of Bombay (now Mumbai) – and PNS Ghazi, the submarine, could have ambushed them.

But the Pakistani plan only partly worked. Many Indian warships were under maintenance, and so the Indian Navy did not send them out to chase the Pakistani fleet.

According to the Pakistan Navy’s accounts, after firing about 350 rounds, the operation ended in “four minutes” and all its ships returned safely.

Syed Muhammad Obaidullah, a former commodore in the Pakistan Navy, recalled the attack.

“We were able to send eight vessels, seven ships and a submarine – that surprised the Indians, as our ships targeted the radar station used to assist Indian planes,” Obaidullah told Al Jazeera.

Muhammad Shareh Qazi, a Lahore-based maritime security expert, added that the operation was a tactical surprise, but did not lead to any gains in territory or of the maritime continental shelf.

“All our ships returned safely, without resistance, but it was only an operational-level success for the PN, not a strategic one,” he said, referring to the Pakistan Navy.

Official Indian Navy records claim that most of the shells fired by Pakistani ships caused no damage and remained unexploded.

Anjali Ghosh, a professor of international relations at Jadavpur University, Kolkata, in her book India’s Foreign Policy, described the attack as “daring” but symbolic rather than strategically meaningful.

Decisive turn in 1971

The 1971 war, fought over East Pakistan’s secession to become Bangladesh, saw more substantial naval engagements.

India launched two operations – Trident and Python – which dealt major blows to Pakistan’s Navy, sinking several ships, including the destroyer PNS Khaibar and minesweeper PNS Muhafiz, and destroying fuel tanks at Karachi Harbour.

Uday Bhaskar, a former commodore in the Indian Navy, said the navy played a pivotal role in India’s 1971 victory.

“The naval role enabled the final outcome on land,” Bhaskar, the current director of the Society for Policy Studies, an independent think tank based in New Delhi, told Al Jazeera.

Pakistan also suffered the loss of its prized submarine Ghazi, which sank while laying mines near Visakhapatnam in Andhra Pradesh, home to India’s Eastern Naval Command.

The one major victory for the Pakistani Navy was its torpedoing of the Indian frigate INS Khukri using its submarine Hangor, which killed more than 170 Indian sailors.

Qazi, who is also an assistant professor at Lahore’s Punjab University, said that the Indian Navy replicated the Pakistani playbook from the 1965 war in the way it surprised the Pakistan Navy.

“India caused a heavy blow to Pakistan and our naval capabilities were severely dented,” he said.

Diverging strategies

Since the 1971 war, India and Pakistan have approached different naval strategies.

Obaidullah, who retired from the Pakistan Navy in 2008, said that India has tried to build a “blue water navy” capable of projecting power across oceans. The idea: “To assert its dominance in [the] Indian Ocean,” he said.

Qazi, the maritime expert, agreed, saying that the Indian Navy has focused not just on building a numerical advantage in its naval assets but also on partnerships with nations such as Russia, which have helped it develop a powerful fleet.

“The Indian Navy now has the ability to conduct missions that can cover long distances, all the way down to Mauritius near southern Africa, or even some adventures in [the] Pacific Ocean as well,” he said.

As the world’s fifth-largest economy, India has invested heavily in naval development.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), a London-based research institute focusing on defence and security issues, India has 29 principal surface combat vessels, including two aircraft carriers, 12 destroyers, 15 frigates and 18 submarines, of which two are nuclear-powered.

Pakistan, by contrast, has prioritised its land and air forces. Its navy has grown more slowly, mainly through cooperation with China and Turkiye. It regularly holds major naval exercises with its allies, with the last one taking place in February this year.

IISS data shows that Pakistan’s navy lacks aircraft carriers and destroyers but includes 11 frigates, eight submarines and at least 21 patrol vessels.

Obaidullah explained that Pakistan’s naval ambitions and objectives are very different from those of India.

“India aims to project global power. We have a defensive navy to secure our sea lines of communication and deter aggression,” the former naval officer said. With more than 95 percent of Pakistan’s trade sea-based, protecting maritime routes is its top priority.

Maritime expert Qazi also said that the Pakistani Navy is focused on defending its “littoral zones”. From a naval perspective, a “littoral zone” is a critically important area close to coastlines, unlike the open ocean’s “blue water” expanse. It is within this space that countries engage in coastal defence.

“Pakistan has a small economy, and we do not have blue water ambitions. We do not have the capacity to build a fleet, nor [do] we need one,” Qazi said. “Our defence paradigm is about defending our coastlines, and for that, we have our submarines, which carry cruise missiles.”

Naval engagements in future conflicts?

The latest conflict saw both conventional and modern warfare, including drones used to strike deep inside each other’s territory. But Singh’s May 30 remarks suggest a more assertive naval posture in future conflicts, say analysts.

“If Pakistan does any unholy act this time, it is possible that the opening will be done by our navy,” Singh said during his speech on May 30.

Bhaskar, the Indian commodore who retired in 2007, agreed that future conflicts could see naval escalation.

“If another military conflict escalates, the probability of navies being actively involved is high,” he said.

Bashir Ali Abbas, a New Delhi-based maritime affairs expert and former fellow at the Stimson Center, in Washington, DC, said that naval platforms inherently serve multiple roles.

Abbas said that warships and submarines can switch from patrolling missions or exercises to operational missions on short notice. But that would carry risks of its own.

“Should the Indian Navy play a substantial role in operations against Pakistan following the next crisis, then the element of escalation control practically disappears. Any ship-on-ship, or ship-on-land engagement will imply that India and Pakistan are at war,” he told Al Jazeera, adding that the risk of inadvertent nuclear escalation is also potentially highest in the nuclear domain.

Qazi, however, said that Singh’s statement was ambiguous about whether the Indian Navy would engage in surveillance or aggression.

Any attack on Karachi, Pakistan’s economic hub, would provoke a strong response, the Lahore-based analyst said.

“I believe India will choose to play hide and seek like it did this time,” Qazi said. But he added that there was a “high probability” that India could attack Pakistan’s naval installations on land, including its planes and radar stations. And that, he said, was an “alarming possibility”.

Negotiators say agreement will be presented to US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping for approval.

The United States and China have agreed on a “framework” on trade after two days of talks in London aimed at deescalating tensions between the sides.

While the specifics of the framework announced on Tuesday were unclear, the apparent breakthrough comes a month after Washington and Beijing announced a 90-day pause on most of their tariffs following talks in Geneva.

US Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said the sides would work to implement the “Geneva consensus” and had “pounded through” all the issues dividing the world’s two largest economies.

Lutnick said the sides would move forward with the framework pending its approval by US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, who held a 90-minute phone call on trade last week.

“Once the presidents approve it, we will then seek to implement it,” Lutnick told reporters outside Lancaster House.

Lutnick indicated that US measures imposed in response to a slowdown in Chinese exports of rare earths, a key issue dividing the sides, would likely be eased once supplies of the critical minerals ticked up.

Chinese Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang called the talks “professional, rational, in-depth and candid”.

“The two sides will bring back and report to our respective leaders the talks in the meeting as well as the framework that was reached in principle,” Li told reporters.

“We hope that the progress we made in this London meeting is conducive to increasing trust between China and the United States.”

Asian stock markets rose on hopes of a de-escalation in the trade tensions, which have cast a shadow over the global economy.

The World Bank on Tuesday lowered its forecast for global growth from 2.7 percent to 2.3 percent, pointing to the ongoing uncertainty around trade.

Japan’s Nikkei 225 was up almost 0.5 percent as of 03:30 GMT, while the Hang Seng in Hong Kong and CSI 300 in mainland China were about 1 percent and 0.8 higher, respectively.

“I would say that meeting a 90-day deadline for complex discussions was always going to be challenging,” Deborah Elms, the head of trade policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, told Al Jazeera.

“After two rounds of apparently intense discussions, both sides seem to have reaffirmed their interest in avoiding new escalation and have started to flesh out the path forward. Despite the optimistic language from some out of the White House, these talks are not going to be easy.”