Category World News

The “execution” of two Palestinian men by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank this week has been condemned by human rights organizations and the UN, claiming that it highlights Israel’s “systematic policy.”

The “brazen killing” in the northern West Bank city of Jenin, which was captured on camera, was described as “yet another apparent summary execution,” according to a UN human rights office spokesperson on Friday.

Palestinian deaths carried out by Israeli forces, settlers, and security forces have increased rapidly in the occupied West Bank, according to Jeremy Laurence, a Geneva-based journalist.

According to the most recent UN data, Israeli forces and settlers killed at least 1,030 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem, between October 7, 2023 and November 27 this year. At least 223 Palestinian children are included in that figure.

The illegal use of force by Israel’s security forces and the rise in Israeli settler violence must end, Laurence said.

Since footage from Jenin on Thursday showed its forces shooting two unarmed Palestinian men at close range as they attempted to surrender to the military during a raid, Israel has received widespread condemnation.

Before Israeli forces forced them back into a building they had been hunkered in, the men were later identified as Al-Muntasir Billah Abdullah, 26, and Youssef Asasa, 37.

The Israeli army then shot them dead, according to the video.

According to Palestinian human rights group Al-Haq, “evidence andamp; footage show they were unarmed, had surrendered, and posed no threat.”

This reflects Israel’s widespread and systematic policy of unlawful killings throughout occupied Palestinian territory, according to the group, which includes Israel’s ongoing and systematic genocidal conflict with Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

We urge the international community to take action right away, impose sanctions, and hold accountable.

Total impunity

The commanders on the ground are reviewing the incident, according to the Israeli military in a statement released on Thursday, and it will be transferred to the appropriate professional bodies.

However, according to experts, Israel only rarely launches criminal investigations into the killings of Palestinians by the military, even when there is footage of the incidents, and soldiers directly involved are rarely held accountable.

They claim that prominent members of the far-right government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have stoked violence against Palestinians.

Itamar Ben-Gvir, the leader of Netanyahu’s national security, wrote on social media that “terrorists must die” shortly after the killings in Jenin.

Ben-Gvir has been pushing for Israel to impose the death penalty for “terrorist” crimes, which rights advocates claim would “exclude Palestinians” from the scope of the law.

In response to the recent wave of Israeli attacks in the area, Israeli politicians have been calling for the West Bank to be officially annexed.

Israelis, according to Shai Parnes, director of BTselem’s public relations division, enjoy “total impunity” for their violence against Palestinians. Israel is unwilling and unable to investigate itself, he told Al Jazeera, “again and again.”

According to Parnes, “every time it’s forced to]investigate] because of international coverage in the media or international pressure from other states,” Parnes said.

“But the outcome is essentially the same every time. The “investigating mechanisms” in Israel are completely whitewashed, and their goal is to act as though they are investigating [while] giving the perpetrators total impunity.

He added that Israel has no desire to launch a credible investigation based on Ben-Gvir’s remarks, which appeared to celebrate the killings in Jenin.

Washington, DC – Washington, DC – A man allegedly assaulted two members of the National Guard in the country’s capital after one of his victims passed away from her injuries.

The US attorney for Washington, DC, Jeanine Pirro, made the updated charges known on Friday.

Two days prior to the White House, Rahmanullah Lakanwal, an Afghan national, shot West Virginia National Guard members Sarah Beckstrom, 20, and Andrew Wolfe, 24, just blocks away.

Trump, the president’s representative, announced late on Thursday that Beckstrom, who had been stationed in the capital as part of his anti-crime campaign, had passed away.

The following day, Pirro announced that Washington state resident Lakanwal would face three counts of assault with the intent to kill while armed and three counts of firearm possession during a violent crime on the Fox and Friends TV program.

She stated on Friday that Lakanwal will be “further charged with murder in the first degree.”

“We are upgrading the initial charges from assault to murder in the first degree,” he said. “There are undoubtedly many more charges to come.

Prior to the attack, Attorney General Pam Bondi had stated that she would seek the death penalty for the deaths of either of the soldiers. The FBI has stated that it is looking into the “terrorism” attack.

Wolfe, a member of the National Guard, was still in critical condition on Friday.

“Collective punishment”

The Trump administration promised a widespread crackdown on immigration in the wake of the attack, as well as a revetting of immigrants who are already US citizens, with the addition of the upgraded charges.

The actions have been referred to as “collective punishment” by advocacy groups.

Trump expanded a previous decision to halt all immigration requests involving Afghan nationals in a social media post on Thursday night, adding that he would “permanently pause migration from all Third World Countries.”

Trump added that he would “remove anyone who is incapable of loving our country or who is not a net asset to the United States.”

The administration had already stated that it would re-visit asylum seekers and refugees who had been admitted to the US under former president Joe Biden, with USCIS’s director declaring on Thursday that it would “completely reexamine every Green Card for every alien from every country of concern” in a “full-scale, rigorous reexamination of every Green Card.”

As more details about the alleged attacker, Lakanwal, become available, the policy changes are made.

During Biden’s Operation Afghans Welcome, tens of thousands of Afghans were relocated to the US after the withdrawal of Western forces, the Trump administration has repeatedly attributed the shooting to lax vetting practices.

According to reports in US media, Lakanwal was a member of an Afghan force called the “zero unit” that collaborated with the CIA in Afghanistan.

Lakanwal had mental health issues related to the unit’s actions, which included, among other abuses, extrajudicial and civilian killings, according to a friend who spoke to The New York Times.

Lakanawal applied for asylum in December 2024, according to a government report that was reviewed by the Reuters news agency.

However, the case was approved in April, a month after Trump’s second-term as president, with officials praising his efforts to fight in Afghanistan alongside the US. At the time, they discovered no discriminatory information.

Advocates claim that the Trump administration is accelerating immigration reform further.

According to critics, the crackdown targeted both migrant workers and vulnerable people, including refugees who sought refuge from persecution.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) San Francisco Bay Area chapter responded to the government’s decision on Thursday to stop processing Afghan immigration for immigration.

The organization argued that “people who flee violence, persecution, and instability deserve protection and due process, not to be vilified for the alleged acts of one person.”

The Afghan-American Foundation urged media and elected officials to respond responsibly.

After Israeli raids and missile attacks resulted in the deaths of at least 13 people in Beit Jinn, Syria, in a video. After Israel claimed to have entered the village to arrest Jama’a Islamiya militants, violent clashes broke out.

Much of the world has been waiting for Donald Trump’s declaration that he could “end the war in Ukraine” in 24 hours to see if he could force Moscow and Kyiv to reach a settlement. On that subject, millions of views and views, miles of news feeds, and mountains of forecasts have been burned.

Trump fueled this expectation by claiming that Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the president of Ukraine, had run out of options and would eventually have to accept his deal. The opposite is actually the case. Trump lacks all leverage, according to Trump. He has no influence over Vladimir Putin, but he has the power to threaten Nicolas Maduro with possible military action in Venezuela or nearby. There isn’t a single leader in the West who would be willing to sever the branch from their grasp, and any sanctions that are severe enough to harm Russia would also have an impact on the wider Western economy.

Even more improbable is an armed intervention. NATO made the decision to support Ukraine with weapons and training right away, avoiding any possible maneuvers that could lead to a direct NATO-Russia conflict. That position has not changed.

In consequence, Ukraine is now effectively fighting Russia alone, with or without the support of its allies. All talk of a truce or ceasefire has come off as a bluff for Vladimir Putin to use to resumption his duties. Putin’s plan relies on the patience and political unanimity of its allies in order to defeat Ukraine’s army. Following consultations with Kyiv and a number of European governments, the United States has now made a revised version of its peace plan available. The Kremlin is still pressed for significant territorial concessions as well as the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces. Russia asserts that it will not stop its advance without this. For its part, Ukraine maintains that it will not give up its territory.

The United States almost stopped sending arms to Ukraine once it became clear that the diplomatic route offered no solution. Although it was unlikely that the Pentagon’s true cause would be a lack of movers, officials attributed the shutdown to the federal government. In any case, supplies that were previously approved by the Biden administration have slowed to a trickle. Defense Secretary-designate Austin Dahmer stated at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, “I’m not aware of any pause in] US military] aid to Ukraine.” It sounded more like an admission of ignorance than a serious assessment. The sharp reduction in American weapons has had a negative impact on every Ukrainian soldier. Air defense systems are a common acrimony among residents of Kyiv and other cities.

The gap has not been filled by Europe. The joint-procurement and defense industry in the European Union have produced numerous promises but little real money. There have only been a few billion euros in official commitments and very little has been delivered. Although their own programs are moving slowly, the member states prefer to rearm themselves and Ukraine. Governments in the EU continue to split between those who want to support Kyiv and those who don’t want Russia to proliferate or hurt their own budgets. The intention is being spearheaded by Brussels to use frozen Russian assets to finance a 140 billion euro ($162 billion) loan for Ukraine, which could help finance Kyiv’s budget and defense spending over the upcoming two years. The plan may not work without unanimity, even in several of the key member states that hold the majority of those reserves.

So Ukraine can now expand its own production while fighting with whatever comes and isn’t snatched up by corrupt individuals like Tymur Mindich, who is the subject of an investigation into a significant procurement case. Ukraine can stifle the enemy at great cost, but this is far beyond our capabilities.

There isn’t enough ammunition for the army. The government has accomplished the opposite of what the government has done: mobilize or maintain motivation. Women cannot wait indefinitely while men are engaged in a fourth year of combat. The level of conflict is rising, the level of stress is waning, and morale is deteriorating. Since 2022, prosecution has opened more than 255 000 cases of unauthorised absence and more than 56 000 of desertion. They recorded roughly 162, 500 AWOL cases and 21, 600 desertion cases in just the first ten months of 2025. More than 21, 000 soldiers left the army in October, according to various reports, which is the highest monthly figure so far. The scope of social injustice is growing.

The image is similarly bleak in appearance. In territory that is under Kyiv’s control as of early 2025, Ukraine’s population has decreased from more than 50 million at the time of its independence to about 31 million now. Relative fertility rates have decreased by about one child per woman, and infant mortality rates are still at the lowest level.

In light of this, Ukraine only has three strategic options.

Accepting Putin’s terms is the first step. A Ukrainian state would be preserved if it gave in, lost its political face, and lost territory. Additionally, it would render the nation vulnerable for a long time.

A radical change in Ukraine’s political and military leadership is the second option. Re-engineering the war effort from scratch, restructuring the command system, and re-establishing mobilization would be necessary. With institutions built for rotational deployments and peacetime politics, Ukraine cannot engage in a protracted war.

The third option is to maintain the status quo while changing nothing. In order to slow down the Kremlin’s economy and wait for Putin’s death, Ukraine would continue to launch precise strikes on Russian oil infrastructure. This is a fabrication. In terms of economic, territorial, and demographic terms, these strikes won’t break a smaller Ukraine if they can’t. There will be injuries, but none of them will be enough to stop Russia.

According to Zelenskyy’s and several of his European partners’ recent statements, Ukraine has essentially committed itself to the third option. How long can this approach be put to use? The financial outlook is bleak, even leaving morale and exhaustion aside from the war’s four years. The public debt and vast budget deficit of Ukraine likely exceed the gross domestic product (GDP). The continent’s economy is still struggling, Belgium hasn’t released frozen Russian assets, and Europe hasn’t gotten the funding it needs. At a time when voters remain sensitive to the recent increase in inflation, political courage would be required to increase support. In light of Washington’s current political climate, the EU is unable to bind the United States to long-term commitments.

All of this results in an unavoidable conclusion. Ukraine will eventually have to follow the same path and undergo a radical change in its political and military leadership if it wants to survive as a state. Moscow’s conditions will become more stringent once that occurs. Along with strict control measures, demilitarization, and additional concessions, the Russian ultimatum is likely to grow from demands for four to demands for eight.

Before Ukraine’s strategic options narrow further and its ability to withstand collapses with them, radical change is urgently required.

The Rapid Support Forces (RSF) of Sudan are exerting great pressure to conquer Kordofan. The paramilitary force is seen in the nearby cities and towns of the vast central region, including Babnusa and El-Obeid, where they are accused of committing grave human rights violations during the conflict in Sudan.

The RSF is currently gaining momentum after defeating their Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) foes in El-Fasher, in the western region of Darfur, last month, causing a tidal wave of violence that resulted in the deaths of at least 1,500 people and forced thousands more to flee.

In West Kordofan’s Babnusa, a major transportation hub connecting various regions of the nation, SAF soldiers are still able to repel RSF fighters. However, the SAF will find it challenging to hold the city, and if the city does fall, the RSF will likely advance further along the el-Obeid, a crucial gateway to Khartoum, as well.

In March, the SAF appeared to be in the ascendancy during the more-than-two-year conflict, and the RSF were forced to leave Khartoum.

The SAF now faces a dangerous situation, and after completely losing Darfur with the fall of el-Fasher, it runs the risk of losing Kordofan as well.

According to Dallia Abdelmoniem, a political analyst from Sudan, “The RSF has momentum, which they will carry on with,” SPLM-N, an RSF ally, already has control over the Nuba Mountains region of South Kordofan.

Hemedti, who is the head of the RSF, referred to as Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, “he was never going to be satisfied with just controlling the Darfur region. He wanted the entire country,” she said.

Abdelmoniem believes that the balance of power is shifting because the SAF has been stretched and prevented from dependable arms procurement. The SAF is weaker unless they find equivalent, if not superior, weaponry to the RSF.

talks on a ceasefire

The so-called “Quad” – Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and the United States – are currently attempting to put an end to the fighting, so it is notable that the RSF advances have occurred despite these efforts.

Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, the SAF’s head, rejected a ceasefire request from the Quad last Sunday, claiming that it was advantageous to the RSF. He also criticized Abu Dhabi’s continued opposition to Abu Dhabi’s involvement in the Quad, accusing it of supporting the RSF.

The RSF, for its part, made a seemingly unilateral three-month ceasefire announcement on Monday. The RSF has nevertheless continued to attack Babnusa in the wake of the announcement.

The recent escalation in fighting may be the result of the Quad mediation efforts, which have included a push from US President Donald Trump.

Kholood Khair, the founding director of Confluence Advisory, said the pressure on the SAF and RSF to secure a ceasefire from the Quad, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, is “putting pressure on them to gain a territorial advantage as quickly as possible in case something changes during the mediation.” Each side will always make an effort to maximize its standing before the discussions begin.

Khair points out that both sides had been armed during the rainy season of the summer, when fighting was more difficult. The weapons are being “put to use” now that the weather has turned “dry,” especially given that El-Fasher’s RSF is strengthened by its victory.

Kordofan is a significant prize because of its strategic significance, especially if any ceasefire agreement freezes the regions that each side controls.

Due to its agricultural, livestock, and petroleum resources, Kordofan is important to maintain control, according to Retired Lieutenant Colonel Omar Arbab. The battle for Kordofan is not just territorial; it is about securing Sudan’s economic foundation.

Arbab added that the RSF’s push toward Babnusa serves as the link between Darfur and el-Obeid, which has a military justification. El-Obeid could be a threat if the RSF were to control it, and they will undoubtedly attempt to besiege it.

“They have been spending their money for weeks straight.” According to Khair, some of those troops will be moved to el-Obeid if they accept it. She warned that if the city were to collapse, there would be a significant political shockwave. It’s a significant economic gain, a regional capital, and a huge mercantile center. Additionally, it brings Khartoum’s RSF a few steps closer.

Potential division

Analysts worry that the conflict between Sudan’s political and ethnic landscape is severing as a result of Kordofan’s expansion.

Khair noted that western Sudan’s territorial division had been exacerbated by the fall of El-Fasher, adding that there were “dozens of armed groups” that each controlled their own fiefdoms, either affiliated with the SAF, the RSF, or independent.

Khair believes that identity is the real cause of Sudan’s collapse rather than territory. The SAF and the RSF have both ethnicized this conflict to allow them to mobilize their forces. Due to this, there are now communities that think the SAF, the RSF, or other groups serve their ethnic interests.

She claimed that this ethnic competition is now more important than military strategy in determining the course of the war. “As of right now, there is no singular Sudanese project, not intellectually, militarily, politically, or economically,” he said, citing fragmentation.

Abdelmoniem warns, however, that some SAF members may be open to fragmentation. There are undoubtedly those in the SAF who would be happy to see the country strewn apart so they can continue to rule over the Arab-Sudanese side, she said. She continued, referring to former rebel groups that were primarily based in Darfur and affiliated with the SAF, and that “they’re willing to forgo the alliance with the joint forces over it.”

Many Sudanese in Darfur are non-Arab, and RSF attacks have been one of their most recent targets.

Abdelmoniem contends that any plan that leaves Darfur cannot be sustained. They cannot win without the joint forces and other political-military organizations under their control. And how do you handle the criticism of the public when the Sudanese people view the SAF as the government’s “loser or dissolution”?

Arbab views things with more caution. He acknowledges that de facto breakage exists, but he thinks a formal division is unlikely. Because the organization of alliances on both sides requires a political project that covers the entire of Sudan, Arbab said, “division is not currently on the table.” Such a choice is extremely challenging due to the complexity of the actors’ backgrounds and social contexts.

Humanitarian consequences

Korodofan is now at risk of a humanitarian disaster of the same magnitude as Darfur as the front lines get bigger. Abdelmoniem’s warnings sounded directly in the same way before El-Fasher’s fall. She warned that “the atrocities committed will be on a different scale.” The crimes will be committed, the statement reads: “We might not receive the video uploads like we did before.”

Abdemoniem claimed that all armed actors have been encouraged by international inaction. The international community’s desire to release statements and refrain from doing much else is perpetuated by the statement, which states that “that sense of impunity persists and only grows.”

Arbab echoed that concern. El-Fasher received “elements of ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity,” he claimed. However, the dynamics of Kordofan differ. In Babnusa, the violence is distinct from Darfur’s ethnic massacres because the SAF and RSF forces share the same tribal and ethnic backgrounds. Retaliation killings, sieges, and mass displacement are all still a possibility.