Archive May 1, 2025

A contentious minerals deal signed by Ukraine’s parliament is expected to secure the latter’s long-term commitment to the war-torn nation as a result of stalled efforts to reach a ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia.

The minerals-deal-with-us”>deal, which was put forth by US President Donald Trump and took several months to reach, makes for a sort of turning point in the conflict, giving the US priority access to Ukraine’s crucial minerals in order to deter future Russian aggression. However, it falls short of providing specific security assurances and still raises questions about mineral access in regions under Russian control.

Andrii Sybiha, the country’s minister of foreign affairs, claimed on Thursday that the agreement “marks a significant milestone in the Ukraine-US strategic partnership aimed at strengthening Ukraine’s economy and security.

According to Al Jazeera’s Zein Basravi, a journalist from Kyiv, “We’re anticipating it to be discussed and ratified by Ukraine’s parliament later today.” The general consensus is that if the US invests economically in Ukraine, it will invest in Ukrainian security.

According to Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, Ukraine was able to secure a number of last-minute concessions in the agreement, which will result in the establishment of a so-called Reconstruction Investment Fund, with the country now being free to pay back billions in previous US aid and maintaining “full control over its subsoil, infrastructure, and natural resources.”

Notably, the US Treasury statement on the agreement mentioned Russia’s “full-scale invasion” of Ukraine, which suggested a shift in Washington’s alleged support for Russia. According to the Reuters news agency that saw a copy, the draft does not offer the specific security guarantees Ukraine was looking for.

Questions remain regarding how the US will access resources in the Russian-controlled area. According to estimates from Ukrainian think tanks We Build Ukraine and the National Institute of Strategic Studies, which cite data up until the first half of 2024, about 40% of Ukraine’s metal resources are currently under Russian control.

“Diplomatical win”

Dmitry Medvedev, the former head of Russia’s Security Council, made fun of the deal on Thursday. Trump “broke the Kyiv regime to the point where they will have to use mineral resources to pay for US aid,” he claimed.

He said that Ukrainians will now be required to pay for military supplies using the country’s national wealth.

Trump had stated on Wednesday that the deal would give the US a return on its investment in the nation as well as prevent it from looking “foolish.” Trump responded, “Well, it could,” when asked whether the deal would “inhibit” Vladimir Putin.

In response to Trump’s efforts to mediate a peace deal, which included his threat to walk out if one is not reached soon, Anatol Lieven, director of the Eurasia Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, expressed concerns that Putin was “just tapping me along.”

If the current round of peace negotiations fails and Trump is threatened, Lieven said, “What it will probably ensure or [what] Kyiv hopes it will ensure is that he will blame Russia, not Ukraine,” he said.

Overall, he continued, would mean that the US “would feel invested in Ukraine and would not, by extension, overlook Ukraine.” Even though it’s not a security guarantee, he claimed, “It certainly ought to deter upcoming Russian aggression.”

Andrey Baklanov of the Association of Russian Diplomats, who was questioned about whether the US could be seen as a trustworthy mediator, told Al Jazeera that Russia was “cautious.”

Trump claimed that there had been “no tangible results” in terms of improving relations with Russia during his first 100 days in power, which he celebrated on Wednesday. He argued that the minerals deal was not “timely” because “Ukraine’s future is very uncertain.”

War continues to rage.

The war’s daily grind continued unabated as Ukrainian politicians scrutinize the deal, with Ukraine and Russia launch drone attacks on each other.

Two people were killed and 15 others were hurt in the Russian drone attack on Ukraine’s Black Sea port city of Odesa early on Thursday, according to emergency services.

At least 45 civilians were hurt earlier, according to Ukrainian officials, when a Russian drone attacked Kharkiv overnight.

At least seven people were killed and 20 were hurt when Ukrainian drones struck a busy market in Oleshky, in southern Ukraine, on Thursday morning, according to Russian-installed governor Vladimir Saldo, who was there to assist them.

One of the most holy holidays on the Russian calendar, May 8 to 10, will be marked by a three-day ceasefire that Putin has announced for May 8 and 10 when Russia will hold celebrations to commemorate its victory over Nazi Germany in World War II.

Clashes have erupted in Jaramana and Ashrafiyat Sahnaya on the outskirts of the Syrian capital, Damascus, this week.

The violence, which initially involved local armed men from the Druze religious minority and unknown gunmen from other towns, has killed at least 30 people.

Syrian security forces intervened to restore calm, but then Israel attacked Syria, claiming it was “defending the Druze”.

The unrest comes as the Syrian government, in power since the fall of former President Bashar al-Assad in December, tries to assert its control over the whole country.

So, what’s going on in Syria?

How did the latest unrest in Syria start?

Observers agree that the unrest seems to have started when a voice recording of a man cursing the Prophet Muhammad circulated, with claims that a Druze leader was speaking. The authenticity of the recording is questionable.

But it provoked the fury of many Syrians, and on Tuesday, a group of unknown gunmen attacked the mostly Druze town of Jaramana.

The Syrian Ministry of Interior says that its forces went to break up the clashes, before being attacked themselves.

The dead on Tuesday included at least two members of Syria’s General Security Services, the authorities said, while the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) said six Druze fighters and three “attackers” were also killed.

Then, on Wednesday, fighting spread to Ashrafiyat Sahnaya, another town in the Damascus suburbs with a significant Druze population.

A source in the Syrian Interior Ministry told Al Jazeera that 16 members of the security forces were killed in an attack on a security checkpoint in Sahnaya. That prompted more fighting, and six Druze fighters were killed, according to the SOHR.

Israel then launched air attacks on Sahnaya, targeting security personnel, according to the Interior Ministry, while Israel said it had attacked “extremists”.

The Syrian authorities have since announced that calm has been restored in both Jaramana and Ashrafiyat Sahnaya.

What led to the violence?

Syria’s new administration is trying to stabilise the country, but fallout from 12-plus years of war, the many armed groups in the country and the instability that comes with big changes have made for a volatile environment.

The worst unrest was in early March when hundreds were killed in Syria’s coastal region.

Fighters loyal to the Assad regime attacked security forces, setting off the violence as fighters from other areas came in to fight, and widespread attacks were reported against civilians, many from the former president’s Alawite sect.

There is fear in Syria that al-Assad’s supporters will keep trying to overthrow the new authorities, who have not yet been able to exert power and provide security across the whole country.

Some of that fear has morphed into suspicion of minorities such as Alawites and Druze.

The minorities, in turn, fear this suspicion and worry about the fact that there are still armed fighters with backgrounds in groups such as al-Qaeda.

The new government has emphasised that all are equal in the new Syria, but that has yet to quieten these fears.

Add to this mix the potential for fake news to spread on social media, and the country is rife with the tensions that led to the most recent fighting in Jaramana and Ashrafiyat Sahnaya.

Why is Israel involved?

Israel seems to have stepped up its attacks on Syria and is occupying more and more land since the fall of al-Assad.

It already illegally occupied part of the Syrian Golan Heights along the border, and regularly bombed sites in Syria it claimed belonged to pro-Iranian groups like Lebanon’s Hezbollah.

When al-Assad fled, Israel saw an opportunity, analysts say, and stepped up its attacks, claiming that the new government is “extremist” and cloaking itself as a defender of the Druze in Syria, part of whose community lives under Israeli control.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said “he would not allow” Syrian government forces to operate in Syrian territory south of the capital, Damascus, calling for the “full demilitarisation” of the area.

Some Israelis have called for taking control of Druze-majority areas in southern Syria, claiming that would create an alliance of minorities across the Middle East.

On Wednesday, after the fighting in Ashrafiyat Sahnaya, the Israeli military said that it had taken three Syrian Druze to Israel to receive medical treatment.

Who are the Druze, and who do they support?

The Druze, an ethnoreligious Arabic-speaking group that grew out of Ismaili Shia Islam, live in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria as well as Israel, especially the occupied Golan Heights.

Nobody can claim to know who “all the Druze” support. Individuals or sub-groups within each national community will have differing opinions.

The Druze population in Israel is estimated at 150,000, and Israel conscripts their young men into the army, whereas it does not conscript Palestinian citizens of Israel.

The Druze in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria are openly supportive of the Palestinian cause, while Syrian Druze leaders have vehemently rejected the idea of friendlier ties with Israel.

The communities are important players in their countries’ politics, particularly in Lebanon, where Druze leader Walid Jumblatt has been influential for decades.

As extreme weather events become the new normal, informal workers across South Asia are bearing the growing brunt of intersecting crises. Labour rights violations and poor social protections are worsening under the climate crisis. In India, amid the ongoing heatwave, we may have come to a boiling point as street vendors, waste pickers, and other informal workers rise in defiance, coming together in solidarity.

Their demands for compensation for losses and other damages are aimed squarely at the coal, oil and gas corporations. In 2023 alone, climate disasters prompted by oil and gas corporations have affected more than 9 million people in Asia, while Big Oil continues to block climate action and spread disinformation, amassing immense wealth.

This International Workers ‘ Day, a new coalition is forming in Delhi. Informal workers, trade unionists and climate justice campaigners like Greenpeace India, supported by counterparts in Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh, have launched the Workers ‘ Collective for Climate Justice – South Asia. Along with the Collective, groups have signed the Polluters Pay Pact, a global campaign to hold billionaires and polluting corporations accountable for the climate crisis, by demanding that the governments introduce new taxes on fossil fuel corporations to help communities rebuild from climate disasters and invest in inclusive adaptation solutions.

Informal workers on the front lines

Informal workers in South Asia are no strangers to crises. They have been on the front lines of social marginalisation, and increasingly, the effects of climate change. South Asia, with more than 80 percent of its labour force in the informal sector, is seeing rising temperatures and erratic weather events that are drastically affecting people’s ability to work and survive.

In 2024, Greenpeace India documented how street vendors face financial loss and health risks during peak summer months, with vendors in cities like Delhi reporting more than a 50% decline in income due to heat waves. Yet, workers remain largely absent in policymaking. While just five oil majors earned more than $102bn in 2024, informal workers are left to bear the brunt of the crisis.

The power of collectivising

From the struggles of jute mill workers in Bengal to the tea plantation workers ‘ resistance across the region – labour organising has secured fundamental rights and labour protection for millions. They were never just about wages, but about dignity, recognition, and power.

Today, that legacy is more important than ever. The climate crisis is fundamentally altering the nature of life and work. These effects are set to worsen under a carbon-intensive scenario, with projections of more than 800 million South Asians living in locations that will become climate hotspots by 2050.

In a strong response, workers are reclaiming the power of collectivising. When workers unite across sectors, castes, genders, religions and ethnicities, they challenge systems of both exploitation and environmental degradation. This movement refuses to flatten their diverse experiences into a single narrative. By connecting the strength of past labour struggles with the urgency of the climate crisis, this collective is not merely reacting, it’s forging a new path forward.

Centering communities in climate policy

Communities on the front lines of climate effects such as fisherfolk and waste pickers are agents of knowledge and lived experience. They witness real-time ecological changes, gaining an understanding of the risks to their livelihoods that policy briefs are often too slow to capture. Yet, both domestic and global climate policy spaces continue to remain distant, dominated by elite institutions and exclusionary technocratic jargon.

Further, it is well established that in the Global South, non-economic losses such as the loss of culture and community far exceed economic ones. Addressing these losses requires the meaningful involvement of affected communities. Particular attention must be paid to ensuring that Loss and Damage financing is equitable and just, without deepening the existing debt burden or imposing unfair conditions on the very countries already bearing the brunt of the crisis.

Addressing loss and damage cannot wait

Loss and damage from climate change in South Asia are already running into the billions of dollars annually. By 2070, this number could jump to $997bn. Despite the promises made at UN Climate Change Conferences, climate finance has been sluggish, fragmented, and insufficient. Wealthy nations and polluters have under-delivered while continuing to drill for new oil and gas.

The adaptation needs of workers must be met now. They urgently require shade and paid breaks for livelihood and survival. While global climate finance talks stall, adaptation costs and urgency are mounting. This is why the Polluters Pay Pact is so vital. It’s not just a gesture – it demands enforceable commitments. As workers gather in Delhi this May Day, they send a clear message: A just, sustainable future must be led by the working class. By holding oil and gas corporations accountable, climate resilience becomes a right – not a privilege.