Several killed, injured in bus explosion near Syria’s Deir Az Zor: State TV

At least four people have been killed and nine injured following an explosion targeting a government-owned bus in eastern Syria, according to the state news agency SANA.

The explosive device detonated while the bus, belonging to the Syrian Ministry of Energy, was travelling on a highway connecting Deir Az Zor and al-Mayadin, SANA reported in a post on X on Thursday.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

All four deaths were security personnel at an oil facility in Deir Az Zor, the country’s oil heartland and seventh largest city, which was the site of fierce battles against ISIL (ISIS) during the country’s ruinous civil war.

Oil facility workers as well as civilians were among those who were injured in the attack, SANA added, without providing further details.

A video verified by Al Jazeera from the site of the explosion showed several security personnel inspecting a bomb-damaged bus on the side of a road.

According to the Reuters news agency, the security personnel were part of an army contingent securing the Teim oilfield. They were reportedly returning home after their shift at the oil facility when the explosion took place.

The incident is said to be the deadliest explosion in the eastern province, which also produces most of Syria’s wheat, since the fall of longtime ruler Bashar al-Assad last December.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

In May, a blast killed at least three people targeting a police station in al-Mayadin, a day after Syrian authorities said security forces killed three ISIL fighters and arrested four others in Aleppo.

In June, authorities had also accused ISIL of being behind a deadly suicide attack in a Damascus church that killed 25 people, though the group never claimed responsibility.

During Syria’s civil war, which erupted in 2011, ISIL carried out similar attacks on buses targeting the forces of al-Assad.

However, since the interim government of President Ahmed al-Sharaa took power after a lightning rebel offensive, attacks on government-controlled areas have been rare.

The site of the latest deadly attack also lies near an area controlled by the Kurdish US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) east of the Euphrates, where skirmishes and tensions between government forces and the SDF have risen in recent weeks.

The region lies along the border with Iraq and is divided by the Euphrates River between areas controlled by the state and the US-backed and Kurdish-led SDF, which controls Syria’s oilfields east of the river.

In August, Syria’s Ministry of Defence had accused the SDF of carrying out a rocket attack on a military position in northern Syria, injuring four army personnel and three civilians.

Internal, external concerns for al-Sharaa

The Syrian leader has been on a painstaking mission to try and unify the war-ravaged nation, making major inroads in ending Syria’s international isolation, crowned with a visit to the United Nations General Assembly last month, the first by a Syrian in six decades, where he called for an end to all sanctions on his nation.

Damascus has also been attracting substantial economic investment from Gulf Arab nations, a critical economic lifeline.

Deadly sectarian fighting in the southern province of Suwayda in July rocked the fledgling government, prompting it to deploy forces there to quell unrest between Bedouin tribes and Druze militias.

There are also external interventionist security issues to contend with, as Israel attacked Syrian positions during that fighting under the pretext of protecting the Druze. But Israel has carried out multiple bombings and incursions into Syria both before and after that, despite ongoing security talks between the two nations.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s vision of a “Greater Israel”, condemned by Arab and Muslima countries, involves hegemonic designs on Syrian territory, among others.

On Friday, SANA reported Israeli forces conducted incursions and raids in Eastern al-Samadaniyah and Ofaniya, in the Quneitra countryside.

According to SANA, the Israeli operation consisted of eight military vehicles, a heavy bulldozer, and two tanks advancing from near Tal Krum Jaba towards Eastern al-Samadaniyah, before withdrawing hours later towards the destroyed city of Quneitra in southwestern Syria, in the occupied Golan Heights.

Is the ‘inverted’ winger here to stay?

Getty Images
  • 65 Comments

The number of ‘traditional’ wide players starting in the Premier League is significantly down this season, with the majority of teams deploying inverted wingers and a few starting with wing-backs.

Traditional in this sense means a predominantly left-footed player lining up on the left wing or a right-footed player on the right, while an inverted winger would be a left-footed player on the right. Mohamed Salah at Liverpool or Bukayo Saka at Arsenal are prime examples.

Some of that decrease can be attributed to circumstance rather than a complete tactical shift, with new teams and managers entering the division, while the likes of Bournemouth and Everton have tended to buck that trend this season.

The Toffees have started the primarily right-footed Iliman Ndiaye on the right on five occasions in order to accommodate Jack Grealish on the left. The Senegalese was usually deployed on the left flank last term.

Andoni Iraola has named the left-footed David Brooks on the left and the right-footed Antoine Semenyo on the right on three occasions this term at Bournemouth, although they do tend to switch flanks during matches.

Giggs hopes for the return of orthodox wing play

Legendary Manchester United star Ryan Giggs has called for the return of orthodox wing play and believes that modern day football has become ‘strangled’.

“I hope it comes back, left footer on the left, right footer on the right,” said the 51-year old.

“The argument against that is people like [Gareth] Bale, [Arjen] Robben, [Mohamed] Salah, these amazing players, who are playing on the other side and then it is ‘how do you play?’, continued Giggs, who was speaking on a ‘Player Development the Manchester United way’ panel at the Training Ground Guru conference at Old Trafford.

“We used to play with two centre-forwards or a number 10 and try to beat the full-back on the outside and get a cross in. Now it is coming inside and linking.

“But I hope it comes back. I would like to see two wide men beat players on the outside and get crosses in.”

Giggs has not had a management role since standing down as Wales boss in 2022 after domestic abuse charges were levelled against him. He denied the allegations and all charges were dropped after his former partner refused to give evidence at a retrial in 2023. He stood down as director of football at League Two Salford City, the club he used to part own, earlier this year.

“I am a bit biased,” said Giggs. “I was a winger who liked to make things happen and excite the fans.

“Sir Alex [Ferguson] used to say ‘give the guy who works in the factory something to smile about’.

“I liked to pass it forward, to run and try a difficult ball with the outside of my foot knowing the manager wasn’t necessarily going to have a go at me.”

While the current generation are highly skilled and technical, the criticism is that their individuality has been taken away by micro-management, in an era when every positional change is detailed and coaches are a constant presence on the sidelines telling players where to go.

Grealish’s experience is often cited as an example – a player who arrived at Manchester City from Aston Villa in 2021 as a British record signing, capable of the kind of magic Giggs possessed, but then had his ‘off-the-cuff’ style taken away by Pep Guardiola’s demand for possession.

“You don’t like to go back to your time, but it does look a bit strangled with certain quality players,” added Giggs.

“There are some, like Josh King at Fulham, and Martin Odegaard, who get me excited as well, so it is not everyone but yes, from when I first started, I think it is a bit more robotic, with the patterns of play and more defensive minded teams.”

Related topics

  • Premier League
  • Football

More on this story

    • 15 August
    A graphic of Premier League players from every team in the division in 2025-26 season, with the Premier League trophy in front of them.
    • 16 August
    BBC Sport microphone and phone

Britney Spears reveals gruesome knee injury and bruised arms in worrying post

Britney Spears has shared a post to Instagram revealing a gruesome knee injury and bruised arms, just hours after claiming ex-husband Kevin Federline is ‘gaslighting’ her

Britney Spears has shared a post to Instagram which reveals she’s suffered a gruesome knee injury. This comes just two hours after she posted a statement to the same platform, where she accused ex-husband Kevin Federline of “gaslighting” her.

In a sad video, the star can be seen dancing with a bandaged knee, bruises on her arms and a smudged mascara around her eyes. The 43-year-old regularly posts dancing videos to Instagram, but in this one, she looked much sadder and close to tears.

Her latest clip shows her wearing a see-through pink sparkly patterned mini-dress with a feather trim. She is seen sporting bandages on one knee and both her hands while bruises on both her arms are visible. In the worrying clip, Britney is seen striking various poses for the camera, moving backwards and forwards and playing her her hair and making different expressions at the camera. As she posted the clip to Instagram, she added the song Sex and Candy by Unicorns and wrote in the caption: “If a girl is singing it should be there HE WAS HMMMM !!!!”

READ MORE: Britney Spears expresses fury over Kevin Federline accusations as bitter feud deepensREAD MORE: Britney Spears slams ex Kevin Federline’s ‘constant gaslighting’ after bombshell claims

Earlier this month, Spears said she “fell down the stairs” and that her leg “snaps out now and then”. She added that she wasn’t sure if it was broken. At the time, the singer posted a video and captioned it: “Psss I fell down the stairs at my friend’s house… it was horrible… it snaps out now and then, not sure if it’s broken but for now, it’s snapped in!!!” That caption has now been removed.

Britney’s new video was posted shortly after she uploaded a screenshot of statement about her ex-husband. In the post she claims Federline is “gaslighting” her and says she has to speak up because she has “had enough” and “any real woman would do the same”.

This statement comes ahead of the release of Federline’s memoir, You Thought You Knew, due on 21 October. Spears wrote: “The constant gaslighting from ex-husband is extremely hurtful and exhausting. I have always pleaded and screamed to have a life with my boys. Relationships with teenage boys is complex. I felt demoralized by this situation and have always asked and almost begged for them to be a part of my life.

“Sadly, they have always witnessed the lack of respect shown by own father for me. They need to take responsibility for themselves. With one son only seeing me for 45 min in the past 5 years and the other with only 4 visits in the past 5 years. I have pride too. From now on I will let them know when I am available. Trust me, those white lies in that book, they are going straight to the bank and I am the only one who genuinely gets hurt here.”

She added: “I am actually a pretty intelligent woman who has been trying to live a sacred and private life the past 5 yers. i speak on this because I have had enough and any real woman would do the same.”

In his book, Federline, 47, claimed that their sons, Sean Preston, 19, and Jayden, 18, once woke up to find their mother holding a knife. Throughout the memoir, he details their two-year marriage from 2005-2007, which ended in a custody battle. Federline also claims he saw Spears use cocaine whilst breastfeeding.

He also addresses the conservatorship Spears was under from 2008-2021, in which her father controlled her life and finances. The arrangement sparked the #FreeBritney movement, where fans called for her independence to be restored. Federline wrote that while it started from a good place, “all those people who put so much effort into that should now put the same energy into the ‘Save Britney’ movement”. He added that it isn’t about freedom anymore: “This is no longer about freedom. It’s about survival.”

Article continues below

Mirror has contacted Kevin Federline’s representatives for comment.

If you are struggling with mental health, you can speak to a trained advisor from Mind mental health charity on 0300 123 3393 or email info@mind.org.uk

Which countries owe the IMF the most money in 2025?

Central bankers and financial delegates have gathered in Washington, DC this week for the annual International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank meetings, which conclude on Saturday.

Discussions this week have focused on global economic headwinds, as the IMF warns of signs of distress following US trade tariffs and protectionism.

The IMF is widely seen as a “lender of last resort”, only stepping in when countries face severe financial crises and cannot access usual borrowing channels. Its loans, however, often come with strict conditions which can result in austerity measures and deepen social and economic hardships, making the loans a double-edged sword.

What is the IMF and how does it fund itself?

Founded in 1944 during World War II at the Bretton Woods Conference in New Hampshire, US, the IMF was established to help stabilise the post-war global economy. Now based in Washington, DC, it has since grown from 44 founding members to 191 today and works closely with the United Nations and other international organisations to support global financial stability.

It does this by providing policy advice, short-term financial assistance and capacity development to countries and institutions.

Any country can join the IMF if approved by existing members and by paying a quota based on the size of its economy, with wealthier countries contributing more. This quota is used to set how much the country contributes, how much it can borrow and how much voting power it has.

How big is the IMF’s fund?

Overall, the IMF has a total lending capacity of about $1 trillion.

When the IMF lends money, it draws on the pooled resources of its member countries. Wealthier and more stable economies often act as creditors, supplying the funds the IMF uses to provide loans. In return, these creditor countries earn interest on their contributions.

In 2024, about 50 creditor nations received approximately $5bn collectively in interest.

Which countries owe the most money to the IMF?

The amount of money owed to the IMF is typically expressed as Special Drawing Rights (SDRs), the IMF’s own unit of account based on a basket of five currencies – the US dollar, euro, pound sterling, the Chinese renminbi and the Japanese yen.

While SDRs are not a currency, countries can exchange them for the currencies mentioned above. As of October 15, one SDR was equivalent to $1.36.

The IMF currently has the highest-ever total credit outstanding. The chart below shows how much money has been owed to the IMF over the past 40 years.

In total, 86 countries owe the IMF SDR 118.9 billion, roughly equivalent to $162bn.

The three countries that owe the most make up almost half of the total, while the top 10 countries owe 73 percent.

The chart below shows the 86 countries which owe money to the IMF, broken down by region.

Argentina owes the most to the IMF, with SDR 41.8 billion (about $57bn) in outstanding credit, followed by Ukraine with SDR 10.4 billion ($14bn) and Egypt with SDR 6.9 billion ($9bn).

Why does Argentina owe so much?

Argentina is the IMF’s largest borrower, with its debt exceeding the combined total of the following seven countries – Ukraine, Egypt, Pakistan, Ecuador, Ivory Coast, Kenya and Bangladesh.

In April, the IMF approved its 23rd programme to Argentina with a $20bn bailout programme to help prop up the economy.

Argentina’s history with the IMF is marked by repeated borrowing – it is the recipient of the most bailouts in the history of the IMF. In 2018, the country secured a $57bn loan – the largest in IMF history – to address fiscal imbalances after facing a currency crisis and double-digit inflation.

In October 2025, the Trump administration announced a $20bn financial support package for Argentina, aimed at stabilising the country’s economy before its October 26 midterm elections. The package includes a $20bn currency swap with Argentina’s central bank, providing US dollars in exchange for pesos to bolster the nation’s foreign currency reserves.

Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Kristalina Georgieva and Argentina's President Javier Milei talk ahead of a session on Artificial Intelligence (AI), Energy, Africa and Mediterranean on the second day of the G7 summit in Borgo Egnazia, Italy, June 14, 2024. REUTERS/Louisa Gouliamaki/File Photo NO RESALES. NO ARCHIVES
Managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Kristalina Georgieva and Argentina’s President Javier Milei talk before a session on Artificial Intelligence, energy, Africa and the Mediterranean on the second day of the G7 summit in Borgo Egnazia, Italy, June 14, 2024 [Louisa Gouliamaki/Reuters]

Why does Ukraine owe the IMF more than $14bn?

Ukraine’s economy tanked after Russia’s invasion in February 2022 and its external debt is now more than double what it was before the war began. The country’s total government-guaranteed debt reached $152bn by the end of April, according to the Reuters news agency, with more than 70 percent ($108.4bn) constituting external obligations.

In March 2023, the IMF approved a four-year Extended Fund Facility (EFF) worth $15.5bn, which was part of a broader international support package to help stabilise Ukraine’s economy and support civilian spending and debt servicing due to the country’s high expenditure on weapons.

As of October, Ukraine has received $10.6bn out of the planned $15.5bn for 2023-2027 under the EFF arrangement.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy looks on during a visit to a military training area.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy looks on during a visit to a military training area to assess the training of Ukrainian soldiers on the Patriot anti-aircraft missile system, at an undisclosed location in Germany, June 11, 2024 [Jens Buttner/Pool via Reuters]

Why does Egypt owe the third-most?

Egypt has had to borrow from the IMF on numerous occasions to stabilise its economy as a result of high debt and fiscal deficits. It has also faced shortages of foreign currency reserves and is tackling high inflation.

In 2016, the IMF approved programmes under the Extended Fund Facility (EFF) for Egypt worth $11.9bn following longstanding economic issues in the shadow of the 2011 uprising, including an overvalued currency, slow growth and high unemployment. The aim of the IMF’s programme was to fix these issues via a flexible exchange rate and inflation control, raising taxes and cutting subsidies and wages.

In March, the IMF approved the disbursement of $1.2bn to Egypt after completing a fourth review of the country’s $8bn economic reform programme. Egypt reported that inflation had almost halved in February, helped by financial reforms taken as part of the IMF financial support agreement.

IMF Egypt
International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva and Annual Meetings chairman and governor of the Central Bank of Egypt, Hassan Abdalla, embrace at the end of a Plenary Session of the Annual Meetings of the IMF and World Bank in Washington, DC, on October 14, 2022 [Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters]

Which countries owe the IMF the most money as a share of their GDP?

While IMF loans run into the billions of dollars, they usually make up only a small part of a country’s total debt and gross domestic product (GDP).

As a share of GDP, the countries with the most debt to the IMF are: Suriname (13 percent), Central African Republic (9.4 percent), Argentina (8.3 percent), Barbados (7.4 percent) and The Gambia (6.95 percent).

How Trump got his Nobel Peace Prize after all

Although the White House immediately put the Nobel Committee on notice for putting “politics over peace” when it failed to deliver the peace prize to United States President Donald Trump, the administration had to be pleased that the award went to Venezuela’s Maria Corina Machado. Trump and Machado are cut from the same right-wing authoritarian cloth, which in part explains why the president quickly congratulated her, and why Machado, in turn, dedicated her award to him.

As a leader of Venezuela’s hardline right-wing opposition, Machado has been committed to a brand of peace that has sought to undermine Venezuelan democracy and sovereignty for more than a quarter of a century. In 2002, she helped orchestrate a coup against Hugo Chavez, the democratically elected president at the time. Undeterred by failure, Machado subsequently worked to build an opposition whose primary goal has been to create enough political and economic chaos to undermine the Venezuelan government and return the country to oligarchic rule. This has included mobilising violent mobs to block streets, targeting opponents, wreaking havoc on the country’s economy, and terrorising large segments of the population. More recently, Machado’s tireless pursuit of “peace” led her to ask none other than Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose genocide in Gaza Machado vocally supports, to bomb Venezuela in an effort to “liberate” the country.

Machado’s rise to international prominence has long been aided by Western media and political elites who frame her as a freedom fighter rather than a destabilising force. Her image has been carefully curated to appeal to the US and Europe, where right-wing populists increasingly claim the mantle of democratic renewal. By awarding her the Nobel Peace Prize, the committee has helped launder that image and reinforced the narrative that the West alone defines what counts as legitimate democracy.

What is troubling about Machado being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize is not so much that the committee “got it wrong”, something it has done often enough, or even that mainstream coverage of her award has been largely uncritical. It is that, in awarding the prize to Machado, the Nobel Committee has provided an open invitation for Trump to continue, and even escalate, military intervention and gunboat diplomacy in Latin America. For Venezuela, this means violent regime change is firmly on the table.

In fact, Machado herself has suggested that the attention brought by the Nobel Peace Prize might lead to increased international intervention in Venezuela, a sabre-rattling sentiment echoed by Bret Stephens in The New York Times. This should come as no surprise, given that Machado has encouraged Trump’s ongoing illegal efforts to “combat narcotrafficking”, cheered his periodic threats of invasion, and even pushed for international sanctions that have strangled the Venezuelan economy and killed hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans.

That warning already appears prescient. Just this Wednesday, The New York Times revealed that the Trump administration has authorised covert CIA operations aimed at destabilising Venezuela’s government. The disclosure confirms exactly what many feared: that rewarding Machado under the banner of “peace” would embolden Washington to pursue regime change by other means. In effect, the Nobel Committee has provided moral cover for the very interventions its prize was meant to condemn.

Put another way, the problem with Machado receiving the Nobel Peace Prize is not just that it makes a mockery of any meaningful understanding of peace. In the process, it embraces and validates the Trumpian sleight of hand by which violence not only becomes peace but, in so doing, becomes an effective tool for advancing an authoritarianism that is repackaged as democracy. Opponents are then cast as enemies of freedom who must be eliminated, the destruction of whom allows for a broader project that benefits the very rich while leaving working people in misery.

In this sense, Venezuelan sovereignty and democracy mean as little to Machado as they do to Trump. The goal and practice of right-wing authoritarianism look much the same across the Americas. It is to ensure that political power is controlled by a wealthy elite who are free to implement long-discredited economic policies designed to facilitate the upward distribution of wealth while reducing government regulation of the natural resources and public goods that support working people. Awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Machado, someone who puts a democratic face on violent foreign intervention and an economic war on the poor, is not just bad for Venezuela. It is deeply disturbing for the rest of the hemisphere and the world.

Court Adjourns ₦5.5bn Defamation Suit Against SERAP To Nov 12

Justice Yusuf Halilu of the Federal Capital Territory High Court has adjourned the hearing in a ₦5.5 billion alleged defamation suit instituted against the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) by two aggrieved operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS), to November 12.

READ ALSO: SERAP Asks EFCC, ICPC To Probe NASS Over ₦3m Bribe-For-Bills Allegation

Justice Yusuf adjourned the hearing in the suit following the absence of SERAP’s lawyer, Ebun Adegboruwa SAN, in court.

The two DSS operatives, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogunleye, had filed the action against SERAP on the grounds that the organisation defamed them in a media publication.

SERAP Logo

Specifically, the two claimants alleged that SERAP defamed them by claiming that they unlawfully invaded their office, thereby putting their reputation as law-abiding security operatives in jeopardy.

They are asking the court to order Serap to pay the sum of ₦5.5 billion as compensation for damages they suffered.

The two claimants also applied to the judge to issue an order of perpetual injunction against SERAP, restraining it from defaming them.

At Thursday’s proceeding, SERAP’s lawyer, Ebun Adegboruwa, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, wrote a letter to the court informing it that he would not be able to attend the proceeding as he had a matter at the Court of Appeal in Lagos and asked for an adjournment till November 12.

Counsel for the claimants, Akinlolu Kehinde, did not oppose the request for an adjournment.