Category World News

Who: South Africa vs Nigeria
What: CAF qualifiers for FIFA 2026 World Cup
Where: Free State Stadium in Bloemfontein, Free State province, South Africa
When: Tuesday at 6pm (16:00 GMT)

How to follow: We’ll have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 13:30 GMT in advance of our live text commentary stream.

Nigeria travel to South Africa looking to get their FIFA World Cup 2026 Confederation of African Football (CAF) qualifying chances back on track against the Group C leaders.

Nigeria, the three-time African champions, are currently third in the group, but they could move as high as second with a victory on Tuesday in Bloemfontein and keep alive their country’s qualifying hopes.

Making the Super Eagles’ task all the harder is that South Africa are unbeaten at home during the group phase with victories against Benin (2-1), Zimbabwe (3-1) and Lesotho (3-0).

Here is all to know about the high-stakes matchup between two of Africa’s most high-profile footballing nations:

Where do South Africa and Nigeria currently stand in Group C?

After seven matches, South Africa have opened up a wide points gap between themselves and the five other teams in the group:

1. South Africa: 16 points (+8 GD)
2. Benin: 11 points (0 GD)
3. Nigeria: 10 points (+2 GD)
4. Rwanda: 8 points (-1 GD)
5. Lesotho: 6 points (-4 GD)
6. Zimbabwe: 4 points (-5 GD)

How many African teams will qualify for the FIFA World Cup 2026?

African World Cup qualifying is arranged into nine groups of six nations.

The nine CAF group winners secure direct entry to the World Cup 2026 while the four best runners-up will participate in an intercontinental playoff for the possibility of securing a 10th spot at the tournament.

Of the nine African groups, only Morocco have already qualified for next year’s World Cup finals in North America.

CAF World Cup 2026 qualification dates:

• First round (November 15, 2023, to October 14): Group stage features 54 teams.
• Second round (November 10-18): Four best group runners-up play in semifinal-final format. Winners compete in interconfederation playoff for potential 10th African World Cup spot.

Could Nigeria still qualify for the FIFA World Cup 2026?

Nigeria could still reach the World Cup finals, but they will be dependent on other teams to finish top of their group.

They need to win against leaders South Africa (Matchday 8), then secure victories in their final two matches (Matchday 9 and 10) against Lesotho and Benin and hope South Africa lose one of their final two games to even have a mathematical chance of directly qualifying as the Group C winners.

If South Africa was to lose one of their final two matches and Nigeria wins both, the teams would be tied on 19 points at the end of the first round with the group winner being decided on goal difference. If they are tied on goal difference, then the two teams’ head-to-head record would be a factor in deciding the group winner.

If Nigeria finished second in Group C, they could potentially qualify as one of the four best runners-up for the intercontinental playoff. If they won the playoff, they would be admitted to the World Cup finals as the 10th African team.

Team news: South Africa

Head coach Hugo Broos will be without his first team defenders Nyiko Mobbie and Thabo Brendon Moloisane after both were injured against Lesotho on Friday. Kaizer Chiefs’ Thabiso Monyane has been called up as a possible replacement for Mobbie against Nigeria.

Burnley forward Lyle Foster, who scored and assisted in the 3-0 home win over Lesotho, is again expected to lead the line against Nigeria.

Team news: Nigeria

Head coach Eric Chelle will be without his talismanic striker Victor Osimhen, who was ruled out of the South Africa fixture after suffering a chin bruise during a 1-0 win over Rwanda on Friday.

Osimhen, who plays for the Turkish side Galatasaray, was considered the biggest goal threat for the Super Eagles, and his absence creates a selection dilemma for Chelle, who is tipped to go with Tolu Arokodare to lead the line, although Cyriel Dessers and Samuel Chukwueze would also be in contention.

In Osimhen’s absence, Moses Simon, Ademola Lookman and Alex Iwobi could all be deployed further forward to add attacking punch to the lineup.

When did South Africa last qualify for the FIFA World Cup finals?

South Africa have appeared in the FIFA World Cup finals on three occasions: 1998, 2002 and 2010.

The last time the Bafana Bafana successfully qualified for the World Cup through the CAF qualifiers was in 2002. In 2010, they were awarded automatic entry as the tournament hosts.

How many FIFA World Cup finals have Nigeria reached?

Nigeria have been to six FIFA World Cup finals but missed out on the most recent tournament in Qatar in 2022.

When was the last time the two sides met in South Africa?

The last time South Africa and Nigeria met in Bloemfontein was during a competitive fixture at the 2019 AFCON qualifiers with the Super Eagles winning the away fixture 2-1.

Possible starting lineups:

South Africa: Williams (goalkeeper); Mdunyelwa, Ndamane, Monyane, Modiba; Mokoena, Mbatha; Nkota, Mbule, Appollis; Foster

Nigeria: Nwabali (goalkeeper); Aina, Fredrick, Bassey, Onyemaechi; Onyedika, Ndidi, Iwobi; Simon; Lookman, Arokodare

Head-to-head

South Africa and Nigeria have played 13 times since 2004.

Nigeria have won six times while South Africa have only one victory.

The sides have played out six draws.

Last five matches:

South Africa

W-W-W-W-W (all competitions, last result on the right)

Nigeria

At least 14 people were killed in clashes with security forces after thousands of young people in Nepal took to the streets on Monday to protest against corruption and a government ban on social media websites.

A curfew was imposed in parts of Kathmandu after protesters entered the Parliament building in the capital and faced off against the police.

Here is what prompted the demonstration, dubbed the Gen Z protest, and what is the latest on the ground.

When did the protest begin in Nepal?

The protest began at 9am (03:15 GMT) on Monday.

Where are the protesters marching?

The protesters gathered in Maitighar, a neighbourhood in Kathmandu. It includes a busy road intersection, featuring the Maitighar Mandala monument — one of the city’s most iconic landmarks.

What’s happening in the Gen Z protest?

Aayush Basyal, a 27-year-old master’s student in Kathmandu who was present at the protest site, said the demonstration was “unprecedented with the number of attendees”.

However, Basyal added that as the protest progressed, “mobs of physically well-built guys came on their loud motorcycles through the crowd to create a sense of chaos”. It is this set of people, he said, that broke through the barricades to enter Parliament. Al Jazeera could not independently verify this claim.

Basyal said there was extensive participation from school and college students, some in their uniforms. “Surprisingly, I did not see any affiliation related to any political parties,” he said.

What is behind Nepal’s Gen Z protest?

Growing dissatisfaction among the youth with corruption in the country materialised into the demonstration on Monday.

Basyal said the protests were fuelled by incidents of corruption in recent years “that get regularly talked about in public, in Parliament, but never seem to reach a fair conclusion”.

These include a 2017 Airbus deal, in which Nepal Airlines bought two A330 wide-body jets. A five-year-long inquiry, conducted by the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), a watchdog appointed under the country’s constitution, revealed last year that the deal led to a loss of 1.47 billion rupees ($10.4m) to the exchequer. Several top officials were convicted of corruption following the inquiry.

Protests in Sri Lanka and Bangladesh — which led to the removal of governments in the South Asian countries in 2022 and 2024, respectively — served as inspirations, Basyal said. In the Philippines, images of children of public figures enjoying lavish lifestyles have also drawn social media criticism recently. That also motivated protests in the Himalayan nation, Basyal added, as videos emerged on TikTok showing children of Nepalese politicians living lives of luxury in a country where the per capita income is $1,300 a year.

Ankit Bhandari, a 23-year-old student in Kathmandu who was present at the protest site, told Al Jazeera that the protest seemed to stem from the “frustration of having to pay tax” with no “proper documentation” of how it was being utilised.

The government’s September 4 announcement that it was blocking several social media platforms, including Facebook, added to the anger.

“The protests are fuelled by the frustration of youth and their disbelief in authority, as they feel sidelined from decision-making,” Yog Raj Lamichhane, an assistant professor at the School of Business in Nepal’s Pokhara University, told Al Jazeera.

“While the recent ban on social media platforms has added fuel to the unrest, the grievances extend far deeper, rooted in longstanding neglect and the silencing of youth voices.”

Hami Nepal, a nonprofit organisation that began as a youth movement in 2015, organised Monday’s protest. According to the Kathmandu District Administration Office, the organisation had secured approval for it.

“At the core of their demands lies a call for the rule of law, where fairness, accountability, and justice prevail over favouritism and corruption,” Lamichhane said.

The government blocked 26 social media platforms, including WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and YouTube.

The ban came into effect after one week was given to these social media websites to register with the Nepali government. The websites had until September 3 to register with the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology.

To avoid being shut down in the country, the websites had to name a local contact, a grievance handler and a person responsible for self-regulation.

A day after the deadline, the government issued a directive to the regulator, Nepal Telecommunications Authority (NTA), to shut down the websites that did not comply. An unnamed ministry official told the Reuters news agency that some platforms, including TikTok, Viber, and WeTalk, had registered with the government.

According to the government, users with fake IDs on these platforms are committing malicious acts and cybercrime, disrupting social harmony. About 90 percent of Nepal’s 30 million people use the internet, according to a 2021 NTA report.

As of 2021, about 7.5 percent of Nepal’s population was living abroad, reliant on platforms such as Meta’s Messenger to communicate with families back home. Many Nepalis have switched to Viber to communicate with their families and friends who are working abroad as migrant workers.

“It was abrupt,” and in a country with a large population overseas, was “frustrating,” Basyal said.

What is the latest on the ground?

The Kathmandu District Administration Office imposed a curfew in and around the New Baneshwor area, some 3km (about 2 miles) from Maitighar.

This happened after some protesters broke barricades set up by the police and entered the Parliament premises in New Baneshwor.

The curfew order, signed by Chief District Officer Chhabilal Rijal, bars gatherings in and around the area effective 12:30pm (06:45 GMT) to 10pm (16:15 GMT) on Monday.

The curfew was extended to other areas of Kathmandu, including the presidential residence — known as Rastrapati Bhawan or Shital Niwas — and the vice president’s residence in Lainchaur. The president’s residence is 6.3km (3.9 miles) from Maitighar, while the vice president’s residence is about 4.3km (2.7 miles) from the original protest location.

Police used tear gas and water cannon on the protesters. The demonstrators hit back with tree branches and water bottles, local media reported. According to a message on NGO Hami Nepal’s communication channel, authorities fired rubber bullets at the protesters.

Basyal said he “saw people get hit with rubber bullets, and were bleeding, being carried to the ambulances”. He said tear gas and water cannon were used to disperse protesters.

Fourteen people were killed after the police opened fire on the protesters. The deceased have not been identified. The Kathmandu Post reported that they succumbed to their injuries while receiving treatment at Civil Hospital and National Trauma Centre.

Local news outlets also reported that dozens of protesters were injured in the firing and were receiving treatment in different hospitals in Kathmandu, including Civil Hospital and Everest Hospital.

On September 2, the United States conducted a sensational military strike on a speedboat in the southern Caribbean Sea in violation of both international and US law. The extravagant attack killed 11 civilians on board, whom US President Donald Trump had magically intuited to be drug traffickers affiliated with Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua gang.

The spectacle was staged amid the ongoing deployment of US warships off the Venezuelan coast under the pretence of fighting “narcoterrorists” whose ringleader, according to the current Trumpian narrative, is Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro – no surprise given the country’s lengthy role as a thorn in the side of US imperialism.

Warning that such attacks would continue, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio explained that the interdiction of alleged drug boats simply does not work: “What will stop them is when you blow them up, when you get rid of them.”

Trump, meanwhile, remarked on the ensuing decrease in boat traffic near the site of the strike, perhaps due to the fact that people who fish for a living now fear for their lives: “I don’t even know about fishermen. They may say, ‘I’m not getting on the boat. I’m not going to take a chance.’”

As with most situations in which the US claims to be fighting terror, then, this episode appeared to be rather terroristic in nature – particularly given the president’s own insinuation that fishermen or anyone else on a boat could be indiscriminately targeted at any time.

On September 5, the global hegemon’s enlightened commander-in-chief signed an executive order renaming the US Department of Defense the “Department of War”. This from a president who campaigned on, you know, keeping the US out of wars.

With his signature eloquence, Trump announced that the name change would wrest the US out of a supposedly “woke” orientation that precluded decisive victories and usher in an era of military triumph: “We could have won every war, but we really chose to be very politically correct or woke-y.”

Never mind that “politically correct” is not exactly the first descriptor that comes to mind when considering the mass US military slaughter of civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who will henceforth be referred to as the “secretary of war”, concurred that the rebranding is necessary for “restoring the warrior ethos”.

But why the sudden need on Trump’s part to project a warrior image by blowing up a speedboat in the Caribbean? To put it briefly, it serves as a convenient distraction from the president’s dismal failure on other fronts to live up to his super-tough-guy vision of himself.

His ultimatums to Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the war in Ukraine, for example, have proved fruitless. Ditto for intermittent pressure on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to wrap up the genocide in the Gaza Strip, where in less than two years Israel has officially killed more than 64,000 Palestinians, most of them women and children.

So why not hone the “warrior ethos” against easier targets – which may or may not include Caribbean fishermen?

Of course, this is not the first time Trump has put Venezuela in his crosshairs. In 2019, during his first presidential term, his administration took the liberty of recognising Juan Guaido, the little-known right-wing character who had spontaneously declared himself interim president of Venezuela, hypothetically replacing Maduro.

Things didn’t go quite as planned and Guaido ended up in Miami – but perhaps US warships surrounding Venezuela will help speed regime change along.

Nor, to be sure, is this the first time the US has used the old drug war as an excuse to kill civilians abroad, a hypocritical arrangement of particularly sinister proportions given that the US itself has been up to its ears in the global drug trade since pretty much forever.

As for the concept of “narcoterrorism” presently being invoked by Trump, this dates back to the 2006 renewal of the Patriot Act after the US Drug Enforcement Agency, fearful of losing its relevance in the whole “war on terror” era, proposed the new crime as a “pre-eminent threat” to the homeland.

So while Trump’s Caribbean showdown is not exactly a deviation from past US policy, his quest to perfect the art of total derangement does make for a somewhat unique display.

Thus far, the Trump administration has refrained from offering any evidence of Maduro’s alleged narcotrafficking ties. But, hey, evidence is just a “woke-y” thing, right?

At the end of the day, though, it’s not really about Maduro or Venezuela. It’s about Trump’s need to project power by blowing stuff up.

In August, Trump staged a summit in Alaska with Putin, ostensibly to end the war in Ukraine but really to distract from MAGA infighting – including on the subject of Netanyahu’s insistence on continuing to blow stuff up in Gaza.

Now, Venezuela is serving as the chosen distraction from the president’s weak showing against both Putin and Netanyahu as well as a venue for the general recuperation of a testosterone-fuelled “warrior ethos”.

And as the new Department of War proceeds to blow up international and domestic law along with a Caribbean motorboat, it’s more than just the fishermen who need to worry.