Jerusalem shooting escalates “collective punishment acts”
[unable to retrieve full-text content] “There is almost no Palestinian city or village that escapes attacks from illegal settlers.”
Charting the past year of Russian drone and missile attacks on Ukraine
On Sunday, Russia launched its largest drone and missile attack since the war began, firing a total of 823 projectiles into Ukraine. The attack killed at least four people, wounded 44, and caused damage to a key building in Kyiv’s government district, making it the first on the site since the full-fledged war began in February 2022. Ukraine’s air force said Russia fired 810 drones and decoys, as well as 13 cruise and ballistic missiles. They added that nine missiles and about 60 drones had made it through their air defences and landed in Ukraine. Smoke rises over a Ukrainian government building after Russian drone and missile strikes in Kyiv on September 7, 2025 [Serhii Korovainyi/Reuters] The air force said 33 locations were struck across Ukraine, with officials saying that Russian strikes damaged civilian and residential infrastructure in Kyiv, Sumy, Dnipro, and Zaporizhzhia cities; Kremenchuk in Poltava province; Kryvyi Rih in Dnipropetrovsk province; Sloviansk in Donetsk province; and parts of Chernihiv and Cherkasy provinces. How many drone strikes has Russia launched? Since the start of the year, Russia has launched at least 37,000 air attacks on Ukraine, according to a tally by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. According to the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), Russia has intensified drone strikes following Ukraine-Russia bilateral talks in Istanbul, Turkiye, on May 15. The talks, pushed by United States President Donald Trump, did not yield any breakthrough. Advertisement Between January and May 2025, Russian drone strikes averaged about 120 strikes per day. From May to August, drone strikes averaged 185 per day. What types of drones is Russia using? Russia is mainly using Shahed-type drones in their attacks. At the start of the war, these low-cost weapons were primarily supplied by Iran. The number of Russian drones has risen significantly, with Moscow scaling up its production of Shahed-type drones, known as Gerans (Russian analogues of the Iranian missiles), Garpiyas (made with Chinese components), and Gerberas (low-cost decoys that mimic Shaheds on radar but carry little or no explosives, intended to deplete Ukraine’s expensive interceptor missiles). Russia is producing these drones in Tatarstan and has opened a new production line at the Izhevsk Electromechanical Plant, where it already produces Garpiya drones, according to the ISW. In June 2025, Ukrainian defence intelligence suggested that Russia was capable of producing an average of 170 Shahed-type drones per day (about 5,100 per month) and planned to increase production to 190 drones per day by the end of 2025. The Russian-made Geran-1 (also known as Shahed 131) and Geran-2 (also known as Shahed 136) are low-cost, with a price range of $20,000-$50,000 for domestic production, but have a high impact. The Shahed-131 is a smaller munition with a range of 700-900km (435-560 miles), while the larger Shahed-136 has a range of at least 2,000km (1,243 miles). They are known for flying at low altitudes and slow speeds. That means they can be shot down by individual soldiers, but they can also be used against front-line positions and are more manoeuvrable than faster missiles. Some of Russia’s homegrown drones include the Lancet kamikaze drone, designed for precision strikes, the ZALA family of reconnaissance and attack drones, and several reconnaissance models such as the Orlan-10, Supercam and Merlin-VR. However, Russia is predominantly relying on Shahed-type drones, and — alongside those — is also using cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. Russian soldiers prepare a Lancet drone for action in an undisclosed location in Ukraine [Russian Ministry of Defence via AP] What type of air defence system has Ukraine used against Russian air attacks? Ukraine has employed several tactics and weapons to take down or disable drones, including modern air defence systems alongside mobile fire teams and electronic warfare. Man-portable air defence kits (MANPADS), heavy machineguns and German-made IRIS-T and US-made NASAMS and SHORAD missile defence systems have also been used against drone attacks, intensifying in recent weeks. Advertisement Ukraine has had the most success in downing drones with the German radar-assisted Gepard anti-air 35mm gun and domestically-developed interceptor drones, according to Ukrainian drone warfare expert Olena Kryzhanivska. Chancellor Olaf Scholz gets off a German self-propelled anti-aircraft gun Flakpanzer Gepard during a visit to the training programme for Ukrainian soldiers near Oldenburg, Germany, on August 25, 2022 [Axel Heimken/Pool via Reuters] Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has made domestically produced weapons a top priority, saying in July that within six months, the country’s domestic arms production should aim to reach 50 percent of its needs. Ukraine has also used the US-made Patriot system against ballistic and cruise missiles, providing a critical layer of defence against long-range attacks, including from some of Russia’s most advanced missiles. What are the latest developments on the ground? Currently, Russia controls one-fifth – 114,500sq km (44,600sq miles) – of Ukrainian land, with about 88 percent of the Donbas under its control and three-quarters of Zaporizhia and Kherson oblasts. For most of this year, the war has settled into a grinding impasse with heavy losses on both sides; however, in August, Russian forces made significant gains, advancing about 10km (6 miles) beyond the front lines. Adblock test (Why?)
Nepal Gen-Z protests live: Nepali Congress office, leaders’ homes on fire
blinking-dotLive updatesLive updates, Protesters set fire to homes of some top political leaders, a day after 19 people were killed by the security forces. Published On 9 Sep 20259 Sep 2025 Adblock test (Why?)
Nineteen killed in Nepal protests against corruption and internet bans
Published On 9 Sep 20259 Sep 2025 Nepal has lifted its social media ban one day after protests turned deadly, with at least 19 people killed by security forces as demonstrators rallied against internet restrictions and government corruption. Police fatally shot 17 people in Kathmandu, according to spokesman Shekhar Khanal, with two additional deaths reported in eastern Nepal’s Sunsari district. Officers deployed rubber bullets, tear gas, water cannons and batons when protesters broke through barbed wire barriers attempting to reach Parliament. Approximately 400 people sustained injuries, including more than 100 police officers. Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak resigned following the violence. “I had been there for a peaceful protest, but the government used force,” said 20-year-old Iman Magar, who was struck in his right arm. “It was not a rubber bullet but a metallic one, and it took away a part of my hand. The doctor says I need to undergo an operation.” Emergency vehicles rushed the wounded to hospitals throughout the city. “I have never seen such a disturbing situation at the hospital,” said Ranjana Nepal, information officer at the Civil Service Hospital. “Tear gas entered the hospital area as well, making it difficult for doctors to work.” The social media ban triggered widespread anger, particularly among younger Nepalis who depend on these platforms for communication. Amnesty International reported that authorities used live ammunition against protesters, while the United Nations called for a transparent investigation. Advertisement Millions of Nepalis use platforms like Instagram for entertainment, news, and business purposes. “This isn’t just about social media – it’s about trust, corruption, and a generation that refuses to stay silent,” wrote the Kathmandu Post newspaper. “Gen Z grew up with smartphones, global trends, and promises of a federal, prosperous Nepal. For them, digital freedom is personal freedom. Cutting off access feels like silencing an entire generation.” Nepal has previously restricted online platforms, blocking Telegram in July over fraud concerns and implementing a nine-month TikTok ban that ended last August when the company agreed to comply with local regulations. Adblock test (Why?)
Brazil’s Lula says US warships in Caribbean are a source of ‘tension’
US naval forces have unsettled some in South America who see them as a precursor to possible intervention in Venezuela. Published On 8 Sep 20258 Sep 2025 Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has criticised the deployment of United States naval forces to the Caribbean, calling them a source of strain that could undermine peace in the region. The South American leader expressed concern on Monday over the concentration of US forces, seen by some as a possible prelude to an attack on Venezuela. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list “The presence of the armed forces of the largest power in the Caribbean Sea is a factor of tension,” Lula said during the opening of a virtual BRICS summit. The US has said its military forces are in the region to counter drug trafficking. But the deployment has been paired with US threats against the government of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, whom US President Donald Trump’s administration has accused of being closely linked with drug trafficking groups. The Trump administration has provided no evidence for those claims and has often used vague allegations of connections to drug trafficking or criminal groups to justify extraordinary measures both at home and abroad. Last week, the US carried out an unprecedented lethal attack on what the Trump administration said was a boat transporting drugs from Venezuela. Analysts have said the extrajudicial strike, which killed 11 people, was likely illegal, but US officials have promised to carry out more attacks in the region. Maduro has said the deployment is part of an effort to depose his government and called on the military and civilians to make preparations for a possible attack. Advertisement BRICS meeting As the Trump administration takes aggressive steps to advance its priorities on issues such as trade, immigration and drug trafficking, some countries are seeking to bolster ties with powers like China. Addressing the virtual BRICS conference via video call on Monday, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for more cooperation in areas such as technology, finance and trade, according to the official Chinese news agency Xinhua. “The closer the BRICS countries cooperate, the more confidence, options and effective results they will have in addressing external risks and challenges,” he was quoted as saying. Officials from India – a country, like Brazil and China, that has become a recent target of the Trump administration’s severe tariff policies – also called for greater collaboration. “The world requires constructive and cooperative approaches to promote trade that is sustainable,” External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar said in comments published by India’s Ministry of External Affairs. “Increasing barriers and complicating transactions will not help. Neither would the linking of trade measures to nontrade matters.” The virtual conference came a week after leaders from China, Russia, India and other Eurasian nations gathered in Tianjin, China, where they presented a vision of a new international order at a moment of widening rifts between partner nations and the US. Adblock test (Why?)
US court upholds sexual assault defamation order against Trump
Appeals court upholds $83.3m verdict against Trump for defaming E Jean Carroll over her 2019 sexual assault claims. Published On 8 Sep 20258 Sep 2025 A federal appeals court has refused to throw out an $83.3m jury verdict against US President Donald Trump for damaging the reputation of the writer E Jean Carroll in 2019 when he denied her rape claim. The US Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Manhattan on Monday rejected Trump’s argument that the January 2024 verdict should be overturned because he deserved presidential immunity from Carroll’s lawsuit. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list “We hold that the district court did not err in any of the challenged rulings and that the jury’s duly rendered damages awards were reasonable in light of the extraordinary and egregious facts of this case,” the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit wrote. Neither the White House nor Trump’s personal lawyers in the case immediately responded to requests for comment. The Second Circuit court on June 13 upheld Carroll’s separate $5m jury verdict against Trump in May 2023 for a similar defamation and sexual assault suit. Carroll, 81, a former Elle magazine columnist, accused Trump of attacking her around 1996 in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room. Trump first denied her claim in June 2019, telling a reporter that Carroll was “not my type” and had concocted the story to sell a book called What Do We Need Men For? – a memoir about her life. Trump essentially repeated his comments in an October 2022 Truth Social post, leading to the $5m verdict, though the jury did not find that he had raped Carroll. E Jean Carroll exits the New York Federal Court on Friday, September 6, 2024, after US President Donald Trump appeared in court, in Manhattan, New York City [Eduardo Munoz Alvarez/AP] The $83.3m award comprised $18.3m of damages for emotional and reputational harm, and $65m of punitive damages. Advertisement In his latest appeal, Trump argued that the US Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision providing him with substantial criminal immunity shielded him from liability in Carroll’s civil case. He added that he had spoken about Carroll in 2019 in his capacity as president, and that failing to give him immunity could undermine the independence of the executive branch of the US government. Trump also said US District Judge Lewis Kaplan, who oversaw both trials, had made other mistakes, including by striking out his testimony that, in speaking about Carroll, “I just wanted to defend myself, my family, and frankly the presidency.” In June, Carroll released another memoir, called Not My Type: One Woman vs a President, about her legal battles against Trump. Adblock test (Why?)
Trump cheers West Point’s cancellation of award ceremony for Tom Hanks
Actor Tom Hanks’s planned West Point honour is cancelled as President Donald Trump praises moves against critics of his administration. Published On 8 Sep 20258 Sep 2025 United States President Donald Trump has praised a decision by the prestigious military academy West Point to cancel a ceremony honouring Oscar-winning actor Tom Hanks, a frequent critic of Trump. Trump, who has sought to purge critics from government institutions and crack down on dissent, celebrated the move in a social media post on Monday. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list “Our great West Point (getting greater all the time!) has smartly cancelled the Award Ceremony for actor Tom Hanks. Important move!” Trump said. “We don’t need destructive, WOKE recipients getting our cherished American Awards!!!” Hanks, who has starred in numerous films set during World War II and been an avid supporter of veterans of the armed services, has been a sharp critic of Trump. He was set to receive the Sylvanus Thayer Award from the West Point Association of Graduates (WPAOG), which is granted to people whose accomplishments further the US national interests and ideals of the military academy. The famous actor was set to receive the award at a WPAOG ceremony on September 25, and the Washington Post has reported that it is unclear whether Hanks will still receive the award without the accompanying ceremony. Known for his leading role in the World War II film Saving Private Ryan, Hanks has been at the forefront of efforts to dramatise and commemorate US efforts during that conflict. He also produced several popular miniseries depicting US forces in various theatres during World War II, such as Band of Brothers, The Pacific, and Masters of the Air. Advertisement Hanks – who also served as a national spokesperson for the World War II memorial campaign and was chair of the D-day museum capital campaign – had expressed excitement about visiting West Point. “To have my first ever visit to the Academy be to accept such an honour as the Thayer Award is simply astounding,” a WPAOG statement had quoted Hanks as saying. Earlier this year, the Trump administration ordered West Point to discard books and resources on topics such as transgender people, diversity, and anti-racism. Adblock test (Why?)
French no-confidence vote: What’s next if the government collapses?
The French government looks set to collapse in a vote of no confidence and tip the eurozone’s second biggest economy into a political crisis. Prime Minister Francois Bayrou is expected to be ousted, casting doubt over President Emmanuel Macron’s future. Monday’s vote hinges on Bayrou’s unpopular budget proposal for 2026, designed to slash France’s fiscal deficit. The 74-year-old political veteran, who called the vote himself in a bid to pressure lawmakers to back his plans, has been in office for only nine months. France has had four prime ministers in less than two years, and a fifth probably won’t be enough to break the country’s political deadlock. The paralysis is reminiscent of the instability last observed in 1958 when the Fifth Republic was established. Ahead of the no-confidence vote, Bayrou spoke on Monday afternoon in the National Assembly, France’s lower house of parliament, where he told lawmakers that the economy faced serious risks because of its deep indebtedness. He is expected to field questions from parliamentarians. The vote itself will take place in the evening with the result expected between 8pm and 9pm (18:00 and 19:00 GMT). Here’s what you need to know: What could happen next? For several weeks, lawmakers have made it clear they will vote against Bayrou’s state-slashing budget. Opposition parties from the far left to the far right hold 330 seats in the 577-seat National Assembly – more than enough to oust him. If Bayrou loses Monday’s vote and the government falls, he would stay in office until President Emmanuel Macron decides what to do next. Unfortunately for the president, France lacks a consensus figure to replace Bayrou. Advertisement Macron is faced with uniquely hard choices – appoint another prime minister in the hope he or she can pass an unpopular budget, call new elections to try to re-establish a parliamentary majority or stand down himself, something he has refused to do before his term ends in 2027. Most experts expected Bayrou to lose the vote, which would force Macron to find a replacement. But with the arithmetic in parliament unchanged, that risks simply repeating the events from last year when Bayrou succeeded Michel Barnier. A fiscal conservative, Macron is unlikely to appoint a premier who advocates for higher state spending. But after the government recently tried to cut deals on the right of the political spectrum, some wonder if Macron might try something new. According to Stefano Palombarini, assistant professor of economics at the University of Paris VIII, “the two previous appointments, Barnier and Bayrou, both failed. He [Macron] lost a lot of credibility in that process, and if he tries a similarly centrist approach, he’d lose even more.” Palombarini told Al Jazeera that “in this context, it would make the scenario of a relative opening towards the left possible. Some Macronist, Socialist and Green politicians say they’re ready for compromises to form a government that lasts until 2027.” Does this mean there is a clear political path? Not really. According to an opinion poll this month for Le Figaro Magazine by the Verian Group, just 15 percent of the electorate has confidence in Macron, down 6 percentage points since July. However, the president has consistently ruled out resigning from office. Separate surveys by Ifop, Elabe and Toluna Harris Interactive indicated that 56 to 69 percent of French people want snap parliamentary elections, indicating growing dissatisfaction with current party politics in a country run by minority cabinets since 2022. For Palombarini, “there’s general political malaise [in France] and also dissatisfaction specifically with Macron. So overall, opinion polls are actually quite stable.” Indeed, the latest polls show no material change in voting intentions over the past year. This means there is no certainty that a new prime minister would be safe from a similar fate as Bayrou. What are the origins of this crisis? At the heart of France’s political paralysis is Macron’s risky decision to call snap parliamentary elections last year. That came after he was re-elected in 2022. Macron’s gamble in June 2024 was an effort to shore up support for the political centre. But French voters edged towards the extremes, leaving Macron with a weakened minority government and limiting his ability to pass legislation. Advertisement The vote resulted in a hung parliament split between three groups. A left alliance won the most seats but fell far short of a majority. The far-right National Rally won the most votes but also doesn’t have a majority. Macron’s centrist coalition lost seats but still forms a significant third bloc. This parliamentary shake-up has made France hard to govern. Divisions have shown up most clearly around spending. How does the budget fit into it? The immediate reason for Bayrou’s fall is his budget proposal for next year. His unpopular 44-billion-euro ($51bn) deficit-reduction plan, including freezing most welfare spending and scrapping two public holidays, has been widely rejected by parliamentarians. On August 25, Jordan Bardella, head of the National Rally, said his party would “never vote in favour of a government whose decisions are making the French suffer”. Bayrou in effect has announced “the end of his government”, Bardella said. The French budget deficit is now nearly 169 billion euros ($196bn), or 5.8 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP), well above the 3 percent limit set by the European Union for countries using the euro. Bayrou is trying to lower the government’s borrowing to 4.6 percent of GDP in 2026 and to 2.8 percent by 2029. In turn, that would lower the overall debt-to-GDP ratio to 117.2 percent in 2029, compared with 125.3 percent if no changes are made. Bayrou recently said young people will be saddled with years of debt payments “for the sake of the comfort of boomers” if France fails to tackle its fiscal pressures. Born in 1951, Bayrou himself qualifies as a baby boomer, the generation born in the years soon after World War II. But any attempt to curtail social benefits is politically difficult in France, as made clear by conflicts in 2023 over Macron’s
Israel’s settler outposts choke Palestinian life in West Bank’s villages
On a sweltering summer day, the insides of villagers’ homes in Ras Ein al-Auja smelled of rot. The villagers said that the day before, settlers had – not for the first time – severed the power lines between their homes and the off-grid electricity networks the community had built up with help from humanitarian organisations, causing the food in their refrigerators to spoil. Israeli authorities have long denied access to basic services such as water, electricity and sanitation to this Palestinian community and others in Area C, and almost all of these communities face demolition orders. Israel typically accuses Palestinians of building without permits to justify the orders, but it makes it near impossible to acquire the permits. The Israeli military did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment for this article. According to Ghawanmeh, Israeli settlers from the three surrounding outposts – all established in the past two years – cut the off-grid electricity systems “five or six times a week”. Last year, settlers prohibited the Bedouins from accessing the al-Auja spring, which locals depend on for both their herds’ and their own water needs. The Palestinian villagers and local reports indicate that Israeli military forces allowed the settlers to block access to the spring. Now, all of the land where the Palestinian locals had grazed their herds is off-limits, forcing them to keep their livestock penned up. Ibrahim Kaabneh, 35, has only 40 sheep and goats left. He once had 250, but he said he sold most of his herd after he and a relative were attacked by settlers last year and the settlers stole his relatives’ herd. “I needed to get money to feed the rest of the herd before they would die or be stolen by the settlers,” he said inside his sparse family home with his children looking on quietly in the summer heat. With settlers attacking them if they bring out their herds to graze and no longer able to access the water spring as well as being denied access to the nearby water pipes connected to Israeli settlements, Kaabneh now must spend about 200 shekels ($60) a day on fodder for his animals while paying for water tanks every two days. “Even the livestock that we still have, we feel like they’re not ours,” Kaabneh said. “Any moment, they can be stolen. Any moment, they can be attacked.” Kaabneh lives about 200 metres (220 yards) away from a second Israeli outpost that was established a year ago. The outpost, containing a corrugated iron pen allegedly stolen from an already-expelled Bedouin community nearby, is a preview of what the newest outpost will look like as it expands, according to locals. The outpost established in August is even closer to the Bedouins living here. This has added to the fears among community members who feel “suffocated” by encroaching settlers. Since the war in Gaza started, settlers have burned homes in the community and are alleged to have assaulted community members, including Kaabneh’s uncle, who was struck by a bulldozer. Settlers also come to the village inappropriately dressed or drunk, the Palestinians say. Kaabneh says he has trouble sleeping, and he is wary of leaving his home even to get groceries because he fears for his family. Women and children avoid leaving their homes for more than an hour or two at a time. An access road to the community – built with funding from the United States Agency for International Development, as a billboard attests – now has at its entrance a series of concrete blocks painted with Israeli flags, and community members face constant harassment to run the most basic of errands. “Once we step outside of the house, it seems like we’re doing something wrong or we’re doing something illegal,” Ghawanmeh explained. “Children, the women and everyone here is in constant fear and in constant danger whenever they leave the house for whatever necessary reason.” “What we are living at the moment is a disaster,” he continued. “To move from accessing 20,000 dunums of land to accessing nothing and from having a free water source to now not having it at all is crippling.” Adblock test (Why?)
Trump asks Supreme Court to let it cut billions in foreign aid
Published On 8 Sep 20258 Sep 2025 Days after a federal judge ruled that United States President Donald Trump’s administration cannot unilaterally slash billions in foreign aid funding, the Department of Justice has asked the Supreme Court to intervene. In a court filing on Monday, lawyers for the administration asked for an emergency stay to halt the order issued by the lower court and allow the administration to continue to withhold about $4bn in congressionally approved funds. Last month, Trump said he would not spend the money, invoking disputed authority that was last used by a US president roughly 50 years ago. Last week, US District Judge Amir Ali ruled that the Republican administration’s decision to withhold the funding was likely illegal. The money at issue in the case was approved by Congress for foreign aid, United Nations peacekeeping operations and democracy-promotion efforts overseas. The Justice Department said in its filing on Monday that the administration views the $4bn of disputed foreign aid funding as “contrary to US foreign policy”. Congress budgeted billions in foreign aid last year, about $11bn of which must be spent or obligated before a deadline of September 30 – the last day of the US government’s current fiscal year – lest it expire. After being sued by aid groups that expected to compete for the funding, the administration said last month that it intended to spend $6.5bn of the disputed funds. Trump also sought to block $4bn of the funding through an unusual step called a “pocket rescission”, which bypasses Congress. Advertisement Ali ruled on Wednesday that the administration cannot simply choose to withhold the money and it must comply with appropriations laws unless Congress changes them. The judge’s injunction “raises a grave and urgent threat to the separation of powers”, Justice Department lawyers wrote in Monday’s filing, adding that it would be “self-defeating and senseless for the executive branch to obligate the very funds that it is asking Congress to rescind”. Under the US Constitution, the government’s executive, legislative and judicial branches are assigned different powers. Trump budget director Russell Vought has argued that the president can withhold funds for 45 days after requesting a rescission, which would run out the clock until the end of the fiscal year. The White House said the tactic was last used in 1977. Lauren Bateman, a lawyer for a group of plaintiffs, said on Monday that the administration is asking the Supreme Court “to defend the illegal tactic of a pocket rescission.” “The administration is effectively asking the Supreme Court to bless its attempt to unlawfully accumulate power,” Bateman said. In recent months, the Supreme Court has issued a number of decisions in Trump’s favour through the use of emergency rulings – rarely requested by previous administrations but which Trump has sought and received in record number. From the beginning of his second term in January to early August, Trump had sought 22 emergency rulings, surpassing the 19 requested in all four years of President Joe Biden’s administration and nearly three times as many as the eight requested during each of the presidencies of Barack Obama and George W Bush, both of whom served two terms, or eight years. The rulings differ from typical cases in that they are often issued in extremely short, unsigned orders that give little in the way of legal reasoning despite the high stakes involved. That lack of transparency has led to criticism from legal scholars as well as rare pushback from federal judges. As of August, the court had sided with Trump in 16 out of the 22 emergency ruling cases. Adblock test (Why?)