How strong are Latin America’s military forces, as they face US threats?
Over the weekend, the United States carried out a large-scale military strike against Venezuela and abducted President Nicolas Maduro in a major escalation that sent shockwaves across Latin America. On Monday morning, US President Donald Trump doubled down, threatening action against the governments of Colombia, Cuba and Mexico unless they “get their act together”, claiming he is countering drug trafficking and securing US interests in the Western Hemisphere. The remarks revive deep tensions over US interference in Latin America. Many of the governments targeted by Trump have little appetite for Washington’s involvement, but their armed forces lack the capacity to keep the US at arm’s length. US President Donald Trump issues warnings to Colombia, Cuba and Mexico while speaking to reporters on Air Force One while returning from his Florida estate to Washington, DC, on January 4, 2026 [Jonathan Ernst/Reuters] Latin America’s military capabilities The US has the strongest military in the world and spends more on its military than the total budgets of the next 10 largest military spenders combined. In 2025, the US defence budget was $895bn, roughly 3.1 percent of its gross domestic product. According to the 2025 Global Firepower rankings, Brazil has the most powerful military in Latin America and is ranked 11th globally. Mexico ranks 32nd globally, Colombia 46th, Venezuela 50th and Cuba 67th. All of these countries are significantly below the US military in all metrics, including the number of active personnel, military aircraft, combat tanks, naval assets and their military budgets. Advertisement In a standard war involving tanks, planes and naval power, the US maintains overwhelming superiority. The only notable metric that these countries have over the US is their paramilitary forces, which operate alongside the regular armed forces, often using asymmetrical warfare and unconventional tactics against conventional military strategies. (Al Jazeera) Paramilitaries across Latin America Several Latin American countries have long histories of paramilitary and irregular armed groups that have often played a role in the internal security of these countries. These groups are typically armed, organised and politically influential but operate outside the regular military chain of command. Cuba has the world’s third largest paramilitary force, made up of more than 1.14 million members, as reported by Global Firepower. These groups include state-controlled militias and neighbourhood defence committees. The largest of these, the Territorial Troops Militia, serves as a civilian reserve aimed at assisting the regular army against external threats or during internal crises. In Venezuela, members of pro-government armed civilian groups known as “colectivos” have been accused of enforcing political control and intimidating opponents. Although not formally part of the armed forces, they are widely seen as operating with state tolerance or support, particularly during periods of unrest under Maduro. In Colombia, right-wing paramilitary groups emerged in the 1980s to fight left-wing rebels. Although officially demobilised in the mid-2000s, many later re-emerged as criminal or neo-paramilitary organisations, remaining active in rural areas. The earliest groups were organised with the involvement of the Colombian military following guidance from US counterinsurgency advisers during the Cold War. In Mexico, heavily armed drug cartels function as de facto paramilitary forces. Groups such as the Zetas, originally formed by former soldiers, possess military-grade weapons and exercise territorial control, often outgunning local police and challenging the state’s authority. The Mexican military has increasingly been deployed in law enforcement roles in response. History of US interference in Latin America Over the past two centuries, the US has repeatedly interfered in Latin America. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the so-called Banana Wars saw US forces deployed across Central America to protect corporate interests. In 1934, President Franklin D Roosevelt introduced the “Good Neighbor Policy”, pledging nonintervention. Advertisement Yet during the Cold War, the US financed operations to overthrow elected governments, often coordinated by the CIA, founded in 1947. Panama is the only Latin American country the US has formally invaded, which occurred in 1989 under President George HW Bush. “Operation Just Cause” ostensibly was aimed at removing President Manuel Noriega, who was later convicted of drug trafficking and other offences. Adblock test (Why?)
Israeli forces kill two in Lebanon, ahead of truce monitors meeting
Representatives from France, Israel, Lebanon, the US and UN tracking the ceasefire are due to meet amid Israeli attacks. Israeli forces have killed two people in southern Lebanon a day before a committee monitoring a yearlong ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah was due to hold its next meeting. Lebanon’s NNA news agency said two people were killed in the Israeli attack on a house in south Lebanon’s Kfar Dunin in Bint Jbeil on Tuesday. Recommended Stories list of 4 itemsend of list The Israeli military said in a statement that it struck two Hezbollah operatives in the area, accusing one of being “an engineering terrorist in a structure that facilitated the organisation’s reestablishment efforts”. The attacks come as the committee monitoring the ceasefire, which includes representatives from France, Israel, Lebanon, the United States, and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) prepared to meet on Wednesday. Israeli attacks have killed more than 300 people in Lebanon since the November 2024 ceasefire, including at least 127 civilians. Israeli forces bombarded several parts of Lebanon, killing at least two other people earlier this week, and ordered the forced evacuation of at least four villages in the south and east of the country. Another overnight attack reduced a multistorey building to rubble in an industrial area of Ghaziyeh town, near the coastal city of Sidon, according to a video verified by Al Jazeera and a photographer from the AFP news agency. In a statement earlier on Tuesday, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said, “Israel’s continued attacks aim to thwart all efforts made locally, regionally and internationally to stop the ongoing Israeli escalation, despite the response shown by Lebanon to these efforts at various levels”. Advertisement Beirut-based security affairs analyst Ali Rizk told Al Jazeera the recent attacks come as no surprise following last week’s meeting between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. “There had been reports that Israel got a green light to escalate against Hezbollah,” Rizk told Al Jazeera. ‘Difficult and dangerous conditions’ The spokesperson for the UN secretary-general, Stephane Dujarric, told a media briefing in New York on Tuesday that Israeli attacks are continuing in close proximity to UNIFIL peacekeepers stationed along the Blue Line, which demarcates the de facto border between Israel, Lebanon, and the occupied Golan Heights. “We are aware that Israeli strikes carried out late Monday night following evacuation orders on targets, reportedly linked to Hezbollah and Hamas,” Dujarric said. “The strikes occurred in areas north of the Litani River, including in western Bekaa, in Lebanese territory in southern Lebanon.” Dujarric added that the UNIFIL peacekeepers detected “three air strikes in their areas of operations” on Monday as well as “several fighter aircraft activities above UNIFIL.” “In addition, our peacekeepers reported multiple instances of direct fire originating from [Israeli army] positions south of the Blue Line, including small arms fire impacting the Kfar Shouba area, a Merkava tank fire near Shab’a, and a small arms fire impacting near a UN position near Kfar Shouba,” Dujarric said. UN Undersecretary-General for Peace Operations Jean-Pierre Lacroix, who is visiting Lebanon currently, said on X that he met with UNIFIL peacekeepers who are “carrying out their mandated tasks under increasingly difficult and dangerous conditions”. Lacroix is set to meet Lebanese officials on Wednesday. Later this week, Lebanon’s cabinet will convene to discuss the army’s progress in disarming Hezbollah, a plan launched under heavy US pressure and amid fears of expanded Israeli strikes. The army was expected to complete the disarmament south of the Litani River, about 30km (20 miles) from the border with Israel, by the end of 2025, before tackling the rest of the country. In his statement, Aoun said the government’s plan to “extend its authority over the south of the Litani” has been “implemented by the Lebanese army with professionalism, commitment and precision”. Adblock test (Why?)
I won the Oxford Union presidency. Then my identity was put on trial
In December 2025, I was elected president of the Oxford Union, the world-famous debating society. I made history as the first Palestinian to hold the role in the institution’s 203-year history. I won the presidency by a significant margin, in an election that saw turnout far exceed recent contests. Throughout my campaign, I was open about my background as a Palestinian from Gaza, and about how my identity and family history have shaped my understanding of the importance of representation and debate. That openness, however, quickly became the basis for sustained attempts to discredit me. Rather than engaging with my stated platform or my record, early press reporting questioned my suitability for office purely on the basis of who I am. The aim was clear: to portray me as a radical, an extremist, someone inherently suspect. These reports did not emerge in isolation. They formed part of a wider smear campaign that accompanied my presidential run, in which I was cast as an extremist and a security concern. Within that framing, false rumours began circulating that students who supported my campaign could face consequences themselves, including the loss of visas, placement on security watchlists or formal investigations. No evidence was ever produced to substantiate any of this. I always expected student politics to involve a certain level of hostility. What shocked me was the extent to which supposedly reputable outlets adopted these narratives without basic due diligence, and in some cases went further, presenting insinuations as fact in order to depict me as unfit for office. Advertisement That pattern became unmistakable when I received an email from the Jewish Chronicle seeking my response to a forthcoming article, a month after I had already been reported on by the Jerusalem Post. The email was framed as an opportunity for a “right of reply”, but in practice it set out a series of claims and insinuations, presented as evidence of extremism. The most glaring of these was a supposed family link to a Hamas member. The claim referred to Mohammed Al-Rayis, a man killed in an Israeli drone strike in Beirut in January 2024. He is not related to me. The suggestion relied on pairing one of the most common first names in the Arab world with a widely shared family name from Gaza. My father, Mohammed Elrayess, who bears the same name, is a scientist at Qatar University and is very much alive. Other points raised in the same email were not allegations of wrongdoing at all, but descriptions of my speech and activities, reframed to appear suspicious. One concerned a social media post in which I mourned the killing of Saleh Aljafarawi, a Palestinian journalist killed in Gaza in October 2025, shortly after the announcement of the latest “ceasefire”. In the email, the Jewish Chronicle journalist described Aljafarawi as a “Hamas propagandist”. Israel’s assault on Gaza has been the deadliest conflict for journalists in recorded history. My post was a defence of press freedom and a tribute to a media worker killed in the line of duty. Another concerned my involvement in a documentary I helped produce, Heart of a Protest, which followed pro-Palestine demonstrations across the UK. It was a zero-budget film that allowed protesters to explain why they continued to mobilise and the obstacles they faced in doing so. All proceeds went to families in Gaza. Another line of attack focused on a speech I made at the Oxford Union in November 2024, in favour of the motion, “This house believes that Israel is an apartheid state responsible for genocide”. There was no interest in the substance of what I said. The objection was to my participation itself. I am proud that I spoke at that debate to rebut arguments that justified or supported the genocide in Gaza. I am proud that I was able to speak about my relative, Maisara Al-Rayis, who was killed alongside his family in an Israeli air strike on his home. If that is an allegation, I accept it without hesitation. For me, these patterns of attack do not reflect strength. They reflect weakness. If the concerns raised about me were genuine, if I truly posed a danger to the institution I now lead, there would be no need to recast lawful and legitimate political expression as evidence of extremism, or to imply guilt through invented family associations. Advertisement These attempts to discredit me sit within a broader effort to silence Palestinians in public life, and to discourage Palestinian participation altogether. They are meant to warn us off. They will not. Let a hundred articles be written to mischaracterise or defame us. We have long passed the point where this can intimidate us into silence. If anything, it makes the need to speak all the more urgent. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance. Adblock test (Why?)
Children dying from water-borne disease at Sudan displacement camp
NewsFeed Families forced to flee their homes because of Sudan’s war have been cut off from health care services and are living in camps with no clean water. Now their children and some of the elderly are dying from bilharzia, a disease caused by a parasitic worm that lives in infested water. Al Jazeera’s Mohammad Vall filed this report from the Khor Ajwal camp in White Nile State. Published On 6 Jan 20266 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Adblock test (Why?)
Real Madrid’s Mbappe out of Spanish Super Cup derby with Atletico
Real Madrid forward Kylian Mbappe has been ruled out of the Saudi Arabia-hosted Spanish Super Cup due to a knee injury. Published On 6 Jan 20266 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Real Madrid’s French international striker Kylian Mbappe will miss the Spanish Super Cup this week as he recovers from a knee sprain. The Spanish giants did not name the French superstar, the team’s top goalscorer, in their squad on Tuesday for the tournament in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Recommended Stories list of 4 itemsend of list Mbappe was diagnosed with the issue last week, with the expectation that the 27-year-old would likely be sidelined for at least three weeks. Xabi Alonso’s side face city rivals Atletico Madrid on Thursday in the semifinals, with Barcelona taking on Athletic Bilbao on Wednesday. The Spanish coach is under pressure after a disappointing start to the season, with his team trailing champions Barca by four points in La Liga. Alonso had told journalists last week that would “do everything we can to get him back as soon as possible”. Adding, “We’re going to be pushing the deadlines; it’s very much a matter of feelings. When is as soon as possible? That’s the question. I don’t know. The Super Cup? We hope.” Mbappe equalled Cristiano Ronaldo’s club record of 59 goals in a calendar year for Real in their 2-0 La Liga win over Sevilla on December 20. The former Paris Saint-Germain striker’s form is in stark contrast with his strike partner, Vinicius Junior, who scored 22 goals last season, but has struck just five times across all competitions this term and has not found the net since October. Adblock test (Why?)
Jailed Palestine Action activist ends 60-day hunger strike as health fails
Prisoners For Palestine says activist Teuta Hoxha needs to be hospitalised but has been denied medical treatment by prison authorities. Published On 5 Jan 20265 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Palestine Action activist Teuta Hoxha has paused her hunger strike in the United Kingdom after more than two months without food while demanding immediate bail and the right to a fair trial. The group Prisoners For Palestine wrote on Instagram on Monday that Hoxha is in serious condition and needs to be hospitalised. It alleged the 29-year old has been denied proper treatment by prison authorities. Recommended Stories list of 4 itemsend of list Hoxha “needs urgent medical care in hospital to prevent refeeding syndrome. The prison is refusing [her] medical treatment, which is required to prevent death in extreme cases of starvation”. Refeeding syndrome, a potentially fatal condition, happens when nutrition is restarted in a starving person too quickly. There was no immediate comment from prison or government officials. For the past 63 days, Palestine Action members have been on hunger strikes in prisons around the UK after being jailed over alleged involvement in break-ins at the UK subsidiary of Elbit Systems in Filton near Bristol in 2024. Elbit Systems is an Israeli defence company with factories and offices across Britain. Some members of Palestine Action are also being held for an alleged break-in at a Royal Air Force base in Oxfordshire, where two military aircraft were sprayed with red paint. The prisoners deny the charges against them, which include burglary and violent disorder. After Hoxha has paused her protest, only three of eight Palestine Action hunger strikers continue to refuse food as they demand their release. ‘Apartheid regime’ In July, the British government voted in favour of proscribing Palestine Action as a “terrorist” organisation – putting it into the same category as armed groups such as al-Qaeda and ISIL (ISIS). Advertisement More than 1,600 people have been arrested in connection with support for Palestine Action after near-weekly protests for the ban to be revoked. The proscription is being challenged in court. The protest group, launched in 2020, has described itself as a movement “committed to ending global participation in Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime”. Those still on hunger strike include Heba Muraisi, 31, and Kamran Ahmed, 28. Lewie Chiaramello, 22, is also refusing food every other day because he’s diabetic. The strikers have made five demands: immediate bail, the right to a fair trial, an end to censorship of their communications, “de-proscribing” Palestine Action and closing Elbit Systems factories in the UK. People protest at a pro-Palestine demonstration in Manchester, England [File: Gary Roberts/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images] Adblock test (Why?)
Colombia’s Petro promises to defend homeland amid Trump threats
President criticizes Trump, calling US threats an undue interference in Colombian internal matters under international law. Published On 5 Jan 20265 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Colombian President Gustavo Petro says he would “take up arms” for his country if necessary as the United States issues threats against him and his government. In a social media post on Monday, Petro, a former leftist fighter, said any violent US intervention in Colombia, such as the kind carried out in Venezuela over the weekend, would provoke a response. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list “I swore not to touch a weapon again,” Petro said. “But for the homeland I will take up arms again.” Petro has emerged as an outspoken critic of US President Donald Trump, who has threatened Colombia with possible military strikes in the name of combating drug trafficking. The two leaders have frequently traded insults, but Trump’s threats have become increasingly hostile in recent days. The US president said over the weekend that Petro should “watch his a**” after the abduction of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, an act widely considered illegal by scholars of international law. Speaking with reporters on Sunday, Trump said a similar operation against Petro’s government “sounds good to me”. “Colombia is very sick, too, run by a sick man, who likes making cocaine and selling it to the United States, and he’s not going to be doing it very long,” Trump said. Colombia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs denounced Trump’s comments as “an undue interference in the internal affairs of the country, against the norms of international law”. Trump has accused Petro of facilitating the trafficking of drugs to the US, a claim for which there is no evidence and is firmly denied by Petro, who says his government has worked to combat drug production while taking steps away from the militarised approach of the war on drugs. Advertisement “I have enormous trust in my people,” Petro said. “And that is why I have asked the people to defend the president from any illegitimate violent act against him.” Adblock test (Why?)
Trump has made US militarism worse
For many years before becoming president, Donald Trump publicly criticised the George W Bush administration over its decision to launch the war on Iraq. And yet, today, in his second term as president, he finds himself presiding over a military debacle that is quite reminiscent of Bush’s. Trump ordered a military intervention to remove an antagonistic foreign leader, based on a flimsy argument of national security, with the goal of accessing that country’s oil. In both cases, we see a naive confidence that the United States can simply achieve its goals through regime change. US intervention into Venezuela reeks of the same hubris that surrounded the Iraq invasion two decades ago. Yet there are also important differences to consider. The most important distinguishing feature of the operation in Venezuela is its lack of an overarching vision. On Saturday after Trump finished an hour-long news conference alongside his secretaries of defence and state, it was not clear what the plan was for Venezuela going forward, or if there was a plan at all. His statements threatening more attacks in the following days brought no clarity either. Past instances of US-led regime change fit into the larger ideological visions of the incumbent US commander-in-chief. In 1823, President James Monroe declared the Western Hemisphere off-limits to European colonialism. As the United States spent the 20th century consolidating its sphere of influence across the Americas, the Monroe Doctrine would justify various interventions in Latin America and the Caribbean. The Cold War added new justifications for the United States to overthrow leftist regimes and install friendly governments in the Americas. Advertisement As the Cold War ended, President George HW Bush sought to serve as a caretaker for a “new world order” in which the US had emerged as the world’s lone superpower. When Bush sent troops to Somalia in 1992 and his successor Bill Clinton reversed a military coup in Haiti in 1994, they did so under the paradigm of “humanitarian intervention”. When George W Bush ordered the invasion of Iraq, it was done under the umbrella of the post-9/11 “war on terror”. When President Barack Obama intervened against the forces of Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, he was guided by the “responsibility to protect” doctrine concerning civilians in danger. But in the case of the US attack on Venezuela, there has been no ideological justification. Trump and his team have haphazardly thrown around references to humanitarianism, counterterrorism and more to justify the attack. The president even brought up the Monroe Doctrine. But just as it seemed that he was grounding his foreign policy in a larger ideology, albeit one borrowed from two centuries ago, he made a joke of the concept. “The Monroe Doctrine is a big deal,” Trump explained on Saturday. “But we’ve superseded it by a lot, by a lot. They now call it the Donroe Doctrine.” Trump did not make up this pun; it was used by the New York Post a year ago to describe Trump’s aggressive foreign policy as he threatened to annex Canada, Greenland and the Panama Canal. The president’s decision to embrace the tongue-in-cheek term illustrates a disturbing reality of his foreign policy: Any notion that he is promoting an ideological vision is a joke. The truth is Trump is pursuing an increasingly aggressive and militaristic foreign policy in his second term, not because he wants to impose a grand vision, but because he has discovered he can get away with it. Striking a variety of foreign “bad guys” who have little capacity to fight back – ISIL (ISIS) affiliates in Nigeria who are “persecuting” Christians and “narcoterrorists” in Latin America – appeals to members of Trump’s base. After he mentioned the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua during Saturday’s news conference, he went on a minutes-long tangent to brag about his military interventions into US cities. While the president’s inability to stay on topic may be concerning for those questioning his health and mental fitness, this digression into domestic affairs had some relevance for his Venezuelan intervention, at least as far as he was concerned: His increasingly militarised war on drugs and crime abroad justifies an increasingly militarised war on drugs and crime at home. Advertisement Past presidents have used US power to pursue a wide variety of ideologies and principles. Trump appears to be paying lip service to past ideologies to justify the use of US power. Many times, the “good” intentions of previous presidents paved the way to hellish outcomes for the peoples who found themselves on the receiving end of US intervention. But those intentions at least created a level of predictability and consistency for the foreign policies of various US administrations. Trump, by contrast, seems driven solely by immediate political concerns and short-term prospects for glory and profit. If there is a saving grace of such an unprincipled foreign policy, it may be the ephemeral nature of interventions conducted without an overarching vision. An unprincipled approach to military intervention does not foster the kind of ideological commitment that has led other presidents to engage in long-term interventions like the Iraq occupation. But it also means that Trump could conceivably use military intervention to settle any international dispute or to pursue any ostensibly profitable goal – say assuming control of Greenland from Denmark. Last year, he decided tariffs were a potent tool for asserting his interests and started applying them almost indiscriminately on allies and adversaries alike. Now that Trump has grown comfortable using the US military to achieve a range of goals – profit, gunboat diplomacy, distraction from domestic scandals, etc – the danger is that he will grow similarly haphazard in his use of force. That does not bode well for the US nor for the rest of the world. At a time when multiple global crises are overlapping – climate, conflict and impoverishment – the last thing the world needs is a trigger-happy superpower without a clear strategy or a day-after plan. The views expressed in this article are
Nigeria vs Mozambique: AFCON 2025 – team news, start time and lineups
Who: Nigeria vs MozambiqueWhat: CAF Africa Cup of NationsWhere: Fez Stadium in Fez, MoroccoWhen: Monday at 8pm (19:00 GMT)How to follow: We’ll have all the build-up on Al Jazeera Sport from 16:00 GMT in advance of our text commentary stream. Fun, flair and fragility sum up Nigeria’s ongoing campaign at AFCON 2025. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list As the tournament’s leading attacking force, Nigeria have laid down an early marker as title contenders but while the West Africans boast impressive squad depth, they still need to shore up a leaky defence. The Super Eagles have moved on swiftly from the heartbreak of missing out on the FIFA World Cup and have been flying high in Morocco on the back of a talented squad featuring Ademola Lookman, Raphael Onyedika, Victor Osimhen and Alex Iwobi. As one of only two teams to maintain a perfect group-stage record, the former champions now face Mozambique, who for the first time advanced past the group stage, for a place in the quarterfinals. Ranked 102nd in the world, Mozambique are up for a historic knockout appearance, facing the daunting task of taking on a side ranked 74 places above them. Here’s everything you need to know about Nigeria vs Mozambique: How did Nigeria reach the round of 16? The African powerhouse soared into the knockouts as the table toppers of Group C, registering victories over Tunisia, Uganda and Tanzania. Nigeria were the first team to reach the last 16 with a 100 percent record. How did Mozambique reach the round of 16? Mozambique advanced as one of the four best third-placed sides. The Mambas lost two Group F games and won one, against Gabon, which ended their 40-year wait for a victory at the continental tournament. They are making their first appearance in AFCON’s knockout stages. Advertisement Who will the winner face in the next round? The winner of the Nigeria and Mozambique match will travel to Marrakesh to face the winner of the Algeria and Democratic Republic of the Congo match in the quarterfinal on January 10. Fez Stadium has hosted all of Nigeria’s matches so far and will also be the venue for the fixture against Mozambique [Abdel Majid Bziouat/AFP] Who are Nigeria’s best players? With two goals and two assists, forward Lookman has been one of Nigeria’s standout players at the tournament. The 28-year-old was the architect of the team’s victories in their opening two games, equally influential as both a playmaker and a finisher. Rested for the final group match, Lookman is expected to come out all guns blazing against their East African opponents. Midfielder Onyedika, who scored twice in the last match, is another key contributor while Iwobi has been pulling the strings in the midfield, and striker Osimhen remains one of the most feared attackers in the competition. Who are Mozambique’s best players? Winger Geny Catamo has scored two of Mozambique’s four goals at the tournament and has been central to their historic qualification. Forward Faisal Bangal and right back Diogo Calila have also found the net. Nigeria and Mozambique form guides Nigeria: W-W-W-L-L Mozambique: L-W-L-L-D Nigeria finished the group stage with eight goals, the highest tally in the competition, while also recording the highest average possession rate (66 percent). Nigeria have won all three of their group games for the first time since 2021. Mozambique’s victory over Gabon is their only win in 18 AFCON matches (D4 L13). Mozambique are yet to keep a clean sheet at AFCON, conceding in all 18 games. Head-to-head Nigeria and Mozambique have met in five previous encounters across competitive and friendly games. Nigeria dominate the head-to-head record with four wins and a draw. When did Nigeria and Mozambique last meet? The teams last met in a friendly in Albufeira, Portugal, in October 2023 when Nigeria won 3-2. Nigeria vs Mozambique – stat attack Monday’s game will be their second meeting at AFCON. Their previous AFCON encounter came in the final group game of the 2010 edition when Nigeria ran out 3-0 winners. This is Nigeria’s 16th successive appearance in the knockout rounds, having last failed to progress beyond the group stage in 1982. Have Nigeria ever won an AFCON title? Nigeria are three-time AFCON champions, having lifted the trophy in 1980, 1994 and 2013. They also finished as runners-up five times. This is their 21st appearance at the continental championship. Advertisement Have Mozambique ever won an AFCON title? No. This is their sixth appearance at the tournament, and the 2025 edition already marks their best finish. Nigeria team news Cyriel Dessers, who is yet to feature, and Ryan Alebiosu, who made his debut in the previous game, are both ruled out through injury. Their absence is unlikely to have a major impact because neither is a regular starter. Coach Eric Chelle could retain Onyedika in midfield after his brace in the last game, which earned him the player of the match award. Nigeria’s predicted lineup Stanley Nwabili (goalkeeper); Bright Osayi-Samuel, Semi Ajayi, Calvin Bassey, Bruno Onyemaechi; Samuel Chukwueze, Wilfred Ndidi, Onyedika, Iwobi; Osimhen, Lookman Mozambique team news Mozambique will be without Calila, who was taken off in the last game after only 15 minutes due to an injury. Nene, who scored an own goal against Cameroon, is also injured. Mozambique’s predicted lineup Ivane Urrubal (goalkeeper); Infren Nani, Mexer, Reinildo Mandava, Bruno Langa; Guima, Manuel Kambala; Catamo, Elias Pelembe, Witi; Bangal Adblock test (Why?)
UN General Assembly president on war, vetoes and UN reform
As global crises multiply and trust in international institutions erodes, the United Nations faces growing questions about its relevance and authority. Thirty years after pledges to end hunger and reduce inequality, progress is stalling, wars are spreading, and UN Security Council vetoes are paralysing action. In this episode of Talk to Al Jazeera, UN General Assembly President Annalena Baerbock reflects on the UN’s credibility, the limits of the UNSC, and whether a more assertive UNGA can drive reform before the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals deadline. Published On 4 Jan 20264 Jan 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share Adblock test (Why?)