“Samantha Niblett’s Summer of Sex.” It sounds like something the police would have shut down in the “grubbiest era of Soho peep shows”, said Madeline Grant in The Spectator. But it is, in fact – “just as the world teeters on the brink of geopolitical collapse” – an “actual initiative” announced by a Labour MP last week.

Awash with sex

Niblett, the “dignity-phobic” member for South Derbyshire, said she wants to encourage “open, inclusive, lifelong sex education”, and have a “national conversation” about pleasure, including the benefits of masturbation. As part of her “Summer of Sex” scheme (launched with the appallingly ungrammatical tagline: “Yes Sex Please, We’re British!”) she has teamed up with Cindy Gallop, the founder of an adult website. Together, they’re planning a series of events, including a sex toy exhibition in Parliament. Really? Is there “literally no area of life” that’s safe from “government intervention”?

Fifty-odd years ago, when people thought you could “lose your virginity by riding a bicycle”, this sort of campaign might have had its place, said Shane Watson in The Times. “But, my goodness, where have you been, Niblett?” You can’t move for people talking about sex these days: the world is awash with porn and sex toys; it’s hard to switch on the TV without seeing a sex scene.

Noble stand

Maybe so, said Rowan Pelling in The Daily Telegraph, but I still think Niblett is taking a “noble stand”. She believes, surely rightly, that issues such as consent and sexual abuse are still not well enough understood. And she and Gallop are in fact campaigning against the warping effects of hardcore porn. (Gallop’s website is called Make Love Not Porn.)

I agree that people’s attitudes need a reset, said Hadley Freeman in The Sunday Times: the rising prevalence of choking, hair-pulling and “other abusive behaviours that porn dresses up as sexy” proves this. But Britain doesn’t need more sexual liberation, sex toys or online porn, even if it’s “ethical” porn.

Niblett should be teaching people – especially those who grew up with internet porn – that sex shouldn’t be degrading; it’s about intimacy and understanding other people. Understand that, and they will have “many happy summers – and years – of sex”.

Apple founder Steve Jobs created the iPhone and cultivated a rockstar reputation for innovation. His successor, Tim Cook, turned the company into a globe-spanning colossus of profit. What will the next CEO, John Ternus, do to build on their legacies?

The 51-year-old Ternus “knows Apple at its core” after a quarter-century at the company, said CNN. As a senior executive since 2021, Ternus “led the hardware engineering behind Apple’s most recognizable products” like the iPhone and iPad and was “essential” in developing the new mid-price MacBook Neo.

His promotion to CEO “isn’t much of a surprise,” given that he had been seen as a front-runner to succeed Cook “for at least the last year,” CNN said. His task is to position the company for further success in the age of artificial intelligence. Ternus faces pressure to “produce success out of the gates,” Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said in a note.

An ‘Apple lifer’

Ternus is a “safe choice in a dangerous moment” for Apple, said Semafor. Cook replaced Jobs when Apple was at the “height of its influence” and built it into the first company with a $1 million market cap. The company is “still a financial juggernaut” though it does not command its former cultural cachet. Ternus is an “Apple lifer” unlikely to take Apple in a “radical new direction” that would “squander its lucrative business.” But his ascension comes as AI transforms the “entire concept of computing and technology.”

The “defining challenge” for Ternus is “fixing the company’s AI strategy,” said CNBC. Apple has so far avoided “hefty capital expenditures” on AI data centers and “punted” on its own AI model. Instead, Apple has bet that consumers will use its iPhones and other products to run AI. Choosing Ternus as CEO signals the company’s belief that the “future of AI will run through tightly integrated devices, not just software,” the University of Notre Dame’s Timothy Hubbard said to CNBC.

Apple faces an “existential challenge” figuring out “what comes after the iPhone,” said Axios. Cook “executed masterfully” to maximize iPhone’s success but “largely sputtered” with new products like the Vision Pro and a failed attempt at building autonomous cars. Companies like Meta and Google are pushing smart glasses, and former Apple design guru Jony Ive is designing hardware for OpenAI. A new leadership era opens with Apple “chasing its next hit” product. Cook demonstrated that Apple can grow. Ternus instead “must prove that it can still innovate.”

Making ‘first-rate physical things’

Apple has put the “hardware guy in charge,” said The Wall Street Journal, and is betting on itself as a “maker of first-rate physical things” in an AI-dominated world. That means navigating “complex geopolitics threatening Apple’s supply chain” and countless “regulatory battles around the world.”

Ternus is expected to “bring back Jobs-era decisiveness” to Apple’s CEO suite, said Bloomberg. Cook was known for “incrementalism” in moving the company’s product line forward, Forrester Research’s Dipanjan Chatterjee said in a note. Ternus “must define Apple’s future as ferociously as he defends its past.”

The FBI and a congressional committee are investigating the mysterious cases of 10 missing or dead scientists and staff who worked at sensitive nuclear or space technology laboratories.

Social media has “lit up” with theories about the disappearances and deaths, said CBS News, as speculation has “swirled” about whether they are part of an effort to “harm” US nuclear or space programmes.

‘Sinister connection’

William Neil McCasland, a retired US air force general now director of technology at an aerospace defence firm, went missing from his home in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on 27 February.

Investigators soon became aware of other aerospace and nuclear officials and researchers who have gone missing or died in mysterious circumstances. These cases included a nuclear physicist and MIT professor who was fatally shot outside his Massachusetts home, an aerospace engineer who went missing during a hike in Los Angeles, and two scientists working on nuclear fusion and astrophysics who were murdered in their homes.

“The similar circumstances of some of the disappearances” and the subjects’ involvement in sensitive and secret research have “fuelled speculation about whether coordinated foul play or foreign espionage may be involved”, said The Hill.

The FBI confirmed it is “spearheading the effort to look for connections” between the 10 cases that have come to light and the Republican-led House Oversight Committee said it will examine “questions about a possible sinister connection”. In a post on X, Nasa said that it was cooperating with the investigations, but “at this time, nothing related to Nasa indicates a national security threat”.

The speculation has drawn in the US president. “I hope it’s random, but we’re going to know in the next week and a half,” Donald Trump told reporters, confirming that an investigation was under way. It is “pretty serious stuff” but “hopefully a coincidence, or whatever you want to call it”.

‘People do just die’

People familiar with the cases said that what “underlies” these deaths and disappearances is “not a spy-thriller plot”, but “something more personal and tragic”, said CBS News.

McCasland’s wife said in a Facebook post that it “seems quite unlikely that he was taken to extract very dated secrets”, pointing out that her husband retired from the air force more than 12 years ago.

Julia Hicks, the daughter of Michael David Hicks, a scientist who worked at Nasa’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory and died in 2023, told CNN there is “no train of logic” connecting her father’s death to that of other scientists. “I can’t help but laugh about it, but at the same time, it’s getting serious,” she said.

The cases are “scattered across several years at different and only loosely affiliated organisations”, said Joseph Rodgers, from the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “If all of the scientists were working on one project or weapons system, then I’d be more suspicious,” he said.

A former US Department of Energy official was more succinct. “People do just die,” they said.

Allbirds is making a complete heel turn after the shoe brand announced its pivot to AI. And many are skeptical that the footwear company will succeed in making such a big switch to the convoluted tech space. But Allbirds is just the latest in a list of companies that got their start in one industry, then changed to something quite different.

Android

Android cellphones have become as ubiquitous as iPhones in modern years, but the company didn’t start out in the phone game. The brand was launched in 2003, originally “conceived as an operating system for digital cameras,” said software development company Velvetech. By the time Android got up and running, the “market for digital cameras significantly fell,” whereas the “mobile device market was constantly growing.”

The company was forced to pivot to stay alive and began producing an operating system with more widespread uses. It is now used “primarily for mobile devices such as smartphones, tablets, smartwatches and other wearable devices,” said IT brand Spiceworks.

Nintendo

Nintendo has always made games but probably not the kind you’re thinking of. The company was started in 1889 when its founder, Fusajiro Yamauchi, began producing Japanese playing cards called Hanafuda in Kyoto. By 1902, Yamauchi “started manufacturing the first Western-style playing cards in Japan,” said Nintendo’s website. The company began growing in size throughout the mid-20th century.

By the 1970s, Nintendo realized it had to make a change to keep up with the times, and in 1975 “began the development of its first electronic video game systems,” said BBC News. In 1978, Nintendo “produced a computer game version of the board game Othello” and has since been responsible for producing some of the most iconic video games franchises of all time, including Mario, The Legend of Zelda and Donkey Kong.

Nokia

Nokia has made perhaps the biggest one-eighty of the companies on this list. While known today for its industrial-strength cellphones, the company started in the 1860s as something wholly different: a wood pulp mill in Finland. This mill was the first step in the mass production of paper. The modern company was eventually formed as a “merger between the Nokia Company (paper), Finnish Rubber Works and Finnish Cable Works in 1867,” said the Crypto Museum, a Dutch virtual museum.

Prior to its eventual focus on cellphones, Nokia became a bit of an everything brand. It has been “involved in the production of paper, rubber, electricity, car and bicycle tires, footwear, communication cables, television sets, consumer electronics, personal computers, robotics, capacitors, plastics, aluminium, chemicals, mobile phones and last but not least: military communications equipment,” said the Crypto Museum.

Slack

Slack is used today as a business-to-business chat tool by numerous companies and industries. Yet it originated in the 2010s as an “internal communication tool” for the “quirky online multiplayer game Glitch,” said Encyclopedia Britannica. The video game garnered positive reviews, but its “creators found the game to be expensive and unwieldy.” They soon started looking for alternative ways to implement the technology.

This arrived in the form of a rebrand: Slack, a “provider of a messaging tool for facilitating workplace communication, an ‘email killer’ and the ultimate collaboration app,” said TechCrunch. Today, Slack is “used by more than 100,000 organizations, including 77 of the Fortune 100 companies, demonstrating the network effect of a mature and innovative product,” according to the company itself.

Volkswagen

Volkswagen has always sold cars. But in this case, it’s the company’s history that represents a major redirect. The brand is well-known for its associations with the Nazis during World War II: In 1937, Adolf Hitler’s party “founded a state-owned company that was later named Volkswagen, or ‘The People's Car Company,’” said NPR. Volkswagen leadership would eventually disavow its Nazi ties.

The pivot came in modern times, as Volkswagen shifted from supporting antisemitic Nazi Germany to negotiating weapons deals with the state of Israel. In a tinge of irony, Volkswagen, which “produced parts using forced labor for V-1 cruise missiles used by the Wehrmacht during World War II, may soon be manufacturing parts for an Israeli-designed missile defense system,” said Haaretz.

YouTube

YouTube is best known as the video platform where you can watch just about any kind of video. But it was originally started in 2004 by three PayPal employees who had an “idea for a website for users to upload video dating profiles,” said Business Insider. The company was even trademarked on Valentine’s Day. As a dating site, YouTube “attracted little interest, forcing the co-founder to take out ads paying women $20 to upload dating videos.”

Then people began “uploading videos of all kinds to YouTube,” said Business Insider, and the website took off as a general platform. Today, over “20 million videos are uploaded daily” on YouTube, with an estimated 20 billion total videos on the site, the company said.

Before 2000, single fathers by choice were “virtually unheard of”, said The Atlantic. But in the past few years, this population has been growing “notably”.

English law changed in 2019 to give single parents the same rights as couples over surrogate children. Since then, the number of men applying to become sole parents of surrogate babies has tripled, according to data cited in The Times. The number is still “a tiny percentage” of the total applications, but it reflects “a growing trend”.

‘Go it alone’

There aren’t many reliable figures documenting the number of men “deciding to go it alone”, said The Guardian. Most surveys don’t differentiate single fathers by choice from widowers, or separated/divorced men. But according to the Office for National Statistics, about 15% of the UK’s single-parent households are headed by dads.

“We are seeing more men wanting to adopt than in recent years,” said Natalie Gamble, a lawyer specialising in surrogacy law. Since 2019, “the options are opening up. More British surrogates are willing to be matched with fathers.”

Many applying to become single fathers by surrogacy are gay – but not all. Some have either “struggled to find a relationship” or left partners because of “incompatible approaches to having children”, said The Telegraph. This is a “family type that does seem to be on the rise”, said Catherine Jones, a family psychology expert at King’s College London.

The “main hurdle” for surrogacy is “money rather than stigma”, she said. In the UK, it is illegal to advertise for a surrogate, or that you’re willing to become one. Single men often look to Cyprus or Belarus to find surrogate mothers. Many complain that the law in the UK is “yet to catch up with the fact that single men can now much more easily pursue fatherhood in this way”.

The increasing number of single men becoming surrogate parents has caused concern among some campaigners. “The checks on single men undertaking surrogacy are not remotely comparable to those we see in cases of adoption,” said Helen Gibson, from campaign group Surrogacy Concern.

But some single men turn to surrogacy because they were turned down by adoption agencies, said ABC News. “I called five different agencies and every one of them told me that either I would not be considered or that I would be at the bottom of the list because I was a single father,” said Peter Gordon.

“Who is going to give their kid to a 50-year-old bachelor living in SoHo, you know?” said Steven Harris, who was also rejected by adoption agencies. “I wouldn’t.”

The promise of meaning

The trend shouldn’t be surprising given that singlehood has been increasing for years, “more steeply among men than women”, said The Atlantic. The gay community has also recovered from the Aids pandemic; a new generation has “made it through” to adulthood with more financial security and societal acceptance than before.

But the fact that some men are “paying extravagantly for egg donation and surrogacy” might suggest “just how important fatherhood is” for many today. Multiple professionals described the pandemic as a “turning point for a lot of single fathers by choice”. Men came out of the pandemic wanting to “spend those moments with their loved ones before it was too late”.

And in a moment when “many of the traditional trappings of manhood” are no longer guaranteed, fatherhood can be “an answer” to questions of identity. For many single men, fatherhood “dangled a promise of deeper meaning in life”.

But in a society that is “set up to regard women as primary caregivers”, single fatherhood can be alienating, said The Guardian. “Men get questions asking whether it’s Mum’s day off,” said Sophie Zadeh of University College London, who has been researching single fathers by choice. “People assume they can’t parent properly because they are male.”

Her research also suggests men are scrutinised more than women by healthcare visitors, and can be viewed with suspicion. “They’re seen as that bit more unusual.”

With the Russo-Ukrainian War in its fourth year, both sides are dealing with critical troop shortages, and Ukrainian officials think they’ve found a solution. The country has started using remotely controlled robots in combat to account for these shortages and also reduce casualties. But some experts are also downplaying the effect these robots could have on the war.

‘Seize Russian positions solely with automated weapons’

The robots, which often feature mounted machine guns, can “help Ukrainian troops carry gear, lay mines, evacuate the wounded and attack Russian positions,” said Business Insider. At least 280 companies are working to develop these robots, many of which are used to transport ordnance because they can “carry more than roughly 10 servicemen can,” Oleksandr Yabchanka, the head of robotic systems for Ukraine’s Da Vinci Wolves army regiment, told Business Insider.

The robots are a key part of Ukraine’s fight because of their offensive capabilities. One video during combat, filmed last summer, showed several Ukrainian robots that “each carried 66 pounds of explosives,” said The New York Times. One of these robots drove into a Russian stronghold and “blew itself up, while the others held back, monitoring the position.” Several Russian soldiers surrendered, and these kinds of attacks show “that the Ukrainian military can now seize Russian positions solely with automated weapons.”

Of course, human soldiers remain the key demographic on the battlefield, but Ukraine is “eager to highlight its advances to show Western partners that its outnumbered army can stay in the fight,” said the Times, while also promoting the country’s “homegrown defense industry.” During the first three months of 2026, Ukraine’s ground robots “carried out more than 22,000 missions on the front lines,” said Business Insider, citing data from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

‘The reality is more nuanced and far less futuristic’

There are drawbacks to using robots, as they “can still fall prey to enemy drones and also face challenges in traversing battle-scarred landscapes,” said Ars Technica. Though they may be good for frontline combat, at least one Ukrainian battalion reported that robots “attempting to evacuate wounded soldiers failed to reach the positions in four out of five cases due to complicating factors.” Ukraine’s efforts are also in “competition with the Russian military, which has similarly increased its use of robots on the frontlines.”

The narrative has largely been that Ukrainian robots will eventually supersede most of the country’s soldiers, but the “reality is more nuanced and far less futuristic,” said the Kyiv Post. The expansion of these battlefield robots is mostly part of an effort to “support troops not replace them.” And even though the stories of killer robots dominate the headlines, much of the “work performed by these robots remains logistical,” encompassing the delivery of “supplies, including food, ammunition, water and equipment, to frontline positions.”

But even non-offensive missions using robots “can save lives, as they replace tasks that would otherwise require soldiers to move on foot under fire,” a senior operator of ground robotic systems from Ukraine’s 13th Brigade told the Kyiv Post. It remains “far better to send a robot on a mission. If it is destroyed, you lose equipment. But if you send two or three soldiers and they are killed, it is a much greater loss, both emotionally and for the unit’s combat capability.”

President Lee Jae Myung warned earlier this month that the conflict in Iran represented a “war-like situation” for South Koreans. As oil reserves continue to dwindle, even if normal service in the Strait of Hormuz were to resume, it would take a long time for supplies to catch up.

The war is “serving as a significant turning point” for South Korea to shift to renewable energy, South Korea’s Minister of Climate, Energy and Environment Kim Sung-hwan told CNBC. We must undergo a “fundamental energy transition” and “turn this challenge into a blessing in disguise”.

Rising oil prices, and the weakening of the won against the dollar, are “dealing a double blow” to the Korean economy, said The New York Times. But reliance on oil has also highlighted the domestic tussle for green energy action in a divided South Korean system.

‘Draconian’ measures

The “brightly illuminated” satellite images of South Korea at night, compared to the “sea of blackness” in the North, have long been seen as a “wider triumph of capitalism and democracy”, said Christopher Jasper, transport industry editor, in The Telegraph. However, due to the Iran war, these lights could be extinguished “in a matter of weeks”.

Compared to fellow developed countries, South Korea is “almost uniquely lacking in natural resources”, relying on imports to meet “90% of its energy needs”. Around 70% of its crude oil shipments, in addition to 20% natural gas, come from the Gulf. The country has seen fuel prices increase by a fifth, a ban on driving one weekday in five for individuals, and calls to reduce shower times and to charge electric cars and phones only in the daytime. Much more “draconian” measures could be just weeks away.

South Korea must face a “difficult home truth”, said David Fickling in Bloomberg. Behind the “sleek modern society” is an “insatiable appetite for fossil fuels that’s undermining its economy”. But this appetite presents a climate and “strategic” threat. State utility Korea Electric Power Corporation’s (Kepco) “huge” generation plants provide “tempting targets for rocket attacks”, and its proximity to North Korea and China leaves the South exposed to mine threats, should the conflict expand.

A ‘catalyst’ for energy reform?

The fossil-fuel vulnerability highlighted by the war in Iran could be the “catalyst for a faster clean energy system”, said The Guardian. South Korea’s energy targets long predate the current war, aiming to generate 20% of electricity from renewables by 2030 and phase out coal by 2040.

As with most renewable energy, there must be the infrastructure to support it. The power generated by new energy is “colliding” with the grid’s capacity, meaning it is “in effect going to waste”. There is hope in the form of Kepco building high-voltage transmission lines to Seoul, but a decade-long wait and “resistance” from locals are taking the shine off the progress.

On top of the energy opportunities, this is a “fresh opportunity” to “strengthen Seoul’s hand” against North Korea, said Jenni Marsh in Bloomberg. According to Finance Minister Koo Yun Cheol, Middle Eastern countries are “lining up” to buy Korea’s missiles, with their 90% success rate and “affordable price tag” an attractive proposition for buyers. The crisis has also fuelled government investment into nuclear-reactor restarts to “maintain grid stability”. As North Korea’s Kim Jong Un “plays hard to get” with the US, and “refuses talks” with Lee, improving defence capabilities “looks like an increasingly smart option”.

President Lee’s “catnip” calls to transition to renewables due to the war in Iran have “no chance of being met”, said Fickling in the same outlet. For instance, Kepco has “effectively banned” all new generators in the “renewables-rich” east until 2032, all because its “crumbling grid is supposedly incapable of accepting new connections”. Decisions such as these will do “nothing to advance South Korea’s energy transition”. Society as a whole needs to fight against those who have kept them “hooked on polluting power”.

Former Bulgarian President Rumen Radev will soon have a new title, and with it a whole lot of new power. Radev won Bulgaria’s parliamentary elections on Sunday and will become the country’s next prime minister. But while the election victory by Radev’s newly created Progressive Bulgaria party could represent a fresh beginning for a nation fraught with political strife, some people are concerned about Radev’s ties to Russia.

Radev’s beginnings

Radev, 62, was born in Dimitrovgrad, Bulgaria, and his early career was dedicated to military service. He is an ex-fighter pilot and former commander in the Bulgarian Air Force, and received several military merits before turning his attention to politics. Radev has often used his “daredevil flying skills to build his political brand,” said Politico. When he first ran for president in 2016, the Bulgarian Air Force “heavily promoted his loop-the-loops in a high-profile air show.”

Upon winning the ceremonial role of the presidency in 2017, Radev “quickly made up for his lack of political experience, capitalizing on his military background to cultivate the persona of a fearless patriot uncorrupted by party politics,” said Politico. In January 2026, after anti-corruption protests toppled the government, he became the first Bulgarian head of state to step down from the presidency and announced his candidacy for prime minister. During his campaign, Radev “cast himself as an opponent of the country’s entrenched mafia and its ties to high-ranking politicians,” said The Associated Press.

‘A more pro-Russian stance’

Radev has largely “positioned himself as the populist standard-bearer for anti-corruption protests that brought down the government in December,” said The Washington Post. But many in Europe are concerned about his potential friendliness with the Kremlin. During his campaign, Radev made it clear his government will take a “more pro-Russian stance, consistently opposing aid to Ukraine and saying he wanted to restore relations with Moscow.”

The new prime minister has also criticized the European Union and “called for a new security architecture in Europe, echoing a key Kremlin drive,” said the Post. If tensions were to continue rising between Bulgaria’s new government and the EU, it could cause financial strain in the country, as “Bulgaria’s economy is heavily dependent on EU funding.” Radev’s easy victory in the election could also “strengthen his hand in opposing a proposed EU ban on imported Russian energy supplies.”

Other analysts believe that Radev’s Russian coziness is more of a political tactic. Radev will probably be “unlikely to seek to be disruptive in relations within the European Union,” Vessela Tcherneva, the deputy director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, said to The New York Times. In the “coming economic crisis, he would not risk the freezing of EU funds.” Radev’s EU criticism, particularly “regarding financial and military support for Ukraine or sanctions against Russia,” will be “aimed primarily at the domestic audience” and may not translate into action, Maria Simeonova of the European Council on Foreign Relations told the Times.

Some pro-democracy activists feel that Radev’s win could give Bulgaria its “best chance in recent history to do away with the stranglehold of corruption and the weak, unstable governments that have plagued it for decades,” said the Times. Radev’s 44% margin of victory may allow him to create a strong coalition, which could “enact structural and constitutional reforms to tackle the corruption that has stymied Bulgaria’s institutions.”

Former fighter pilot Rumen Radev led his party into Bulgaria’s parliamentary election promising to take on the “corrupt officials, conspirators and extremists” he claimed had run the country into the ground.

Voters responded on Sunday by handing his newly formed Progressive Bulgaria (PB) coalition the “single biggest vote haul in a ‌generation”, which “paves the way for greater political stability after eight elections in five years”, said Reuters.

“This is a victory of hope over mistrust, a victory of freedom over fear,” the 62-year-old Radev said after his landslide victory. Bulgarians had “rejected the complacency and arrogance of the old parties and did not succumb to lies and manipulation”.

Corruption crusader

Radev rose through the ranks of the Bulgarian air force to become a major general and finally head of the service. A relative latecomer to politics, he was elected to the largely ceremonial role of president in 2016. He held the position for nine years, keeping himself above the chaos and corruption scandals that have dominated Bulgarian politics in recent years.

In January he resigned, forming his new PB movement to run in the election after massive anti-corruption protests brought down the previous government. On Sunday he won just under 45% of the vote, giving Bulgaria its first parliamentary majority in nearly 30 years.

The “main factors” driving Radev’s victory were “deep frustration over years of futile anti-corruption efforts, concern over rising prices… and a potent mix of pro-Russian sentiment”, said Atanas Rusev, from the Center for the Study of Democracy in Sofia. “Radev played astutely on all these anxieties.”

The result “raises expectations of an end to the country’s cycle of short-lived coalition governments”, said Deutsche Welle. Radev had pledged to “crack down on corruption, tackle inflation and pursue a more independent foreign policy within the EU – one that does not exclude dialogue with Russia”.

EU tightrope

A Radev-led government is “bad news for Ukraine and would represent a significant win for Russia”, said Jan Surotchak on the Atlantic Council think tank. In the short term, his victory will “likely mean an end to Bulgarian ammunition supplies to Ukraine, forcing Nato to seek other sources”. The US-backed northern corridor for energy supplies to Eastern Europe could also “lose out in favour of Turk Stream, the last major energy pipeline bringing Russian gas to Europe”.

Radev’s winning message has been a “cocktail of anti-corruption pledges, Euro-scepticism and pledges to rebuild ties with Moscow, spooking some EU and Nato diplomats”, said the Financial Times. But “while his outreach to Russia may be symbolically valuable to the Kremlin, it is likely to be far less consequential in practice” than the recently deposed Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán, who “routinely vetoed EU decisions in order to benefit Moscow”.

“Unlike in Hungary the political cleavage here between the anti-corruption platform and the anti-Russia platform is wide, so those two messages won’t reinforce each other in quite the same seismic way,” said Vessela Tcherneva, from the European Council on Foreign Relations.

“Maintaining a strategic ambiguity towards Russia and the EU” while focusing on his anti-corruption message helped Radev secure an absolute majority, winning votes from both the far-right and progressives, said The Guardian. This may bring the country “political stability” but “leave it walking a tightrope on EU issues”.

From ordering groceries online to using AI to write emails, technology is making life exponentially easier. But while that may be appealing, it has also become a crutch, and constantly outsourcing our thinking can be detrimental in the long term, according to experts. A new trend called friction maxxing seeks to reintroduce discordance into our lives.

‘Building up tolerance for inconvenience’

Tech companies are succeeding in “making us think of life itself as inconvenient” and an endeavor we should be “continuously escaping” from into “digital padded rooms of predictive algorithms and single-tap commands,” sociologist ​​Kathryn Jezer-Morton said at The Cut. The businesses have invested “as much money as possible in friction-elimination tools that effectively dehumanize users.”

It is a method that is “especially evil” because our “love of escaping is one of humanity’s most poetically problematic tendencies, and now it’s being used against us,” said Jezer-Morton. Enter “friction maxxing,” which isn’t “simply a matter of reducing your screen time.” Rather, it requires “building up tolerance for inconvenience” and then “reaching toward enjoyment.”

Friction-maxxing practices could include navigating by road signs instead of Google Maps or arranging to meet up with friends without sharing your location. Or it could mean eschewing ChatGPT for information that could be gleaned from a book or asking other people. Each of these acts may seem insignificant, but an “orientation toward friction is really the only defense we have against the life-annihilating suction of technologies of escape,” said Jezer-Morton.

Friction maxxing may “play a valuable role in reorienting yourself away from tech dependency” and back toward “embracing the effort that makes people feel genuinely alive and fulfilled,” Mashable said. No one needs to optimize their life in “pursuit of a proverbial gold star.”

The effect of frictionless living

Despite how easy technology advancements have made simple tasks, “living a frictionless life may not be the best for your cognitive function over time,” said The Washington Post. It is basically “having a personal trainer lift the weights for you,” neuroscientist Lila Landowski said to the Post.

Over time, frictionless living could be detrimental because brain functions like learning, memory and focused attention are “use it or lose it,” brain health researcher Marc Milstein, the author of “The Age-Proof Brain,” said to the Post. You need to practice these skills to maintain them. If you’re not regularly challenging your brain, those skills can erode, he said.

And the benefit of friction maxxing isn’t just in boosting cognitive abilities. It also helps to create a more meaningful life said, Emily Falk, a professor and author of “What We Value,” to the Post. If you value building social skills, for example, the ease of writing an email with AI may not align with your values and may make life feel less meaningful. When we “make choices that seem immediately rewarding but don’t take a step back to ask if those choices are compatible with big-picture goals and values, we can get in trouble.”

Many of our decisions about convenience are driven by “short-term emotions,” said Forbes. It feels good to order delivery “because you remove the worry of your kids messing up the ingredients you need to cook.” It feels good to scroll “because you know getting into a challenging book will feel lousy (at least initially).” On the other hand, if you can “learn to grapple with these pesky emotions head-on, the long-term benefits are big.”

Our comfort with friction is “under attack,” and we “bear the responsibility of keeping friction intact as part of our families’ lives” and should “notice the ways that it’s being sanded away for profit,” Jezer-Morton said. Perhaps this is an opportunity to “think more clearly than we ever have about what is interesting and essential about being human.” We have never before “had a chance to see our own humanity so clearly,” but now, with “tech innovation bearing down on us so hard, we can’t take it for granted anymore.”

He was once celebrated as Australia’s “uber-soldier”, said Michael Bachelard in The Sydney Morning Herald. Ben Roberts-Smith, a towering 6ft 7in corporal in the Special Air Service Regiment (SAS), had a “bulging chest full of medals” by the time he returned from his sixth tour of Afghanistan in 2012, including the Victoria Cross, for his bravery against the Taliban.

Australia’s most-decorated living soldier was soon very much in the public eye: there was a display devoted to him in the Australian War Memorial’s Afghanistan gallery; he was named “father of the year” in 2013; he even attended the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II in 2022.

However, for years, war reporters had heard “whispers” about his conduct. And from 2018, Roberts-Smith was dogged with allegations of war crimes. Five years later, he lost a defamation case against three newspapers that had alleged that he was involved in unlawful killings in Afghanistan.

Now, so many years on, he has been arrested, said Ben Smee in The Guardian – an episode that “has cut deeply to the core of the Australian psyche”. Roberts-Smith now sits on remand in Sydney’s Silverwater prison, having been charged with five counts of the war crime of murder, dating from 2009 to 2012. If convicted, the 47-year-old faces life imprisonment.

‘Trial by media’

“The wheels of justice are famously slow to turn,” said The Age (Melbourne), “but even by their standards, 17 years is a long time to wait.”

It was in a place known as Whiskey 108, in Uruzgan province, on Easter Sunday in 2009 that Roberts-Smith – who maintains his innocence – is alleged to have shot a detained Afghan man at point-blank range. The victim’s prosthetic leg was reportedly removed as a trophy of war and used as a beer-drinking receptacle by Australian troops. Then, in September 2012, Roberts-Smith is said to have kicked a handcuffed man off a cliff in the village of Darwan, before ordering one of his subordinates to execute him, in a “blooding” ritual.

These accusations have been tested in court before, to a civil standard of proof, when a judge determined that on the balance of probabilities, he had committed murder. His former comrades testified against him; incriminating photos, found hidden in his garden, were shown in court. Unfortunately, there may be many more such cases to come. A judicial report in 2020 found credible evidence that Australian servicemen had played a role in the deaths of 39 Afghan non-combatants in 23 incidents.

For too long, Roberts-Smith and other veterans have been subjected to “trial by media”, without “the opportunity for a fair response”, said Martin Hamilton-Smith in The Daily Telegraph (Sydney). So it’s good that he will finally have his day in court, when the claims against him will be properly tested.

Beyond reasonable doubt

Roberts-Smith is of course innocent until proven guilty, said Andrew Bolt in the Herald Sun (Melbourne). Criminal courts need to find defendants guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Yet it is shocking that so many public figures – the former PM Tony Abbott, the right-wing senator Pauline Hanson, the country’s richest person, Gina Rinehart – have leapt to his defence, as if it’s the “patriotic thing” to do. They claim that “a war hero is being persecuted by woke civilians judging soldiers in battle from the comfort of their sofas”. This is completely wrong. Alleged crimes of this magnitude cannot go uninvestigated.

What makes the Roberts-Smith case “extraordinary” is that prosecutors do not have any of the evidence they would normally need for this kind of case, said The Australian (Sydney): forensics from the crime scene, contemporaneous witness statements. It will be a test for the legal system, in the full glare of the media. But Australians should maintain confidence in due process, and refrain from jumping to conclusions by either damning Roberts-Smith or excusing him. The claims must be heard in full. The rule of law is a “core” Australian value, and even our heroes are not beyond its reach.

On the champions’ podium of 1980s action cinema, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone “fought over gold and silver position”, said Ryan Gilbey in The Guardian. “Bronze belonged indisputably to Chuck Norris, who has died aged 86.”

Origin story

He was an expert martial artist, a six-time world middleweight karate champion who ran his own chain of dojos in California. Among his pupils in the mid-1960s was Steve McQueen, who suggested that he should pursue a screen career.

A spectacular fight sequence with Bruce Lee in “The Way of the Dragon” in 1972 – in which he played a rare villainous role – led to a series of “gung-ho” action pictures, such as “Missing in Action” (1984) and “Invasion U.S.A.” (1985). Violent and unsophisticated they may have been, but Norris insisted on the soundness of the philosophy behind them. “I don’t initiate violence, I retaliate,” he said.

He was born Carlos Ray Norris in Ryan, Oklahoma, in 1940, to parents of mixed Irish and Cherokee descent. His father, Ray, who had fought in the Battle of the Bulge, was an alcoholic, “and his long binges crippled the family finances and burdened his waitress wife, Wilma”, said The Times. She moved with her three sons – one of whom, Wieland, was later killed in Vietnam – to LA. There Carlos attended Torrance High School, but was bullied for being mixed race, unathletic and cripplingly shy.

At 18 he joined the US air force as a policeman, and in 1958 was sent to Osan, South Korea, where he acquired the nickname Chuck, and became interested in martial arts such as taekwondo and tang soo do, a version of karate. Back at home, while on the waiting list to join the Los Angeles police, he opened a martial arts school in his mother’s backyard, and found that it fulfilled him. His first acting role was a small part as a heavy in Dean Martin’s “The Wrecking Crew” (1968); his first starring vehicle came a decade later.

What took him into the mainstream was the 1980s vogue for films “that chimed with the national mood of wanting a resurgent America to hit back after its humiliation in Vietnam”. In “Missing in Action”, he rescued PoWs from Vietnam while showcasing his martial arts prowess. An even bigger hit was “The Delta Force” (1986), in which he and Lee Marvin fought terrorists in the Middle East. McQueen had reputedly advised Norris after seeing his first films that he should aim for “less dialogue”, and this approach won out, particularly in his best-known success, the TV drama “Walker, Texas Ranger”.

For eight seasons from 1993, he played a lone-wolf lawman with “a black belt and an iron will”. At the peak of his fame, two men tried to mug him in Dallas. When the police arrived, they found the men with broken arms, knives on the ground and Norris, then 54, waiting quietly. “We knew who he was,” the men said. “We just figured that all that stuff on television was fake.”

“The transformation of his life often awed him,” said The Economist. Born into miserable poverty in the Oklahoma backwoods, he was now in a place where the public, “half-joking, thought he could do anything”. By the early 2000s, his hardman persona had made him an ironic cult hero, and a long trail of “Chuck Norris facts” started appearing online: claiming that he made onions cry; that Superman wore Chuck Norris pyjamas; that he was the only person who could slam a revolving door.

Norris had always been on the conservative, evangelical Right, said The Telegraph; he was a staunch Reaganite in the 1980s. In 2008, he published “Black Belt Patriotism: How to Reawaken America”. In 2016, he endorsed Donald Trump. Norris married Dianne Kay Holechek in 1958; they had two sons but divorced in 1989. In 1998, he married Gena O’Kelley; they had twin daughters. He also had a daughter from another relationship.

“Our season continues exactly as planned, uninterrupted and at full throttle,” wrote LIV Golf’s chief executive, Scott O’Neil, in an email to staff on Wednesday night, hours after an emergency meeting in New York over a “seismic” funding announcement.

“But what about beyond this season?” said The Telegraph. O’Neil’s email was an “attempt to calm ferocious speculation” that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund (PIF) is “pulling the plug” on the franchise, a project into which it has already sunk $5 billion (£3.7 billion).

With the future of the controversial tour under threat, a change in Saudi Arabia’s investment priorities could spell the beginning of the end for its sporting soft power.

‘Dying days’

“Farewell, LIV Golf, we hardly knew ye,” said The Independent. Four years after initiating a “prolonged and ultimately pointless civil war” with the PGA, “LIV is dead, or at least in its dying days”. There had been “signs of creaking” for some time now, with major stars like Brooks Koepka and Patrick Reed departing, and “more would surely have followed, given time”. Fundamentally, though, the tour couldn’t ever quite “shake” the sense that the players were “doing it for the money”.

LIV Golf was “supposed to be the breakaway tour that changed golf as we know it”, said BBC Sport. Though it “certainly managed to disrupt the status quo” with the help of an “eye-watering” amount of money from the PIF, it has failed to make returns. The tour’s net losses have totalled more than “more than $1.1 billon (£810 million) since it was established in 2021”; even O’Neil admitted that the tour would not be profitable for another “five-ten years”.

If they ever make a documentary about LIV, “it will look a lot like the one about that calamitous Fyre Festival”, said Sean O’Brien on TalkSport. The dominant narrative is of Saudi Arabia trying to buy “disruption, influence, and a seat at the table with professional golf’s establishment”. Some of the game’s big names who rejected offers to join the tour, such as Tiger Woods, Scottie Scheffler and Ryder Cup and recent Masters winner Rory McIlroy, have been shown to be “on the right side of history”. McIlroy, in particular, was thought to have turned down an offer in excess of Jon Rahm’s reported £500 million contract. In the end, the tour’s only purpose was to “make rich men absurdly richer”.

Changing world

The change in Saudi Arabia’s stance comes as the PIF announced a new five-year strategy on Wednesday to make up a budget deficit of $73 billion. It is expected to “narrow” its funding focus and take stock of a “decade-long spending splurge”, said the Financial Times. One thing’s for sure, the Kingdom’s apparent coldness towards LIV Golf “will reverberate through professional sport”.

The focus for Riyadh has always been money, and diversifying its economic interest away from oil, said The i Paper. Though there was enthusiasm from “golf-mad” PIF governor Yasir al-Rumayyan, “all that matters” to Saudi sovereign Mohammed bin Salman – “who wouldn’t know a five-iron from gridiron” – is return on investment.

For a while, the soft power of sport was a “critical driver” in Saudi Arabia’s repositioning, but the “world has changed since then”. Criticism of the country’s approach to human rights has, “if not washed clean off”, then at least “shunted down the list of global concerns”, while the Iran war has “reinforced the strategic and diplomatic importance of Saudi Arabia in the Middle East”.

This is unlikely to mean a complete retreat from the sporting world, however. The Kingdom is still a major investor in F1 and football, including as hosts of the 2034 men’s World Cup. For now, Riyadh will focus on events that “serve a PR purpose” or “promise a return on investment”. “Golf falls outside both metrics.”

President Donald Trump has nothing if not an active imagination. Since taking office, he has pitched multiple ostensibly revolutionary products and plans to the nation. Some are material planks of his America First agenda, while others are seemingly speculative flights of questionable feasibility. Whether touting settlements on Mars or “freedom cities” at home, Trump has never been at a loss for ideas about the next big thing.

Aliens

In February 2026, Trump said in a post on Truth Social that he had directed his administration to identify and release government files containing “any and all other information” about the “highly complex but extremely interesting and important” matter of aliens, UFOs and other extraterrestrial phenomena. Trump should “peel back the layers of that onion, let America decide if we can handle it,” Tennessee Republican Rep. Tim Burchett said in a Fox News interview two months later. “I think we can handle it.”

Even with Trump’s “presidential intent,” federal bureaucracy and legal safeguards will determine “whether the files are ever fully revealed,” said CNN. Those hoping for immediate bombshells may want to “temper expectations a bit,” said Christopher Mellon, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense for intelligence, to the outlet. UFO hunters should expect, at minimum, a “fairly long, and probably a bit of a slow process.”

Golden Dome

As one of the first executive orders of his second term, Trump in January 2025 directed the implementation of a “next-generation missile defense shield for the United States against ballistic, hypersonic, advanced cruise missiles and other next-generation aerial attacks,” said The White House. Dubbed the “Iron Dome for America” at the time, there has been “little progress” made on the since-renamed Golden Dome system, with “internal misalignment on the administration’s plans for the architecture causing delays,” National Defense said.

At the “heart” of the networked satellite defense system would be “space-based interceptors” designed to “find and destroy enemy missiles and drones in the early stages,” said Gizmodo. That technology, however, “does not exist yet and is deemed theoretically ineffective and impractical.” Nevertheless, Golden Dome will demonstrate “operational capability by the summer” of 2028, said project director Gen. Michael Guetlein to lawmakers earlier this month, per The Washington Examiner. He also admitted that pace-based interceptors may not be part of the “final architecture as originally envisioned” if the tech is shown to be “prohibitively costly,” said Breaking Defense.

Boots on Mars

While speaking remotely with NASA astronaut Peggy Whitson in 2017, the president said he would like to see a manned mission to Mars “during my first term or at worst during my second term.” The United States will “lead the world in space and reach Mars before the end of my term,” Trump said in the closing days of his 2024 reelection campaign, reiterating the promise of historic planetary exploration alongside major donor, SpaceX CEO and future-DOGE chief Elon Musk. Under his leadership, Trump said at his second inaugural address in 2025, America will “pursue our Manifest Destiny” by sending astronauts to “plant the stars and stripes on the planet Mars,” a message he returned to in his address to Congress that year.

In a memo to NASA in late 2025, Trump “confirmed that he wants to send astronauts back to the moon” instead, thereby “putting eventual Mars missions on the back burner,” Le Monde said. A manned Mars mission would “likely cost hundreds of billions of dollars spread over a number of years,” said Nature. NASA, however, spends “$25 billion a year on all of its programs,” and faces further potential budget cuts from the administration.

Freedom Cities

In the lead-up to the 2024 election, Trump campaigned on establishing “Freedom Cities,” tracts of federal land where businesses could “focus on technological innovation” and potential homeowners would revel in futuristic patriotism, said Politifact. At the time, Trump’s campaign advisers framed the proposal as comparable to “Abraham Lincoln’s campaign for the transcontinental railroad, Teddy Roosevelt’s vision for a national park service and Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Interstate Highway System,” said Politico. By March 2025, multiple interest groups had begun “drafting Congressional legislation” to advance the development of Freedom Cities “where anti-aging clinical trials, nuclear reactor startups and building construction can proceed without having to get prior approval” from the associated federal agencies, Wired said.

Concurrently, Trump’s efforts to acquire Greenland have been met with interest from “some Silicon Valley tech investors” envisioning their own “libertarian utopia with minimal corporate regulation” on an American-controlled Island, Reuters said. The notion has been “taken seriously” by U.S. Ambassador to Denmark Ken Howery, although Greenland remains, for now, in Denmark’s control. Despite his utopian campaign promises, Trump “hasn’t lent any rhetorical weight to the idea recently,” Politifact said in February. It is possible that “preliminary work undertaken by outside groups will eventually be reflected in tangible developments.”

Medbed

In September 2025, the president shared a since-deleted video to Truth Social promoting “access to new medical technology” in the form of a “cure-all bed” with roots in “conspiratorial corners of the internet,” said CNN. “Every American” will have “their own medbed card” granting access to medbed hospitals, an AI-generated Trump said in footage “intended to resemble a Fox News segment” hosted by daughter-in-law Lara Trump. Why was the footage AI? Because “no one has an actual photo” of a medbed, said McGill University’s Office for Science and Society. “Let’s be clear, they don’t exist.”

Trump is “transparent,” said White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt when asked about why the president shared a doctored video of a nonexistent technology on Fox News. “He likes to share memes and videos,” she said, calling it “refreshing” that Trump is “so open and honest.”

The internet is rife with trends promising to optimize your body, and right now, peptides are the It drug. Available as injectables, intravenous infusions, pills and nasal sprays, the chains of amino acids are rumored to help with weight loss, anti-aging and rapid muscle repair. But government restrictions have led to an increase in gray-market sales of peptides — something its champions hope to change soon.

New wonder drug?

The human body naturally produces peptides. They have fewer amino acids than larger proteins and are responsible for sending messages or regulating the body’s systems. Researchers have known about some peptides for decades, and “dozens have been turned into safe and effective drugs,” said The New Yorker. The hormone insulin, for example, is a peptide that “moves sugar from the bloodstream into cells” and is used to treat diabetes.

The drugs that are driving the current wellness trend are part of a broad category of synthetic short-chain amino acids that includes “familiar, well-studied items like insulin and GLP-1 weight loss drugs,” said Stat News. Unlike those two FDA-approved uses, however, the peptides being touted by some influential figures in the health sphere are part of a “thicket of newer drugs with catchy names like BPC-157, TB-500 and CJC-1295.” Most of them have “comparatively little research” to support claims that they can “treat injuries and chronic pain, increase muscle, slow down the aging process and boost energy.”

Off-label use of peptides was initially popular among bodybuilders. Still, in the “era of Make America Healthy Again,” their popularity has risen among the general public, said The New Yorker. Compounding pharmacies are experiencing soaring demand, and imports of gray-market peptides and hormones from China nearly doubled last year, The New York Times said. Influencers like looksmaxxer Clavicular and podcaster Joe Rogan, as well as Health Secretary Robert. F. Kennedy Jr., are among those singing their praises.

Part of the appeal of peptides is the “promise of autonomy,” Stat News said. The idea is that if you “take the right blend of drugs, along with good nutrition and exercise,” it’s “possible to DIY your way into optimal health.” This coincides with the “right-to-try” philosophy touted by physician Gabrielle Lyon on celebrity fitness trainer Jillian Michaels’ Keeping It Real podcast last year. People should “have physical autonomy,” Lyon said during a discussion about peptides, and as long as it doesn’t hurt them, “they should be able to choose.”

Kennedy comes for the gray market

In 2023, during Biden’s administration, the FDA placed 14 peptides on a “do not compound” list due to “potential significant safety risks,” which included immune reactions, pancreatitis and accelerated growth of cancerous cells. In February, Kennedy said the FDA would make changes to make their use more acceptable. “I’m a big fan of peptides,” Kennedy said on The Joe Rogan Experience podcast, adding that he “used them myself to really good effect on a couple of injuries.”

A senior Health Department official said the FDA plans to “aggressively enforce rules against making false or misleading claims about medical benefits” while moving forward in allowing compounding pharmacies to produce the injectable peptides, said the Times. The agency is also planning to convene its Pharmacy Compounding Advisory Committee. That group is likely to “consider whether there is a medical justification for the peptides” and vote on adding them to a list of products that compounding pharmacies can legally use.

Lifting the restrictions on peptides would be done in an effort to curtail the use of “very substandard” gray-market products, Kennedy said to Rogan. He wants people to have access to “ethical suppliers.” However, such logic could set a dangerous precedent. If you “applied that argument more generally,” it would “prevent the government from banning almost any substance that people widely demand,” said Lewis Grossman, a professor and the author of “Choose Your Medicine: Freedom of Therapeutic Choice in America,” to Stat News.

Proponents of the peptide movement remain unmoved. Critics will say, “if the FDA were to do this, this will create the Wild West,” Brigham Buhler, a compounding pharmacy owner, said to the Times. “And my rebuttal to that is: We are living in the Wild West.”

David Szalay was “praised by the judges for its originality” when his pared-back novel, “Flesh”, scooped the Booker Prize last year, said The Times. “Yet some readers have found it strangely familiar.”

Critics have noticed “striking similarities” between “Flesh” and Stanley Kubrick’s 1975 film “Barry Lyndon”, which itself is adapted from William Thackeray’s 1844 novel. While some are “flummoxed” by Szalay’s reluctance to acknowledge the extent of the parallels, others are convinced he is “playing a game with readers, sending them on a literary treasure hunt”.

‘Near-identical trajectories’

With its “sparse prose” and constant repetition of the word ‘OK’, the British-Hungarian author’s novel caused quite a stir when it won the 2025 Booker Prize, said The Independent. The awards chair, Roddy Doyle, said the panel of judges had “never read anything quite like it”.

The rags-to-riches tale begins in Hungary, where 15-year-old Istvan lives with his mother in a housing estate. While the eponymous lead in “Barry Lyndon” hails from Ireland, the characters “follow near-identical trajectories: they enlist in the army, marry wealthy women, grieve their sons and clash with their stepsons, and lose everything they have earned later in their lives”.

Despite the almost indistinguishable plot, few critics pointed this out when “Flesh” won the Booker Prize. One of the first to note the similarities was writer Aled Maclean-Jones who in November 2025 described “Flesh” as “quite clearly a near beat-for-beat mirror” both of Thackeray’s novel and Kubrick’s movie, “to such a level I’d almost call it a retelling”, in a post on Substack.

“Szalay has the whole plot, the entire arc, supplied to him”, said David Sexton in The Standard. “There is nothing remotely wrong about it. It’s not plagiarism. Indeed it could be considered a vital tribute to a fantastic film”.

Reader ‘sleuthing’

When Szalay appeared on Dua Lipa’s “Service95 Book Club” podcast he listed five books including “Hamlet” and Virginia Woolf’s “Jacob’s Room” as having influenced “Flesh”, said The Independent. But he made no mention of Thackeray’s novel or Kubrick’s film.

Asked directly whether he had “Barry Lyndon” in mind when writing “Flesh”, he told Anthony Cummins in The Observer that he had seen the film when he was 20, “and the rags-to-riches arc was an influence”.

But in an episode of BBC Radio 4’s “This Cultural Life” due to air this week, Szalay “downplays the connection”, said The Times. When asked about whether the film is a “direct reference”, the author tells host John Wilson, “No, I wouldn’t go that far”, adding “Kubrick wasn’t really at the front of my mind, I don’t think.”

“I don’t understand why, at this stage, he won’t own up to it more”, Sexton told The Times. But Cummins had his own theory. “I think he is more artful than people are willing to credit”, he told the newspaper. The similarities could be “more akin to ‘Easter eggs’ in films, hidden messages for fans” to try and find. Perhaps he feels, “‘Why spoil it by talking people through the book in that way?’ There’s fun for the reader in sleuthing”.

When Prince Harry and wife Meghan visited Australia in 2018 as working royals they were “welcomed by rapturous crowds”, said The Guardian. There was “little sign” of that “ecstatic reception” today when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who stepped down as working members of the royal family in 2020, arrived in Melbourne, said Reuters.

The couple have embarked on a tour that includes “engagements covering sport, mental health and veterans’ affairs”, but in their capacity as private citizens – an arrangement that has raised some eyebrows among their hosts.

Commercial activities  

During their four-day visit Harry will make a solo stop-off in the capital, Canberra, to meet military veterans. He and Meghan will then attend a ⁠mental health summit in Melbourne before rounding off the joint leg of their trip with sailing and rugby events in Sydney. It “still looks very much like a royal visit” even though “officially, it very much is not”, said ABC News.

But unlike on their previous visit, they’ll also “undertake commercial activities”, said Reuters. Meghan will host a wellness retreat at a luxury beachside hotel in Sydney, which will include yoga, manifestation and sound healing. Tickets cost A$2,699 (£1,417) including accommodation, or A$3,199 (£1,680) for a more VIP experience, including a group table photo with Meghan.

Meanwhile, Harry will be a star speaker at InterEdge’s “psychosocial safety” summit, a two-day professional development event with ticket prices as high as A$2,378 (£1,249) for the platinum option. For both of them, their sojourn in Australia is not only “private” but also “promotional”, said The Guardian.

Royal expert Giselle Bastin told the ABC that the commercial aspect of the tour was “unusual” and said the royal family would not be impressed that the Sussexes were “monetising their visit to Australia”.

Quasi-royal disaster

The “quasi-royal tour” was “already a disaster” before they set off, said The Times last month. “Early signs” showed that Australians “aren’t all that excited about their visit”; a recent Ipsos Australia poll found that only 40% of Australians view Harry favourably, while 46% view him unfavourably. Meghan “fares even worse”, with 55% holding a negative view of the US-born duchess.

The “honour” of this visit “comes with a hefty price tag”, said Bevan Shields in The Sydney Morning Herald. Although their travel expenses for the visit are being privately funded, ⁠local media reported that some of the policing costs would be paid by Australian taxpayers. Harry and Meghan are “laser-focused on building a healthy bank balance” now that their lucrative deal with Spotify has “imploded” and most of their Netflix projects have “fallen flat”. “Does anyone seriously believe they are coming to our shores for reasons other than financial and reputational?”. Our warm welcome back in 2018 clearly made Australians “look like a soft target”, so now they are back to “use us as an ATM”.

I “can’t begrudge them trying to make a living”, said Hello! magazine’s royal editor, Emily Nash. The reception of the Australia tour will be a “real litmus test for what else they may do this year”, with an Africa visit potentially on the cards, but it is also “something for the wider royal family to watch”. “The sorry saga” of the former prince Andrew and ex-wife Sarah Ferguson is a “reminder of how blurred the lines can become when titles and influence are mixed with personal gain”. If the Sussexes are able to “effectively operate alongside the working royals, but outside the carefully managed framework that governs royal duties”, that would represent a “headache” for the King.

The Department of Justice has opened a probe into the National Football League, exploring whether the sports juggernaut engaged in anticompetitive practices through the various streaming packages it offers viewers. While the league’s increasingly complex subscription structures may represent a legally actionable transgression, the DOJ’s investigation does not exist in a bubble. It follows years of hostility between the president and the NFL.

‘Fragmented viewing experience’

The Justice Department is investigating whether the NFL’s “deals with streaming services are leading fans to pay too much to watch pro football on TV,” said NPR. The Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961 permitted the league to let teams “negotiate for the media rights together,” but critics argue that more regulation may be necessary, as “this isn’t the same marketplace anymore.”

The rising costs of airing high-profile events are being “propelled in part” by demand from “deep-pocketed tech companies hoping to woo subscribers and advertisers,” said The Wall Street Journal. To meet that demand, the NFL has “increasingly sliced off smaller packages of games” for individual streaming services, resulting in a “more fragmented viewing experience” for consumers.

Within the NFL, there’s a sense that the Murdoch family, which owns Fox Corporation, is the “key driver behind the DOJ probe,” said ESPN. Murdoch’s media empire has “turned the cost of streaming into a hobby horse issue,” said league insiders to the outlet. This comes amid a “growing bipartisan anti-streaming sentiment in Washington” and during a Trump administration that has “at times targeted the league.”

‘Revenge tour’

Trump has a “long history” of “weighing in on the fortunes of football,” said The Independent. He condemned former quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s refusal to stand for the national anthem and demanded the Washington Commanders return to their racially insensitive original name. But Trump’s “grievance” with the league “stretches back further, to at least 1984,” when he unsuccessfully attempted to launch a new franchise for the sport.

Trump has “tried to get into the NFL a couple times since then” — defeats that now fuel the president’s “revenge tour for the league humiliating him and permanently barring him from the cool kids’ table,” said Above the Law. “If they screw me over, I’m gonna show them,” Trump allegedly said in 2014, broadcaster Stephen A. Smith told ESPN. “I’m gonna get them all back. I’m going to run for president of the United States.”

The NFL is “absolutely using its power to squeeze the media,” and the media, in turn, is “passing that on to the consumer,” said Above the Law. But this administration let Ticketmaster’s monopoly “walk” and put itself behind a “consumer-crushing media merger” on behalf of Paramount’s purchase of Warner Bros. Discovery. In that context, Trump and his administration “don’t care about sports fans getting gouged.”

The difference between federal officials moving against the Sports Broadcasting Act now and Trump’s other tangles with the NFL is that there are Democrats “aligned" with the Department of Justice in this instance, said ESPN. Congress could repeal and pass new laws to further regulate NFL viewing options, but the lengthy legislative and legal process means fans “might not notice any significant difference to the way they watch games anytime soon.”

In shops, offices and bars across Spain, a single story has been monopolising conversation, said Enrique Aparicio in El Público (Madrid). The case of 25-year-old Noelia Castillo, whose life was ended by euthanasia in a Barcelona hospital last month, has “stirred the entire country”, sparking a fierce debate about an assisted-dying law introduced in 2021.

Castillo had had a troubled life; she'd spent her teen years in state-run foster care, had suffered several sexual assaults, and in 2022 was gang raped by three men. Days after that, she threw herself out of a fifth-floor window. The suicide attempt left her paralysed and in chronic pain with depression: insisting that her life was no longer worth living, she asked that it be ended. However her father, backed by a religious advocacy group called Christian Lawyers, claimed that given her fragile mental state, she was in no position to give meaningful consent to an assisted death.

‘Unnecessary suffering’

It's appalling the way in which Castillo was denied the right to a dignified death, said El País (Madrid). Her euthanasia had been unanimously approved, as the law requires, by two doctors, a lawyer and a review and oversight body; and it had been scheduled to take place on 2 August 2024. But then the legal challenges started to roll in, and it was only on 10 March this year, when the European Court of Human Rights rejected the final appeal by Christian Lawyers, that they came to an end. And so her “unnecessary suffering” was prolonged for a “devastating” 601 days, and in the full glare of media attention.

No, that puts everything the wrong way round, said Javier Redondo in El Mundo (Madrid). The assisted-dying law was supposed to provide a “dignified death” for terminally ill patients languishing “bedridden, paralysed and intubated; in agony”. It was not meant for young people like Castillo, who “lacked hope for the life ahead”. This case has fundamentally shifted the “boundaries of euthanasia”.

‘Abandoned’ by society

Indeed, the noise of this scandal should reverberate “far beyond the borders of Spain”, said Laurent Frémont in Le Figaro (Paris). It lays bare a society that no longer knows how to look after its most needy citizens. At every turn, Castillo was failed by the state: it took her from her family when she was a teenager and put her in foster care; she was still in the state's care when she was gang raped; and finally, instead of providing the psychiatric care she so badly needed, the state granted her a medically assisted death. In short, she was “abandoned by the institution” meant to take her family's place.

We need to be careful here, said Pedro García Cuartango on ABC (Madrid). I myself am morally opposed to euthanasia, and I too view Noelia Castillo's death as a societal failure. Yet we must acknowledge that the assisted-dying law was passed by an absolute majority in parliament and thus has full political legitimacy. We may hate the outcome, but in the clash between the law and our moral convictions, we in the end have to accept the law.

“WE GOT HIM!” Donald Trump’s announcement on Sunday that the second of two US airmen had been rescued from “deep inside” Iran struck a “triumphant” tone, said Jonathan Sacerdoti in The Spectator – and no wonder.

The rescue brought to an end an episode that had begun on Friday, when a US air force F-15E Strike Eagle was shot down over southwestern Iran – the first time a US fighter jet had been downed by hostile fire since the 2003 Gulf War. Both crew members had “ejected safely”. But while one was quickly recovered by US forces, the second, a weapons systems officer, was stranded for 36 hours, as the two sides raced to find him.

Iran, eyeing a propaganda victory, offered a £50,000 reward for his capture, said Paul Nuki in The Telegraph. Washington, in turn, was desperate to avoid a humiliation evoking memories of the botched US attempt to rescue 53 embassy staff held hostage by Iran in 1980. In the end, Trump was able to celebrate what he called “one of the most daring search and rescue operations in US history”.

“Deep behind enemy lines”, seriously hurt, and armed only with a pistol, the officer had been in a terrifying position, said Guy Adams in the Daily Mail. But his “survival, evasion, resistance and escape” (SERE) training kicked in, and he scaled a 7,000ft ridge in the Zagros Mountains, before hiding in a crevice and using a satellite device to report his location.

The CIA, meanwhile, hatched a “deception plan”, spreading word in Iran that it was moving the airman out of the country on the ground, said Greg Jaffe in The New York Times. Then, on Saturday night, the US launched a “vast and complex” rescue mission. Two MC-130 troop planes carrying more than 100 special forces commandos landed on a disused airfield near Isfahan, which they used as a forward operating base. Drones and jets provided air cover, striking Iranian forces that came near. Then commandos used mini-helicopters to reach the mountains, extract the weapons officer, and fly him back to the airfield.

It was here that a major hiccup occurred, said Dan Sabbagh in The Guardian. The troop carrier planes became bogged down in the soil and had to be destroyed by the US to avoid them falling into enemy hands, while new planes were flown in. Although the US did get all its troops out, suffering no casualties, it lost hardware worth about $250 million (£185 million). The episode as a whole was a reminder that, for all America’s military superiority, Iran “can fight back” – and it would only need to “get lucky once” in this asymmetric conflict to secure a major propaganda victory.

A chorus of high-profile right-wing figureheads including Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly and Alex Jones recently criticized President Donald Trump’s ongoing Iran war. The president responded by denouncing them as “NUT JOBS” and “TROUBLEMAKERS” in a lengthy social media statement, essentially making them persona non-MAGA. But as the president struggles to contain blowback from his Middle Eastern adventurism, the MAGA fault lines are only growing.

The ‘biggest break thus far’

After several MAGA figures denounced the president’s actions in the Middle East and, in some cases, his presidency overall, Trump responded with a “blistering” 482-word Truth Social post that insulted them in “starkly personal terms,” The New York Times said. Trump’s missive came after “weeks of criticism” from the consortium of conservative figureheads, which he had “largely ignored” before this latest outburst. Jones, Kelly, Carlson and former Charlie Kirk collaborator Candace Owens are the “opposite of MAGA,” Trump said, before he began “insulting the pundits personally,” said The Hill.

Trump has “repeatedly dismissed suggestions” of an alleged “fissure in his MAGA coalition,” Forbes said. But criticism from MAGA notables “intensified” after Trump “threatened to wipe out Iranian civilization,” NBC News said. There is now a “growing schism within Trump’s base” over the Iran war, “particularly” given his campaign pledge of “no new wars.”

While Carlson in particular has been “highly critical” of the Iran conflict and “somewhat more gently critical of Trump the man, at least publicly,” the “gloves were off” this week “like never before,” said CNN. The result is “perhaps the biggest break thus far” between Trump and a “leading conservative influencer,” even as the GOP has “done its best to forestall these kinds of splits.” Carlson’s critiques won’t “suddenly equally divide Trump’s base,” but they are an “inauspicious sign” and “not helpful” for the party.

‘Deep anger’ and ‘quick rebukes’

Trump’s attacks on this batch of newly minted detractors reflect what seems to be a “deep anger” at once-loyal supporters, said Politico. The opprobrium runs both ways, as the targets of his ire offered “quick rebukes” to Trump’s attacks. “It may be time to put Grandpa up in a home,” Owens said in a “one-line quip” on X, said Forbes. “I’m just so sad that whatever’s happened to him has totally changed the man he once was,” said Jones in a video response on the same platform.

Iran has clearly “emerged as a growing weakness” for Trump, said CNN. While some MAGA supporters are “overwhelmingly on board,” the president’s wider base is “increasingly on a different page.” For Trump, the danger in rebukes by Carlson and other media figures is that it gives Republicans “skeptical of the war license to tilt into outright opposition to him.”

Recent violence in the Middle East had some of Dubai’s wealthy British expats rushing to bunkers, but in the longer term they might be seeking shelter in a famous Italian city.

Milan is becoming the preferred destination for the wealthy who are “abandoning” Dubai because of tensions and violence in the Gulf region, said British Asian newspaper Eastern Eye.

Restlessness and reinvention

Italy’s flat-tax regime means that foreign residents can pay €300,000 (£259,620) a year on all overseas income, which is “small change for the world’s wealthiest”, said The Guardian. Even prior to the fighting in Iran, interest in Italy took off after Britain scrapped its non-dom status and Portugal tightened its own rules.

But “tax policy alone does not explain the surge”, said the Economic Times. Italy’s “strong legal framework, EU membership, and relatively stable economy” make it a “compelling choice” for the privileged.

As wealthy families move to “safer European bases”, Milan is enjoying “historic spikes” in luxury real estate sales, from its “renovated palazzi to modern high-end apartments”. Property prices in Milan have risen by 38% over five years.

“Unlike more poetic cities like Rome or Venice”, Milan “actually works” and doesn’t have an issue with “overtourism”, said The Times. Its “strategic location” offers “easy access to the lakes, mountains and coast” and there’s a “restlessness” and an “obsession” with “reinvention”, meaning there’s “always something new to see or do”. It is home to the Borsa Italiana stock exchange, leading banks and global fashion houses.

A new “superfast” railway links the city centre and Linate airport, you can “whizz around the city quicker than ever” on the “tap-in tap-out” metro, and there are new hotels, restaurants, bars and private members’ clubs, which are “cranking up the standards of hospitality” from “perfectly good” to something closer to those of London or New York.

Tax dumping

Can Milan really dethrone Dubai in the affections of the “global elite”? That “remains to be seen”, said The Guardian. Armand Arton, who helps multimillionaire and billionaire families to relocate through investment citizenship schemes, said he’s “positive” that Dubai will “rebound from the current question of doubt around security”.

There are “still questions” about “how far Italy can push its advantage”, said the broadsheet, and the former French prime minister François Bayrou accused Italy of “tax dumping”, an allegation that Giorgia Meloni dismissed as “utterly baseless”.

Italy is not fully replacing Dubai, said Eastern Eye, but it has become a “strategic second home for global elites”. Experts believe the Italian city “offers a compelling alternative for those prioritising European stability”.

As part of AI company Anthropic’s Project Glasswing initiative, the new general-purpose model Mythos is uniquely powerful in the artificial intelligence industry and is causing concern among even people who are normally trusting of AI. The company, which also makes the AI model Claude, has claimed that Mythos is currently too advanced for public release, and is instead entrusting the model to cybersecurity experts for the time being. Some are worried this could pave the way for even more nefariousness in the AI space.

‘New era of hacking’

Mythos’ AI programming is able to find potential weaknesses in cybersecurity, and it can “detect thousands of high- and critical-severity bugs and software defects, with vulnerabilities identified in most major operating systems and web browsers,” said NBC News. Some of these vulnerabilities “had been undiscovered for decades,” according to Anthropic’s experts. The company found that Mythos’ “cybersecurity capabilities in particular were surprisingly advanced” compared to similar general-purpose AI models.

But there are also fears that Mythos “could usher in a new era of hacking and cybersecurity,” said NBC News. Mythos is “capable of advanced reasoning,” which could allow it to “identify and exploit a growing number of software vulnerabilities” if it were to fall into the wrong hands. To stave off these fears, Anthropic is allowing certain tech firms to access Mythos. But the company “does not have plans yet to release Mythos to the general public,“ said Bloomberg, a move that will ensure the AI ends up “in the hands of defenders first,” officials with Anthropic said.

The tech firms are expected to use Mythos as part of a project called Glasswing to “hunt for flaws in their products and share findings with industry peers,” said Bloomberg. It is a notable change because it will be the “first time a leading AI lab has built a frontier model and simultaneously decided the public cannot use it,” said Forbes. Anthropic’s position remains “straightforward: The model’s cyber capabilities are too dangerous for general availability.”

‘Humanity’s most devious behaviors’

In addittion to hacking vulnerabilities, some experts are concerned about Mythos’ capabilities. Anthropic released a safety evaluation for Mythos that shows a “striking leap in scores on many evaluation benchmarks,” the company said. In some instances, the evaluation “reads like a thriller about an AI that has learned some of humanity’s most devious behaviors,” said Axios.

At least one of the tests performed by Anthropic showed Mythos “acting like a cutthroat executive,” said Axios, doing things like “turning a competitor into a dependent wholesale customer, threatening to cut off supply to control pricing and keeping extra supplier shipments it hadn’t paid for.” The AI had instances where it “used a prohibited method to get an answer, then tried to ‘re-solve’ it to avoid detection,” though these were limited to “less than 0.001% of interactions.”

These issues have not stopped companies from working with Mythos, as “approximately 40 organizations involved in the design, maintenance or operation of computer systems are said to have joined Glasswing,” said The Guardian. This includes major firms like Amazon, Apple, Google, JPMorganChase and Microsoft. And while Anthropic has previously sparred with the Trump administration about its implementation in the Defense Department, the company has also “had discussions with the U.S. government regarding Mythos.”

Donald Trump’s political rivals have denounced him as an “unhinged madman” and a “dangerous and mentally unbalanced individual” after he directed a string of expletives at the Iranian regime. “Open the F***in’ Strait, you crazy bastards, or you’ll be living in Hell!” the US president said on his Truth Social platform .

But Trump is far from the only potty-mouthed politician, and trends suggest that swearing in politics is increasingly going from taboo to mainstream.

‘Profanity seal’

Woodrow Wilson “broke the profanity seal” in 1919, when the then president recalled a time he made a “conspicuous ass of himself”, said Joseph Phillips, a politics lecturer at Cardiff University. “Since then, presidents, their seconds-in-command, and presidential hopefuls have used profanity at least 692 times” – but the vast majority of curse words, 87%, occurred in the last 10 years.

We’ve “come a long way from our shock” at John Major, not knowing he was being recorded, using the word “bastards” while prime minister in 1993, said Robert Crampton in The Times. Although “tough talk is nothing new in politics”, leaders “long avoided flaunting it”, said The Independent. But now, public vulgarity is “in vogue”. During a political rally in 2025, Trump “used profanity at least four times”. J.D. Vance has also sworn publicly, and former vice president Kamala Harris “earned a roar of approval from her audience” last October when she said of the Trump administration that “these mother******* are crazy”.

Members of Congress and the Senate have also sworn as a “volley of vulgarities underscores an ever-coarsening political environment” on social media. Posts that “evoke the strongest emotions are rewarded with the most engagement”.

‘Anti-intellectualism’

There’s a “misguided belief” that “profanity is more ‘honest’ or ‘authentic’ than polite speech”, said Solomon D. Stevens in the Illinois paper the Journal-Courier. This suggests that politicians who swear are “telling it like it is” or “being real”, while those who don’t must be “holding back and not telling the truth”. But “politicians who swear are just politicians who swear. They can lie just as easily as those who don’t swear.”

There’s also “an anti-intellectualism at work”, as politicians who swear imply that those who don’t are “putting on airs”. While some intellectuals can “certainly be pretentious”, “refraining from coarse language” is not in itself a sign of that.

Trump’s “disinhibited language” sounded like a “tantrum”, said Melanie Phillips in The Times. It “suggested that he’d lost self-control because Iran wouldn’t do what he wanted”. Swearing points to an “emotional release and thus a loss of reason”.

The president’s recent profanity also distracted from “the message itself”, said the Deseret News. A “rousing and well-crafted argument” could have “built a compelling case for ousting the country’s ruling regime”, because “when it comes to war, calm self-assurance speaks louder than ranting expletives”.

Politicians aren’t “bawling swear words because they can’t contain their outrage”, said Barton Swaim in The Wall Street Journal. They do it because, “like preteen boys trying to sound tough”, they believe “the odd public expletive enhances their authenticity” and gives them “an air of pugnacity apropos to the moment”. But they are mistaken. “Most Americans still prefer their leaders to talk like grown-ups.”

Nevertheless, Democrats are pushing back against the right, using bad language themselves and embracing more confrontational and crass tactics. They see it as a way to beat Maga at its own game, attempting to “step outside the bounds of the political correctness that Republicans have accused Democrats of establishing”, said The New York Times.

Traditionally seen as occupying a more staid, straight-laced and “conservative” end of the American political spectrum, the modern Republican party has, under President Donald Trump, become a hub for many of the theories formerly relegated to the fringes of national discourse. Over the past decade, the conservative movement has elevated adherents to claims of demonic possession, extraterrestrial infiltration and, most recently, instantaneous transportation.

Just months after being nominated to lead the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s core Office of Response and Recovery in late 2025, top FEMA official Gregg Phillips became the subject of an investigation into his “rise to prominence” as a “far-right activist” who “spread conspiracy theories,” said CNN. Phillips’ claim that he’d spontaneously teleported to a Waffle House restaurant in the city of Rome, Georgia, has “generated numerous headlines and at least one biting late-night comedy segment,” The New York Times said.

Rep. Tim Burchett: UFO disclosures the country would ‘come unglued’ over

“We need full disclosure,” Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn) said to Newsmax in April. “The public has a right to know, dadgummit, it’s your tax dollars. Let’s get it out there.” Asked by host Rob Finnerty about the aliens-exist claims from former Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz, Burchett, who sits on both the House Oversight and Foreign Affairs Committees, said he’d been “briefed by just about every alphabet agency there is.” If the national security apparatus were to “release the things that I’ve seen, you’d be up at night worrying about or thinking about it.”

One of Burchett’s recent classified briefings “would have set the earth” on fire and cause the country to “come unglued,” the Tennessee lawmaker said. Outer space revelations are “getting covered up, and the people that know are dying or disappearing.”

Tucker Carlson: demonic origins of atomic weaponry

Onetime Fox News juggernaut Tucker Carlson insists a nocturnal attack from supernatural forces once left him bloody and scarred while his family slept unmolested. The claim, made in footage from the unreleased “Christianities?” documentary, was accompanied by “creepy music, reenactments of Carlson firing a gun and dogs running through the woods in slow motion,” The Seattle Times said.

Nuclear weaponry is also “demonic,” Carlson said on the Bannons War Room podcast to former White House advisor Steve Bannon. Anyone who “claims otherwise” is “either ignorant or doing the bidding of the forces that created nuclear technology in the first place, which were not human forces obviously.”

Matt Gaetz: alien hybrid breeding program

Once a front-runner to lead the Trump administration’s Justice Department, former Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz claimed on The Benny Show podcast in late March that the U.S. government is engaged in a human-extraterrestrial breeding program, with eyes on making inroads to the broader galactic community.

“An actual uniformed member of the United States Army briefed me,” Gaetz said to right-wing political commentator and podcaster Benny Johnson. Despite taking place in a “non-classified setting,” Gaetz said the soldier showed him “locations of hybrid breeding programs where captured aliens were breeding with humans to create some hybrid race that could engage in intergalactic communication.” During the interview, Gaetz “admitted he didn’t verify the whistleblower’s claims,” HuffPost said, but added he was told there were “between six and 12 breeding facilities around the country.”

Marjorie Taylor Greene: Jewish space lasers

Perhaps the most infamous Trump-era Republican flight of sci-fi fancy is that of former Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who in 2018 claimed in a since-deleted Facebook note that a series of catastrophic California wildfires were potentially started by a beam from “space solar generators” under the nebulous control of the Rothschild banking firm — itself a longstanding shibboleth for antisemitic conspiracy theories. In a 2025 interview on “Real Time with Bill Maher,” Greene said she “didn’t even know the Rothschilds were Jewish” and also claimed UFOs “could be fallen angels.”

Roger Stone: demon portal above White House

In 2022, longtime Trump ally and conservative operator Roger Stone claimed on the Eric Metaxas Radio Show that a “demonic portal” had appeared above the White House “around the time that the Bidens moved in.” Insisting he’d been initially skeptical, Stone said he was convinced, in part, by a friend’s sending him a “bunch of documents and also a bunch of notations from the Bible about portals,” adding that he had seen the alleged 1600 Pennsylvania Ave vortex “swirling like a cauldron.” Asked why the apparent rift in space-time hadn’t been reported on by mainstream news outlets, Stone said simply that the media “doesn’t cover a lot of things that are true.”

JD Vance: UFOs as demons

Asked during a recent interview with Benny Johnson about federal tracking of UFOs and other potentially extraterrestrial phenomena, Vice President JD Vance offered a slightly different take on whether or not advanced civilizations were visiting Earth: “I don’t think they’re aliens, I think they’re demons,” Vance said. Pressed to expand on his assertion about “celestial beings who fly around, who do weird things to people,” Vance said there is a “desire to describe everything celestial, everything otherworldly” as “aliens.” Put simply, said Slate, Vance “appears to believe that aliens visit Earth” and that those aliens “are actually demons.”

Russian commanders are charging “up to £30,000 to spare soldiers from the front lines in Ukraine”, said The Telegraph. Recruits unwilling or unable to pay are “reset” – a “euphemism for sending them to their deaths” in large-scale offensives with astronomical casualty rates.

Wounded soldiers must “pay thousands” to be declared unfit for active service, said PBS. Those who do not are “forced to literally limp into battle”. Seth Jones, from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said that injured soldiers, sometimes on crutches, are being “used as bait” to “draw fire” from hidden Ukrainian artillery.

Estimates put the number of Russian casualties in the war against Ukraine since 2022 at around 1.2 million, according to the CSIS. Ukrainian officials have also claimed that in March Russia suffered its highest number of losses – more than 35,000 killed or seriously wounded – since the launch of Ukraine’s “Army of Drones” programme last year, said the UK Defence Journal.

‘System of extortion’

“Corruption and slave labour have long been features of the Russian and Soviet armies,” said The Economist. Soldiers are not just seen as “grunts” – serving as “cannon fodder” for their superiors – but more troublingly as a “source of enrichment”.

There is a “system of extortion and punishment” in the Russian ranks, where infantry soldiers must “buy their own” military gear. Other collections begin “under the pretext of raising money for drones, equipment or food”, but payments are expected to continue. “Soldiers who refuse to pay may be thrown into dug-out pits for torture.”

In extreme cases, sources have reported that commanders “requisition troops’ bank cards and PIN codes” before sending them into battle. “The dead are declared missing, and commanders withdraw the money they earned from their bank accounts”. As one soldier was told by a new commanding officer, survival is “not a matter of luck, but of ability to pay”.

In the Russian military, “men learn quickly to fear their commanders more than their foe”, said PBS. Videos appear on social media depicting the “horrific punishments” faced by soldiers if they fail to pay up, with reports of some “being locked in cages, electrocuted and sexually assaulted”. According to the independent Russian station Radio Echo, nearly 12,000 complaints were filed over six months last year, accusing commanders of “corruption and violence towards their own men”.

‘Public resentment’

The Russian military recruitment drive has “poured blood and money into the system, resulting in a vast battlefield economy”, said The Economist. The front line has become a “marketplace where everything has a price: drones, medals, home leave and life itself”.

The problem is widespread, said The New York Times. In the last two years, “at least 12 high-ranking Russian military officials and generals, as well as dozens of lower-ranking officers, have been indicted on corruption charges”.

Most recently, Lieutenant Colonel Konstantin Frolov – known as “Executioner” – has been put on trial in a military court, facing charges of fraud, bribery and weapons trafficking. He is accused by the Investigative Committee (Russia’s equivalent of the FBI) of leading a scheme where “more than 30 soldiers and medics” in his regiment “used weapons to shoot themselves in order to obtain payouts for battlefield injuries”. The plot reportedly defrauded the army of “200 million rubles, or $2.6 million”.

This case in particular has “fed public resentment of the economic and social privileges” of high-ranking officials, who are accused of perpetuating the war “only for the money”.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s effort to purge the Pentagon of so-called woke ideologies has earned him plaudits from the White House. But his “highly unusual” decision to strike four officers — two women and two Black men — from a recent promotions list has some asking whether the officers were “being singled out because of their race or gender,” said The New York Times. The incident has resurrected a question that has dogged the secretary since his confirmation: Is the Defense Department still the microcosmic American melting pot it once was?

Implying lack of talent

It’s “exceedingly rare” for one-star general promotion lists like the one recently edited by Hegseth to receive “intense scrutiny from a defense secretary,” said the Times. The secretary’s sentiments dovetail with the “broader Trump administration’s attacks” on federal government programs designed to “support and promote the concerns of minority populations,” said Military Times.

Having “honed his communication skills at Fox News,” where talent regularly says “outrageous things as a way of showing their viewers how eager they are to own the libs,” Hegseth has “long stewed” about women in military leadership, said The Atlantic. He has also “hammered on the idea of ‘merit’” to imply that minority officers have been “promoted because of their race rather than their talent.”

“First of all, you’ve got to fire the chairman of the Joint Chiefs,” said Hegseth on The Shawn Ryan Show podcast during his cabinet nomination process in late 2024. Anyone, no matter if they are a “general, admiral or whatever,” who was “involved in any of that DEI woke sh-t” has “got to go.” The secretary acted on those inclinations “almost immediately upon arriving at the Pentagon,” firing multiple senior officers, all Black or women, who were “then replaced with white men,” said The Atlantic.

As secretary, Hegseth has “moved quickly to remake the military as more white and more male,” said historian and journalist Garrett Graff at his Doomsday Scenario newsletter. In firing, among others, the “first Black man to lead a service branch, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. C.Q. Brown, and the first woman to serve as the Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. Lisa Franchetti,” Hegseth has “left the U.S. military without a single woman at a four-star rank.” In Hegseth’s Pentagon, an all-white, all-male Joint Chiefs of Staff is tasked with “overseeing a roughly 1.3 million-strong military that is about 20% female and 43% people of color.”

Erasing history

Hegseth’s recent promotion interference is “just the latest of numerous attacks on women,” said the Congressional Black Caucus and Democratic Women’s Caucus in a joint statement. Hegseth is “trying to erase Black and women’s leadership and history.” In that context, his effort “isn’t an anomaly” but rather part of a “coordinated and sustained strategy.”

To deny promotions “based on their race or gender” would “betray every principle of merit-based service that military officers uphold,” said Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) on X. Such a move would “also violate federal law.”

People who want to grab a once-trendy pair of shoes in person will have to go somewhere else: Allbirds announced it has closed all of its stores and struck a deal to sell its assets. The sell-off marks a massive fall from grace for the shoe company, which began as a direct-to-consumer fashion brand before opening brick-and-mortar locations. Allbirds is merely the latest DTC company to find itself drowning, and experts say its shuttering may point to larger problems with the business model.

From $4 billion to $39 million

Allbirds once represented the pinnacle of tech-bro fashion and became known as the “eco-friendly shoe company that won over Silicon Valley,” said the Los Angeles Times. The brand is best recognized for its high-end wool shoes that were “initially embraced by celebrities like Leonardo DiCaprio, who invested in the company in 2018.” Following a slew of successes with the DTC model, Allbirds “peaked at a $4 billion valuation when it went public in 2021.”

But the company’s remaining assets were sold in March for $39 million, representing only “1% of its peak market capitalization,” said Fortune. The 99% plunge in value was due to “major strategic missteps in trying to sustain its once meteoric growth.” A trend “doesn’t always translate to enduring brand value,” and in Allbirds’ case, the company “believed its growth would last forever, not quite understanding that its distinctive shoes were in fact a fad.”

However, the Allbirds C-suite is seemingly confident that things will turn around. Allbirds “has evolved into a lifestyle footwear brand known for modern design, innovative materials and unparalleled comfort,” Joe Vernachio, the company’s CEO, said in a statement. The sale “builds on the foundational work already completed and sets up the brand to thrive in the years ahead.”

Hit a ceiling

The collapse of Allbirds now has some people asking larger questions about the viability of DTC. Many of these companies “sought to build their customer bases through physical retail and banked on opening stores to boost balance sheets,” said CNBC. As “rents rise, physical retail loses its shine and being digitally native becomes more important, Allbirds and other DTC companies have begun to shift their focus” to a more online strategy.

Many of these early-2010s DTC brands are “suffering from slow sales,” said Marketplace. DTC wasn’t a completely new idea when it arrived, as the business model largely replaced mail-order catalogs. But the “internet refreshed the strategy,” as “anyone with an idea was relatively easily able to present it,” Mark Cohen, the former director of retail studies at Columbia Business School, told Marketplace. There is also a “dichotomy between coming up with a brilliant idea and then managing it brilliantly after it’s been noticed by consumers.”

Most brands “do need physical retail to grow their customer base,” Kevin Mullaney, the CEO of retail consultancy The Grayson Company, said to Marketplace. Yet many of these brands, including companies like mattress seller Casper and skincare brand Glossier, were caught “trying to do everything, everywhere, all at once. Meanwhile, the direct-to-consumer space was getting more competitive.” DTC is a “great concept, but it hit a ceiling,” Jessica Ramirez, a co-founder of the advisory firm The Consumer Collective, told Marketplace. Companies “can only go so far with concepts like that.”

Almost from the moment she was elected in 2022, Giorgia Meloni, Italy’s first female prime minister, has seemed “in complete control”, said Hannah Roberts on Politico. The working-class girl who grew up in a down-at-heel Roman suburb, and shot to power as leader of the hard-right Brothers of Italy party, had – until last week – been shrouded in “an aura of political invincibility”.

Her centre-right coalition – dominated by her own party in alliance with Matteo Salvini’s populist party, Lega, and the late Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia – has proved the most stable government Italy has had in years. But that invincible aura has now been shattered by her decision to call a referendum on her proposed judicial reforms, a flagship policy she claimed was needed to end supposed political interference by the courts.

The decision backfired spectacularly: in a vote last week that many considered a plebiscite on her leadership, some 54% of Italians opposed the constitutional amendment, which, among other things, would have separated the career paths of judges and public prosecutors, and reconstituted the bodies that oversaw them.

To Meloni’s critics, this proposal was a threat to judicial independence, and Italy’s three largest cities – Rome, Milan and Naples – all convincingly rejected it. In Naples, where the “No” vote received 71% support, dozens of lawyers and judges revelled in her resounding defeat: at the headquarters of the National Magistrates’ Association they sung the famous anti-fascist song “Bella Ciao” as they quaffed champagne. Her defeat has also given the opposition reason to be cheerful: Italy’s “torpid politics suddenly look competitive again”.

‘Spirit of vengeance’

The PM’s big mistake was to politicise the reforms, said Mario Orfeo in La Repubblica (Rome). Italy’s judicial system is in desperate need of overhaul, not least on account of its routine staff shortages and excessively long trials.

Rather than attempting to make it more efficient, however, Meloni was driven by “the spirit of vengeance”. For decades, the Italian Right has raged about the court’s perceived left-wing bias, a rage stoked by the “Mani pulite” (“Clean Hands”) investigations of the 1990s, in which hundreds of politicians were accused of corruption and had to stand down. The outrage grew under the premiership of media mogul Silvio Berlusconi, who had to face dozens of lawsuits over his business dealings, and who damned the judicial system as “a cancer of democracy”.

It’s in that spirit that Meloni and her allies – enraged by judicial rulings that have blocked plans to send asylum seekers to Albania and to build a $13.5 billion bridge to Sicily – approached this referendum. A “parallel Mafia”, is how the justice minister, Carlo Nordio, depicted prosecutors. Italy will be flooded with illegal immigrants and rapists, warned Meloni, if the “Yes” vote loses.

‘Surprisingly clumsy’

Meloni, who has immense political talents, has prospered by being pragmatic and forming viable alliances, said Luzi Bernet in the Neue Zürcher Zeitung (Zürich). But on this occasion she was “surprisingly clumsy”, foolishly assuming that her parliamentary majority would guarantee a simple victory.

But it wasn’t just hubris that led to her defeat, said Christian Rocca on Linkiesta. That “heavy blow” should also be put down to her close relationship with the “radioactive” Donald Trump: in Italy, where fears of rising petrol and electricity prices are rife, Trump’s Iran war is deeply unpopular.

This defeat marks a “major political turning point”, said Le Monde (Paris). Meloni is now weakened: the opposition Democratic Party, the Five Star Movement and the Italian Socialist Party, all smell blood. They are hamstrung, though, by a “glaring lack of leadership”. But a defeat like this will expose the PM to internal attacks and “sow doubt in the ranks”, said Federico Capurso in La Stampa (Turin). So ahead of the 2027 general election, Meloni will have to spend a year “in the trenches”. She may claim nothing has changed: the reality is that “everything has already changed”.

“If you look backward in this business, you’ll be crushed. You have to look forward,” said Apple co-founder and CEO Steve Jobs in 2008, a year after he introduced the first iPhone and changed the world forever.

Apple may indeed be “allergic to nostalgia”, said Steven Levy in Wired, but the company is still “begrudgingly engaging in a series of concerts and commemorations, and we’re being blitzed by books, articles and oral histories” to mark its 50th anniversary.

From an inauspicious start in Jobs’ California garage, the company he founded with Steve Wozniak in 1976 went on to pioneer the personal computer, transform the music market, and revolutionise how people use technology in the internet age. Apple is now valued at more than $3.6 trillion (£2.7 trillion), generating $400 billion (£301 billion) a year in revenue, with iPhone sales alone expected to bring in $1 million (£750 million) every 90 seconds. Across the world, 27% of the population – roughly 2.2 billion people – use one or more of its products.

Tariffs, trade wars and anti-trust trials

“No country has been more central to Apple’s rise – or more fraught for its future – than China,” said France 24. CEO Tim Cook, who took over from Jobs after he died of pancreatic cancer in 2011, made China the primary manufacturing base for Apple devices. It is also one of Apple’s largest consumer markets but the company “faces mounting pressure” from “trade tensions and tariffs” accelerating efforts to diversify manufacturing elsewhere in Asia, while “competition from domestic rivals such as Huawei has eaten into Apple’s Chinese market share”.

To put it bluntly, “the world in which Apple once thrived no longer exists,” said former Financial Times editor Lionel Barber in The New Statesman. A “25-year-long process of hyper-globalisation in which money, technologies and ideas have flowed freely” is “now fading amid economic nationalism driven, in part, by a technological arms race between the US and China, and a global tariff offensive led by Donald Trump”.

Apple is also facing a threat to its dominance closer to home, in the form of a series of anti-trust cases against it. “In an industry full of sprawling multipronged tech empires”, the basic argument against Apple is “comparatively simple”, said Adi Robertson on The Verge: “it’s become the ultimate gatekeeper to billions of people’s primary computing hardware, and it keeps competitors locked out while levying a heavy toll on the developers it lets through”.

Regulators and courts have ordered changes, particularly around the App Store, “but those changes have been slow to arrive, in part because for a half-decade or more, Apple has dragged its feet at every turn”.

Artificial intelligence

Apple may have “absolutely owned” the internet and mobile era, said Wired, but “now the future belongs to AI” – a category where Apple seems to have been lacking.

Apple’s Siri lags behind the likes of Microsoft, OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and Google’s Gemini, let alone China’s DeepSeek.

This is, in part, because Apple is “limited by its ecosystem”, said Acuity Trading. AI systems “require vast amounts of data, public testing and continuous version launches” and so “cannot be perfected in a closed ecosystem, which is what Apple has built its reputation on”. But perhaps the “most limiting factor is that Apple takes its commitment to user privacy very seriously”, which “has hindered AI development by limiting the amount of data it can use for training AI models”.

This “obsession with user privacy and its premium hardware could position it to drive widespread adoption of personalised AI – and make it profitable, a goal that has proved elusive for much of the AI industry”, said France 24.

Succession planning

The demise of Apple has been predicted many times before; in the mid-1980s after Jobs was forced out and again in 2011 when he passed away. Having revived the company and driven the release of the iMac, iPod and iPhone, Jobs was “widely thought of as irreplaceable”, said Barber. But Cook has not only steadied the ship but also taken the company to new heights, in terms of revenue generation if not technological innovation.

While the 65-year-old has given no indication of an imminent transition, the most likely candidate to take over when he does decide to go is John Ternus, senior vice president for hardware engineering, who oversees development of the devices that generate roughly 80% of Apple’s revenue. “Known for his steadiness and political acumen”, Ternus, like Cook, is “risk averse” and would be a continuity hire rather than “someone more willing to shake things up”, said Bloomberg.

This matters because, while its products “helped define the past 50 years of consumer technology, thriving for another 50 will inevitably require the company to transform in ways that aren’t entirely clear today”.

Even though relations between China and America remain tense, many young Americans’ perspectives seem to be shifting as they adopt Chinese cultural habits. The online trend, dubbed Chinamaxxing, has non-Chinese content creators singing the praises of their newfound Chinese identity. At the same time, the meme’s prevalence has prompted some members of the Chinese diaspora to push back.

‘China’s growing soft power’

For social media users, Chinamaxxing translates to acting increasingly more Chinese. The trend can include “drinking hot water instead of iced lattes, wearing house slippers indoors or embracing traditional Chinese skin care routines,” said NPR. TikTok and Instagram users have taken to saying they are entering a “very Chinese time” in their lives.

The trend has been “amplified by Chinese diaspora influencers” such as Sherry Zhu, who shares “herbal skin care recipes and advice on becoming a Chinese ‘baddie,’” said NPR. Though it began as “niche lifestyle content,” the trend has since “spilled into celebrity PR stunts by the likes of Timothée Chalamet playing ping-pong in Chengdu and mainstream cultural debates.”

It’s probably not an accident that Chinamaxxing has been popularized on TikTok, said Shaoyu Yuan, a scholar who studies Chinese soft power, to NPR. Soft power is the ability to influence international relations through attraction and persuasion rather than coercion. The social media app has an impact on multiple levels. One content stream weakens “American narrative authority by highlighting content that highlights U.S. dysfunction,” while another “makes China look more attractive.”

The meme is not “bound by nationality or ethnicity; anyone can be Chinese if they wish,” said The New York Times. “And right now, many do.” As Labubus and other “Chinese cultural exports” win over global audiences, experts say that the spread of “being Chinese” memes may “signal China’s growing soft power abroad.” For some American content creators, the memes are also a “wry expression of disillusionment with politics at home.”

It’s “partly meme logic,” but it’s also a “sign of growing cultural cachet,” said Yuan to the Times. The memes reflect a “broader shift, in which online audiences are developing a new level of familiarity with China as they engage with it through lifestyle trends and aesthetics” rather than as the “geopolitical rival and security threat it’s often portrayed as" in the U.S.

‘Orientalism by any other name’

The trend has sparked mixed reactions from the Chinese diaspora, with some “worried about the potential for cultural appropriation,” said The Guardian. Even Zhu is concerned about non-Chinese creators reducing traditional medicine to a wellness fad. “I don’t want people to forget the benefits that my culture is providing,” she said to NPR. It comes from China. It’s not “coming from somewhere else.”

Chinamaxxing seemed to reach its peak during Lunar New Year in February. Related advice from non-Chinese creators felt like a direct challenge to the identity of those within the diaspora, said Jenny Lau, the author of “An A-Z of Chinese Food (Recipes Not Included),” to The Guardian. Chinamaxxing is “Orientalism by any other name.”

In 2026, it’s “apparently cool to be Chinese,” said Cherie Wong, a Hong Kong Canadian activist, in an Instagram video. But before “white people claim they are drinking hot water” and in a “very Chinese time, I’mma need you to stop.” A very Chinese time in “my ancestry was my grandparents seeing all their schoolteachers get executed for being intellectuals.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is struggling. The agency tasked with protecting the health of U.S. citizens has lost a quarter of its staffers over the last year, morale is lousy for those who remain and for the moment the organization has no leader: Its last Senate-confirmed director was ousted in August and no replacement has been chosen.

Health and Human Services Secretary (HHS) Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promised to restore trust in the CDC following the Covid-19 pandemic. But can his “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) movement survive the turmoil?

Why MAHA might be stalled

Kennedy’s MAHA agenda “appears to be stalled,” said The Guardian. The CDC lacks a director, and Trump’s nomination of Casey Means to be U.S. surgeon general is “stuck in limbo” in the Senate. But the administration “isn’t ready to nominate a new CDC director” despite a deadline of last week to do so, said CNN. Administration officials are still “evaluating candidates” who can shift the CDC “to its original mission of fighting infectious disease,” said HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon.

The CDC nomination delay comes as MAHA and Kennedy “appear to be on the ropes,” Tom Bartlett said at The Atlantic. MAHA supporters are “angry” that Trump is shielding herbicide makers from legal liability. The Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine chief just left the agency, a federal judge put a hold on Kennedy’s anti-vaccine agenda and the Kennedy-allied vice chair of the CDC’s vaccine advisory panel resigned last week. Those events, taken together, suggest the secretary’s hold on power is “waning.” A December poll “seems to have scared the White House off Kennedy’s vaccine agenda.” The result: Kenedy is “losing his grip on the CDC.”

The agency is meanwhile in “turmoil,” said The New York Times. Insiders say it is being “remade into a vehicle for ideologues” who share Kennedy’s anti-vaccine agenda. The shift prompted a staff exodus that leaves public health advocates concerned that Americans will be “increasingly exposed to a wide range of health threats” amid surges of measles, whooping cough and flu infections.

White House avoids controversy

Federal law says that acting agency directors “may not serve in the role for more than 210 days,” said The Hill. That deadline passed last week. National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya, who had been serving as acting director, has been “delegated to provide continuity in day-to-day CDC processes” until a permanent replacement is confirmed, said a White House spokesperson.

Getting Senate confirmation is a “potentially tall order,” said Axios. Kennedy and other Trump health appointees have “antagonized some of the chamber’s Republican centrists.” The White House is especially “eager to avoid further controversial health moves” ahead of November’s midterm elections. So Trump’s eventual CDC pick “may need both MAHA and science chops,” said Roll Call. Key GOP senators “want a moderate public servant” who can last in the job. The administration, said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), does not have a “very encouraging track record thus far.”

West Texas is not the first place you would expect to find a French aristocrat suspected of murdering his family and going on the run for 15 years.

But last week the Sheriff’s Office of Brewster County posted a request for information about Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès on its Facebook page, following a tip-off from an investigative news team that he had been seen in the south of the county in 2020, accompanied by a black Labrador. Ligonnès “had previously travelled to Brewster County and reportedly claimed it was one of his favourite places”, the sheriff said he’d been told.

The post, which included the most recent known images of Ligonnès, was “enough to stir a frenzy” among French “amateur sleuths and crime fans”, said The Times. Their “favourite mystery, involving multiple supposed sightings over the years, is equivalent to” the enduring controversy around the UK’s “elusive Lord Lucan”.

‘Fantasy life’

Xavier Dupont de Ligonnès was 50 when the bodies of his wife, Agnès, and his children – Arthur, 20, Thomas, 18, Anne, 16, and Benoît, 13 – were discovered under the patio at their home in Nantes in April 2011. They had all been shot, wrapped in sheets, covered in quicklime and buried, along with the two family dogs. The last confirmed sighting of Ligonnès was at a motel near Saint-Tropez two weeks after the bodies were discovered. His car was later found abandoned in the car park.

Initial investigations revealed that, in the days before the killings, Ligonnès had bought cement, digging tools and four bags of lime in various locations in the Nantes area. He also owned a .22 rifle similar to the one used in the killings, had recently bought ammunition and gone to practise at a local shooting club.

Ligonnès, who had an aristocratic lineage, was a “failed businessman”, said The Times. He “lived a fantasy life in which he claimed he was, among other things, a US intelligence agent”. By the time of the murders, he had accrued significant debts and was struggling to maintain his family’s outwardly comfortable lifestyle.

Following his disappearance, reports emerged that Ligonnès had written to friends up to a year before the killings warning that, crippled with debts, he was contemplating “suicide, alone or collective” and “shooting up the house while everyone is sleeping”.

Red herrings and false leads

In the months and years following the murders, hundreds of sightings of Ligonnès were reported to police, “all proving to be false leads”, said France 24.

Then in July 2015, a photo of two of Ligonnès’ sons was sent to an Agence France-Presse journalist, with the words “I am still alive” scrawled on the back, along with his name. Handwriting analysis failed to ascertain if it was genuine.

In 2018, police raided a monastery in Roquebrune-sur-Argens (the Provençal town near Saint-Tropez where his car was abandoned) after a witness reported seeing a man who resembled Ligonnès, but this again proved to be a dead end. A year later, a man was arrested at Glasgow airport and held in custody before tests confirmed it was another case of mistaken identity.

The case then went cold for years, until a new book published earlier this year by Gilles Galloux, a former police investigator on the case. He claimed Ligonnès “boarded a flight from Nice airport using fake ID documents” and has been hiding out in the US, “a place he had long admired”, said The Connexion. It was this lead that drew attention to Brewster County, which Ligonnès visited in the 1990s.

Ligonnès’ sister, Christine, maintains her brother’s innocence, believing the murders “were staged by a foreign intelligence agency, and that the family is living in witness protection in the US”, said The Times. Prosecutors in Nantes remain “sceptical” of such theories. Their somewhat more pedestrian hypothesis is that Ligonnès “probably killed himself in the rocky hinterland of Provence”.

Tech enthusiasts and industry analysts are sounding the alarm about RAMageddon, a shortage of random access memory chips crucial for running many consumer electronics. Though the future implications of the mass integration of generative AI have had much of the industry worried, the immediate impact of AI’s excessive memory needs is being felt worldwide.

Insatiable high-margin demand

The memory chip shortage is “beginning to hammer profits, derail corporate plans and inflate price tags” on everything from “laptops and smartphones to automobiles and data centers,” said Bloomberg. Major technology companies have hinted that going forward, the shortage of DRAM, or dynamic random access memory, the “fundamental building block of almost all technology,” will constrain production.

The global RAM market is “experiencing a severe price crisis,” with the cost of memory chips “surging by as much as 80-90% in recent months,” said CNN. RAMageddon has been driven by the “insatiable, high-margin demand for AI data center infrastructure,” leading manufacturers to shift “production capacity away from consumer products.” This has led to the shortage “expected to last well into 2026 and potentially up to 2028,” analysts said to the outlet.

RAMageddon is “only getting worse,” and there is “no immediate end in sight,” said The Verge. Everything that has a computer inside depends on RAM, and “almost everything has a computer in it now: farm tractors, hospital equipment, your TV set-top box.” Most of the global supply of RAM comes from just “three companies that are happily prioritizing the AI gold rush over everything else.”

Outside of consumer products, the shortage is also “causing problems for resource-constrained laboratories that already faced barriers to accessing powerful computing tools,” said Nature. The shortage is “pushing researchers to develop more efficient algorithms and hardware, to reduce the amount of memory needed.” Scientific research “increasingly relies on large-scale computing infrastructure,” Matteo Rinaldi, the director of the Institute for NanoSystems Innovation at Northeastern University, said to Nature. Many of these workloads “require substantial memory capacity.”

‘Bigger than anything we have faced before’

The tech industry may be reeling because of the shortage, but an easy fix is not imminent. ​​“There’s no relief until 2028,” said Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan in early February, after speaking to two of the big three memory companies. Micron, SK Hynix and Samsung, which control about 95% of the global DRAM supply, are “making enough money to increase memory production.” Still, it will take time to build the new memory fabrication plants they promised, The Verge said. The companies also see it “as more profitable and less risky to build out slowly” instead of “rushing to meet demand.”

Micron’s memory-fabricating facility in Idaho won’t open until mid-2027, and “you’re not really gonna see real output” until 2028, the company’s vice president of marketing, mobile and client business unit, Christopher Moore, said to Wccftech. SK Hynix predicted the shortage would last through late 2027.

We stand at the “cusp of something that is bigger than anything we’ve faced before,” Tim Archer, the chief executive officer of chip equipment supplier Lam Research Corp., said at a conference in South Korea, per Bloomberg. What lies ahead “between now and the end of this decade” will “overwhelm all other sources of demand.”

With RAMageddon, it is “wiser to hold off doing business today,” as prices are “almost certain to be higher tomorrow,” Suh Young-hwan, who runs three DIY PC shops in Seoul, said to Bloomberg. “Unless Steve Jobs rises from the dead to declare that AI is nothing but a bubble, this trend is likely to persist for some time.”

The ongoing memory crisis is making it “hard for tech enthusiasts and the general population not to feel more than a little deflated,” said Tom’s Guide (a sister site of The Week). We are “marching towards lining the pockets of a small few” while “giving up environmental and financial stability.” It is “easy to feel jaded,” but this kind of crisis “feels a little unprecedented.”

Given the current uncertainty, the Bank of England’s decision to hold interest rates at 3.75% last week was “the only one possible”, said Nils Pratley in The Guardian. “Policymakers are as clueless on the length of the war, and the cost of energy six weeks or six months from now, as stock market investors.” So why did the London bond market throw such a wobbly?

UK borrowing costs soared to their highest level since the 2008 financial crisis on the day after the Bank’s meeting, with the yield on benchmark 10-year gilts surging to 5%, “deepening a three-week long rout”, said the Financial Times. Two-year gilts – the part of the market most sensitive to interest-rate moves – were also pummelled.

Britain has been hit hardest in the global bond sell-off since the outbreak of war, because our dependency on imported energy means spiking oil and gas prices “quickly feed through to broader inflation”. When combined with flatlining growth and rising household borrowing costs, the risk of recession is plain.

‘The spectre of stagnation’

Perhaps last week’s turmoil was “a weird overreaction” to the Bank’s hawkish new tone, said Katie Martin in the same paper – rather than interest rate cuts this year, we are now contemplating hikes. But “the spectre of stagnation stalks the land”. The market has stabilised, but “in aggregate, more than £100 billion has been erased from the market value of UK government bonds in a matter of weeks”, said Stuart Fieldhouse on The Armchair Trader.

“UK rate expectations have been on a remarkable journey in barely a month,” said Chris Beauchamp at IG. “A full 100 basis points rise in rates is now expected for this year.” The bad news for consumers and business is compounded by the implications for the Government of “a fiscal squeeze”. If there’s further escalation in the Middle East, “this may be just the beginning of the crisis”.

The ‘Maradona Effect’

As data on demand weakness becomes evident, the Bank of England won’t want “to compound the damage with higher interest rates”, said Karen Ward of J.P. Morgan in the Financial Times. I suspect it is deploying the “Maradona Effect”, named after the footballing legend whose greatest skill was feinting. Conveying a very hawkish signal about the outlook for rates may obviate the need to actually raise them.

The Bank “faces an acute dilemma”, said Roger Bootle in The Telegraph. As we learnt in 2022, the issue at stake is what happens to inflation after the initial, oil-induced spike. The case for higher rates is to ward off “second-round effects” and stop inflation becoming embedded. “The art of central banking lies partly in not overreacting, but also in not taking action too late.”

Nick Adams is a self-proclaimed alpha male influencer whose social media posts have proclaimed his love of big steaks and the Hooters restaurant chain. He is also President Donald Trump’s new special presidential envoy for American tourism, exceptionalism and values, a gig that came Adams’ way only after his nomination to be the U.S. ambassador to Malaysia did not land.

Adams’ appointment is the latest example of Trump’s penchant for out-of-the-box personnel decisions. Critics call him a trolling “dudebro” surviving in the president’s orbit despite an inability to muster support for Senate confirmation.

Provocative, like Trump

Adams surged to MAGA prominence as one of the leading lights of the online “manosphere,” said The New York Times. He posted frequently “about stereotypical symbols of masculinity,” advised men to dominate their relationships with women and lamented Hooters’ 2025 bankruptcy filing by volunteering to lead a “presidential task force” to save the chain. He did not backtrack after Trump nominated him for the Malaysia ambassadorship last year. “I am an alpha male. Yes, I eat rare steaks. Yes, I visit Hooters frequently,” he said in a social media post after the nomination. But Adams said he would “not be apologizing” for his posts.

Adams began a career in his native Australia as a “staunch nationalist” who regularly gave speeches about the “dangers of multiculturalism,” said The Washington Post. He was controversial even among allies: The country’s right-of-center party once “threatened to suspend him for six months” for swearing at a reporter. He resigned from Australian politics in 2012 and decided it was “time to try somewhere else.” Adams gained American citizenship in 2021 and moved quickly into Trump’s circle. Both men “come up with provocative ways to communicate something or highlight a subject area,” Adams told the Post.

The provocations provoke. Adams’ “shtick” targets insecure young men with the “false promise that embracing aggressive misogyny is the key to achieving your dreams,” Amanda Marcotte said at Salon. Adams and other manosphere denizens play the pose as a joke, but it is “pretty much inarguable that Adams’ followers are sincerely misogynistic.”

Malaysia: Failed nomination

Trump appointed Adams to the tourism position after the ambassadorial nomination “came under fire in Malaysia” because Adams had a history of pro-Israel and anti-Islam posts that did not sit well in the largely Islamic nation, said The Diplomat. Young members of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s party marched to the U.S. embassy in Kuala Lumpur to protest the appointment. Adams is a “right-wing agitator and partisan provocateur,” said former law minister Zaid Ibrahim to the outlet. Malaysians cheered when he was quietly withdrawn from consideration, said The South China Morning Post.

The newly created tourism position is a “much better fit for Adams” because it does not involve a “grueling Senate confirmation process,” said The Bulwark. The job’s duties include involvement with the forthcoming World Cup and 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles. Adams plans to “thrust forward in this role,” he said on X, and “never relent in spreading the message of the greatness of America!”

With oil markets in flux, suspending an early-20th century law might help stabilize energy prices. President Donald Trump certainly hopes so: Last week he signed a 60-day waiver from employing the Jones Act, a law that requires U.S.-flagged vessels be used to carry goods and passengers if they’re traveling between American ports. The law was created to protect the domestic shipping industry, but detractors say it hobbles trade and creates more problems than it solves.

Fewer ships, higher prices

The Jones Act was passed after World War I to “rebuild U.S. shipping after German U-boats decimated America’s merchant fleet” during the war, said The Associated Press. Advocates say the law protects national security and homegrown jobs, but those in opposition say sidelining foreign competition has “driven up the cost of carrying cargo domestically.” Presidents can waive the law during crises, and Trump is using that power for one reason: U.S.-flagged ships are “generally more expensive to operate,” and those added costs fall heavily on places like Alaska, Hawaii and Puerto Rico that rely on overseas shipping.

Trump’s pause will allow foreign tankers to transport oil and gas between ports in the United States. That should “lead to lower transportation costs and increased supply” and eventually lower gasoline prices by 10 cents per gallon, Christopher Niezrecki said at The Conversation. It could be “months, not days or weeks,” before drivers notice the benefits at the pump, however, and that is likely only if Trump extends the waiver’s duration. “Fuel prices would fall more steeply” if the law is fully repealed.

American shipbuilding “has shrunk” despite the law’s best efforts, said Marketplace. The U.S. now has only 55 tankers legally qualified to carry oil and gas between domestic ports. Trump’s interruption of the Jones Act will “dramatically expand the universe of ships available” to do that work, said Cato Institute’s Colin Grabow to the outlet. Places like California, Florida and the Northeast will benefit most from the waiver, said Marketplace, “because those areas rely on ships instead of pipelines.”

Significant costs

The law does have defenders among American shipbuilders and vessel operators. There is “nothing more America First than the Jones Act,” Jennifer Carpenter, the CEO of the American Waterways Operators, said at DC Journal. Repealing it would allow foreign companies to “undercut American companies on labor costs” and hollow out the domestic industry, which raises national security concerns. Without the law, America’s “most sensitive cargo” would be transported between U.S. ports “by foreign mariners, including Chinese shipmen who ultimately answer to the Chinese Communist Party.”

Those against the law hope Trump’s waiver is “the beginning of the end of the Jones Act,” The Washington Post said in an editorial. A South Korean-built tanker costs $170 million less than one made in the United States, and “it costs millions more to operate every year thereafter.” The law has failed to save American shipbuilding but has imposed “significant costs.” Those are “much longer-running issues than anything having to do with the war in Iran.”

Sarah Ferguson was involved in talks to clone the late Queen Elizabeth’s beloved corgis for a reality TV show, The Mail on Sunday has claimed.

The “cash-strapped” former Duchess of York “met executives from Halcyon Studios in Los Angeles for a series of lunches and dinners” in May 2023, eight months after the Queen’s death.

A show synopsis sets out how, after Ferguson “is bequeathed two of the Queen’s beloved corgis, she decides to embark on a bold and controversial business venture – cloning the royal pups”. However, “as she navigates the complex world of genetics and royal protocol, Sarah must also grapple with her own personal demons and strained relationship with the royal family”.

Pet cloning is “highly contentious”, said the paper, “with experts warning it can produce horrible abnormalities”. But it is also highly “lucrative”, with pet lovers in the US, including celebrities such as Paris Hilton, Barbara Streisand and NFL star Tom Brady, paying “up to £75,000” to replicate their favourite animal.

‘Not an exact match’

Science has “come a long way” since Dolly the sheep was cloned three decades ago, said National Geographic. Pet cloning is “becoming more commonplace” with “thousands of grieving pet owners“ turning to the procedure in an attempt to “bring back their lost loves”.

But while a clone “will likely resemble the original pet more than a random member of the same species, both in appearance and behaviour”, their personalities “probably won’t be an exact match”.

Cloning “involves extracting viable eggs from the fallopian tubes” of the female animal, fertilising the egg with sperm from the male animal, then injecting a surrogate with hormones and implanting the embryo, said James Serpell, from the University of Pennsylvania. But it is not cheap – the average procedure costs around $50,000 (£37,000) – or easy. A 2022 study showed a maximum success rate of just 16% as many of the embryos failed to implant successfully, leading to miscarriages and animals born malformed.

Some companies are “trying to market what they do as recreating the original pet, and they’re not succeeding there”, said Serpell. So much happens after conception that, like twins, the two animals will not be “truly identical”.

‘Essence of the hereditary principle’

A spokesperson for Ferguson said she “never progressed any discussions with Halcyon Studios, which were engineered by others, and withdrew from them of her own accord”. But to even “consider cloning the late Queen’s beloved dogs for financial gain is unbelievably grotesque and utterly bizarre”, royal author Richard Fitzwilliams told The Mail on Sunday.

The opportunity to “own an exact replica of a corgi once owned by the Queen of England” would certainly “give immense joy to a certain type of person”, said Sam Leith in The Spectator.

On “a slightly more philosophical plane”, isn’t genetics “the very essence of the hereditary principle?” If she had gone ahead with the proposal, perhaps Ferguson – “in her whimsical but clumsy way” – would “have been putting her manicured finger on the heart of something both important and a little absurd about our monarchy?”

It is generally accepted “as a matter of course that the descent of the crown through the generations is accompanied by a slight but perceptible deterioration of the genetic stock”.

The fallout from The New York Times’ allegations of sexual assault against Cesar Chavez was swift and wide-ranging. Now, some in the industry are hoping the revelations about the late farm labor leader open doors for systemic changes, including reforms aimed at advancing the rights of women farmworkers.

‘It creates an opportunity for those without scruples’

The sexual abuse claims, largely made by Chavez’s co-labor leader, Dolores Huerta, represent a massive fall from grace for a beloved figure in the Latino community, one so cherished that former President Joe Biden even placed a bronze bust of Chavez in the Oval Office in 2021. The allegations “raise a difficult question: How do you reckon with the man without losing the movement?” said KCRA-TV Stockton.

Some are concerned that the focus on Chavez could “leave today’s farmworkers more vulnerable,” farmworker advocate Luis Magaña said to KCRA, since people will be paying less attention to the bigger picture and more on the specifics of Chavez's allegations. The current system, which Magaña says can elicit violence against these workers, “creates an opportunity for those without scruples” to “freely commit some type of abuse, such as not paying them.” Magaña worked alongside Chavez in the early days of the movement but believes the cause must “continue beyond the man.” The time to have a conversation about this issue of sexual abuse among farmworkers documented in the Times exposé is “overdue.”

The farm labor movement itself was “always about the people — the thousands who marched, organized and fought for fair wages and dignity,” Magaña said to KCRA. Many are now trying to reconcile the revelations about Chavez with modern changes. Union organizers, for example, are “trying to push forward the farmworker movement and continue the work that many women, not just Chavez, spearheaded,” said The 19th. This includes “investing resources and support to improve the culture that has protected perpetrators in organizing spaces over victims.”

‘Engage and support our community’

Huerta, now 95, insists that her allegations against Chavez should not downplay the victories made by labor unions. Farmworker labor movements have “always been bigger and far more important than any one individual,” she said in a statement. Chavez’s actions “do not diminish the permanent improvements achieved for farmworkers with the help of thousands of people. We must continue to engage and support our community, which needs advocacy and activism now more than ever.”

And many say that the current advocacy for women’s rights in the fields, regardless of Chavez, doesn’t go far enough. Do women “feel safe at work? It’s not just the labor movement,” said Olga Miranda, the president of SEIU Local 87, a union for San Francisco service workers, to The San Francisco Standard. There are “assholes everywhere.” The floodgates will open because of the allegations, as there are women who will “stand up and speak out and say, ‘I’m not gonna take your shit.’ Watch out for that force.”

The discourse should shift from “one man to the conditions farmworkers still face today, including a reality many say has long gone unheard: sexual violence against women in the fields,” said KCRA. Many women in these environments, Magaña said to KCRA, “stay silent, not for a cause but out of the need to survive.”

Although he's still only 35, Balendra Shah has already lived many different lives, said Hannah Beech et al. in The New York Times. He has been an engineer, a rapper and – until he stepped down this January – mayor of Nepal's capital city, Kathmandu. But Balen (to give him the name by which he's popularly known) now faces his biggest test yet, as Nepal's youngest-ever prime minister.

The “pugnacious” millennial – who has made a habit of ranting against his critics on social media and coming up with startling political observations (he has even praised “the managerial acumen of dictators like Hitler”) – hasn't formally been declared the next leader of the Himalayan nation, but following the sweeping victory on 5 March of his centrist Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), the party he joined in December, he's all but a shoo-in.

Defying the odds

Balen's success didn't come out of the blue. As Kathmandu's mayor, he cultivated the image of a no-nonsense politician keen to slash red tape. But his appeal skyrocketed after he voiced support for the violent youth demonstrations – the so-called Gen Z protests – that toppled the communist-led government of K.P Sharma Oli last September. People between the ages of 16 and 40 make up about 40% of the population – and younger voters turned out en masse for the RSP.

Balen's spectacular victory has “fundamentally changed” Nepali politics, said Biswas Baral in The Diplomat (Washington DC). Defying an electoral system that typically produces coalition governments, he achieved the “almost impossible” by helping the RSP, a party only founded in 2022, to win 182 out of 275 seats. The old political guard suffered a drubbing so severe that the country's two main parties – the centre-left Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist) – were left with just 38 and 25 seats respectively. They paid the price for endemic corruption, chronic political instability and high youth unemployment – issues Balen has promised to address.

If anyone is to blame for the scale of their defeat, it's Oli, said Jiba Raj Pokharel in The Himalayan Times (Kathmandu). It was the 74-year-old communist PM who imposed the social media ban that triggered the Gen Z demonstrations last September, a ban that morphed into a broader movement against state corruption. The security forces opened fire on the crowd and, in the ensuing violence, 76 people died; parliament, the supreme court and other historic buildings were torched. By refusing to take “moral responsibility” for the killings, Oli guaranteed his own “political demise”. Balen stood against him in his seat in Jhapa and, unsurprisingly, beat him by some 50,000 votes.

‘Delicate balance’

This election should be seen as a “youthquake”, said The Kathmandu Post. For decades, Nepalese politics has been dominated by sexagenarians and septuagenarians, in a country where the median age is now just 26. But things are changing fast. In 2022, just 6% of Nepal's politicians were aged under 40. Now 43% of the 165 directly elected MPs are (the rest are selected by parties in a PR list system). Although their election is, of course, a welcome development, this inexperienced new cohort must “transcend the lure of social media populism in favour of substantive, research-driven legislative reform”.

The RSP victory and the trouncing of the old guard is a boon to India and a blow to China, said the Tibetan Review (New Delhi). Nepal is strategically situated between Asia's two largest powers, both of which compete for influence there. India is by far Nepal's biggest trade partner, but under the premiership of Oli, an “unabashedly pro-China figure”, Beijing gained the upper hand. The precarious path Balen will now have to tread is maintaining “a delicate balance” between these regional super powers, said Sanjay Upadhya in the Nepali Times (Kathmandu). “The challenge is to protect Nepal's sovereignty while gaining the economic aid needed for growth.” It will be no easy task.

Artificial intelligence has swept through the tech industry, video games included. While many industry heads are declaring AI the wave of the future, so far, integrating AI into gaming has had a rough start. And its presence is getting pushback from both developers and gaming enthusiasts.

‘RAMaggedon,’ job loss and stunted creativity

The video game industry reached unprecedented heights during the pandemic, but then “artificial intelligence crept up behind it,” said Wired. The industry proliferation of AI is “already accelerating job loss and cheapening the work of developers at studios.”

One of the largest problems gaming faces is the global shortage of random-access memory, a dearth referred to as “RAMaggedon.” The data centers’ need to run AI have “siphoned RAM from the industry,” said Wired. The costs of hardware required for consoles are augmented, leading to higher prices for existing systems and stalled releases of new ones. At-home PC-building, “once a rite of passage for entry-level gamers,” has become a luxury. Analysts warn that the shortage is “expected to last well into 2026 and potentially up to 2028,” said CNN.

Gaming is the “only mass media entertainment where the creative ceiling is limited by consumer hardware,” Washington Post game critic Gene Park said to Wired. If consumers can’t afford or access tech like sufficient RAM, “the innovation will slow down.” Developers could be forced to compromise stories, art, non-player characters, battles and world-building, “all of which are already at risk of being automated by new AI tools,” Wired said.

There is a fear among the staff of major gaming companies that “CEOs will continue to fall for the potential of AI rather than the reality and thus gut workplaces.” About 45,000 gaming employees were fired from 2022 to the end of 2025, with up to 10,000 layoffs forecasted for 2026. Layoffs and fewer job postings have disproportionately impacted junior staffers, and now “everyone is just having seniors do the work,” a veteran game developer at Xbox said to Wired. The work they do is often supplemented with AI.

Mixed feelings

Some gaming executives are pro-AI integration. It is shocking and “sad” that the industry, famous for pushing new technology forward, hasn’t embraced generative AI, said Moritz Baier-Lentz, the head of gaming at Lightspeed Venture Partners, during the recent Game Developers Conference, per PC Gamer. Anti-AI game developers are “demonizing” a “marvelous new technology.” The technology is “ultimately there to empower human creators to create stuff more efficiently,” not replace them, Tim Sweeney, the founder and CEO of Fortnite developer Epic Games, said to IGN. “I think that’s a good thing.”

Developers, unlike some executives, do not seem as sure about AI, though many of them are already using it. Overall, 36% of the game developers surveyed for the 2026 State of the Game Industry Report used generative AI, with business professionals and upper management more likely to use it than rank-and-file developers. 52% of developers think generative AI is having a negative impact on the game industry, up from 30% last year. Only 7% said it had a positive impact.

As more studios have released games with AI-generated art, characters and dialogue, a “growing number have later backtracked or sworn to limit their use of the technology,” said The Washington Post. The reversals have come after “aggressive pushback from gamers online.” Gamers are overwhelmingly worried that the technology will “reduce the work needed from artists and voice actors” or lead to low-quality games filled with AI-generated slop that “lacks a creative touch,” said the Post. How the video game industry navigates this issue could influence companies in other sectors, said Nicole Greene, an AI industry analyst to the Post. Gamers are a “passionate consumer group. They don’t want to go in and see cheap AI backgrounds because a company wanted to cut costs.”

The war in Iran has caused airlines “their biggest test since the Covid-19 pandemic”, said The New York Times.

Air traffic has been “paralysed” and more than 52,000 flights to and from the Middle East have been cancelled since the war began – that is “more than half of all flights planned in the region”.

“Costs are adding up” and tourism in the region has “effectively ground to a halt”. For Emirates and the other Gulf airlines, who “have the highest profit margins in the industry”, continued disruption could take a “substantial” financial and reputational toll.

‘Scrambling’ for alternatives

Since the first missiles were launched, air traffic controllers have been “shepherding passenger jets through safer but congested airspace on the edge of the war”, said the BBC. On a normal day, each individual controller would be responsible for around six aircraft “in their area at a time”. But in times of war it can easily be “double that”.

Shifts would normally be around “45-60 minutes long with 20-30 minutes off” but during times of conflict “they will likely only do a 20-minute stint and then break for the same length of time”. In times such as these, more controllers are brought in to manage the volume and “rotated more frequently to ensure they don’t become overwhelmed”.

Airlines “have been scrambling to find alternatives” to normal routes through Iranian airspace, and the effects are “rippling across the region”, said The New York Times. “Tens of thousands of flights” have been cancelled since war broke out, and the total numbers in the Gulf remain “well below normal levels”.

Airspace restrictions have become an “increasingly common challenge for airlines navigating a world shaped by geopolitical conflict”. The Russian invasion of Ukraine had a similar effect: the “Siberian corridor” over Russia used to be a “relatively direct connection” between Europe and Asia but is has become a “patchwork of workarounds”. Likewise, the airspace over Iran, Iraq, Syria, Bahrain and Qatar is now “largely devoid of commercial planes”. The war in the Middle East is “further fragmenting a once efficient and finely tuned global aviation network”.

As “established east-west routes are narrowing, the skies over Central Asia matter more than they did before”, said The Times of Central Asia. Countries like Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan are “not immune to the crisis” and cannot match the “far larger networks” and “deeper fleets” of other Gulf hubs.

But they can provide “overflight planning, air traffic management, and route resilience rather than headline passenger numbers”. Their “aviation systems clearly now carry far greater strategic and economic importance than they did only a few years ago”. Governments in the region have acknowledged the “strategic value of their territory for rail, road, and trade corridors”, but the disruption caused by the war in Iran has “added aviation to that argument”.

‘Ballooning cost’

The war in Iran has “exposed the fragility of modern travel”, said Bloomberg. As flight paths become “increasingly narrow”, airlines’ “long-term growth plans” have been thrown into “disarray”.

Diversions add many hours to flights so planes must carry more fuel, which is “an expensive burden in light of the spike in energy costs”. With shipping channels through the Strait of Hormuz “effectively shut”, the markets have been “driving up prices of crude and products like diesel and jet fuel”.

This will inevitably affect consumers. Carriers may “hike fares” and add “fuel surcharges to cover the ballooning cost”. Equally, airlines and other large energy consumers could begin to “panic buy oil derivatives contracts” to “shield them from wild price swings”.

In the longer term, continued instability could also change flight culture, with safety concerns “likely to remain front of mind for many travellers” for the foreseeable future. Higher inflation around the world could mean demand to fly is “reshaped”, even “spurring passengers to rethink long-haul trips” and “favour cheaper holidays closer to home”.

Even though it has long been known that Russia engages in censorship of its citizens, recent experiments in Moscow are raising fears that the Russian government is augmenting its information blockade. This new era of censorship, which involves blacking out internet communications other than approved websites, has raised concerns in Russia and among outside observers.

‘Severely limit what people can see’

Throughout March, people in Moscow have “found themselves without connectivity on their phones” due to internet outages created by the Kremlin, said NBC News. These blackouts have “disrupted the daily lives of millions of residents and hit businesses that rely on mobile internet,” though the Russian government has repeatedly said this is being done in the name of security due to threats from the war in Ukraine.

Certain “websites and apps, including government portals and banking services, may remain accessible through ‘whitelists,’” said Business Insider, as the Kremlin may allow “certain services to keep operating even while broader internet access is restricted.” Beyond government portals, some of the sites on these Russian whitelists may also include “state media outlets and Russian homegrown apps such as Max, a messaging platform controlled by the government,” said The Wall Street Journal.

This effort to control internet access is not new: Russia has been “honing and testing similar infrastructure for the past year,” said the Journal. Many officials believe these rolling blackouts will “likely be in place until the end of the war.” This comes as Russians are already “contending with rising inflation and economic strain more than four years into the war in Ukraine.”

‘Massive headache’

As the Kremlin continues to clamp down harder, many Russians, particularly those in the workforce, say they are having trouble going about their lives. The outages are a “massive headache,” Dmitry, a consultant in Moscow, said to The Guardian. “I’m having trouble ordering a taxi, sending work emails or even just messaging my family.” The blackouts are also “slamming businesses that rely on cellphone internet,” said The Associated Press.

Muscovites who run “cafes, restaurants and shops that rely on mobile internet have suffered massive losses as customers have been unable to pay for the services,” said the AP. Many of the city’s ATMs and parking meters that “rely on cellphone internet stopped working,” further complicating Moscow life. Businesses in the city “lost between 3 and 5 billion rubles [$38 million to $63 million] in five days of shutdowns.” However, businesses with “broadband access and residents with broadband at home have not been affected.”

Many are turning to more low-tech options, with Russians buying old-school technology like walkie-talkies and pagers. Sales of walkie-talkies “increased by 27%, sales of pagers for communication with clients and staff by 73%, and landline telephones by about a quarter,” said Russian news outlet RBC. Muscovites are also looking for less high-tech ways to navigate the area. “Sales of road maps increased by 170% in physical units, foldable maps by 70% and Moscow maps by 20%.”

Dubai is known for being one of the world’s most opulent cities, as well as a bastion of safety in a region under the perpetual threat of violence. But the recent start of the Iran war has shattered the image of peace in the United Arab Emirates’ largest city. Iranian drone attacks and missile launches against the Persian Gulf have turned Dubai into a place where its residents must walk cautiously.

‘Built itself this image’

The war in Iran has “punctured the notion that towering skyscrapers, financial clout and the embrace of luxury and diversity in the Persian Gulf can act as impenetrable shields against the region’s turmoil,” said The Wall Street Journal. Since the war broke out, Iran has launched over 1,900 missiles and drones toward the UAE, according to the country’s defense ministry, with Dubai bearing the brunt of these. Iran is largely attacking the city in an effort to disrupt global trade routes.

Iran’s attacks have been “shutting down the airport, striking the iconic Burj Al Arab hotel and Dubai’s deep-water port, and killing several people across the UAE,” said the Journal. This marks a significant change for Dubai, as its wealth and status as a financial hub have largely made it “impervious to conflict — a haven of stability untouched by the wars, corruption and upheaval around it.”

Dubai has “built itself this image that people aspire to,” Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, a political science professor from the UAE, told The Washington Post. And publicly, leaders in the region say Dubai is still safe and have “projected confidence in their defense capabilities,” said the Post. The UAE’s anti-missile system has had a “94% overall intercept success,” the Emirati embassy in Washington, D.C., said on X. This system has “largely kept” the “country safe from Iranian attacks.”

‘The shine has definitely been taken off’

Despite the public confidence in Dubai’s safety, many residents seem to feel differently, especially in a city where “more than 90% of its roughly 4 million residents are foreigners,” said the Post. There are “tens of thousands of residents and tourists that have fled Dubai” since the shelling began, said The Guardian, though the city’s “large population of migrant workers largely don’t have that privilege.”

“The shine has definitely been taken off,” John Trudinger, a British teacher and resident of Dubai for 16 years, said to The Guardian. Many of his colleagues in the city are “deeply traumatized and really struggling to cope.” Zain Anwar, a taxi driver from Pakistan, had a similar story. “I don’t want to be in Dubai anymore, there is no business, we are earning nothing since this war and I don’t see the tourism coming back,” he told The Guardian.

Life is going on in certain ways for those who do remain. The situation in the city is “functioning but tense,” Nick Rowles-Davies, a lawyer who moved to Dubai in 2022, said to CNBC. There is “visible vigilance in some areas, particularly at night when interceptions have been audible.” Those living in Dubai are not in a “panic, but there is a clear recognition that this is no longer distant geopolitics.”

The country has adopted a sweeping new law that orders government agencies, private enterprises and parents to foster a “stronger sense of community among all ethnic groups” in the nation, said Lou Qinjian, a delegate to the National People’s Congress, at multiple outlets. The new “ethnic unity” mandate may sound benign, but critics say it could erase and diminish the cultural identities of Uyghurs, Mongolians and other minority groups in favor of the country’s dominant Han Chinese culture.

Binding minorities to the majority

Beijing wants China’s ethnic minorities to “blend in,” said The New York Times. Xi Jinping has “worked aggressively” during his decade in power to pressure minorities in Tibet and elsewhere to “identify first and foremost as patriotic citizens.” The new law furthers that mission with provisions that “touch on education, housing policy, entertainment and other areas” to create a “single national identity” forged by the Chinese Communist Party.

It orders that the Mandarin Chinese language be used in school instruction and other official business and that different ethnicities should live in mixed communities. The goal is to “bind China’s minorities” to the majority Han Chinese population, said the Times. The law tells non-Han Chinese to “integrate themselves with the Han majority and above all else be loyal to Beijing,” said Allen Carlson, of Cornell University, to Bloomberg.

There are 56 officially recognized ethnic groups in China, and “55 are getting squashed” by the new law, said The Economist. The edict is “born of fear” that minority groups are “proving too hard to control.” Early Communist governments allowed minority groups a “range of privileges” to follow their own religions and educate children in their native languages. But “outbursts of violence” over decades in Tibet, Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia persuaded leaders that “even relative autonomy had failed.” The question now is whether the mandate might provoke resentments that may “eventually erupt.”

Cracking down

China started its Sinicization of minority groups in the late 2000s, said BBC News. Monks have been arrested in Tibet, Uyghur Muslims have been sent to reeducation camps, and Mongolians have battled authorities to preserve the right to teach children their language. The law is the latest attempt to “cement Xi’s push toward assimilation” of minority groups.

Beijing’s apparent view is that “minority languages and cultures are backward and impediments to advancement,” said Ian Chong, of the National University of Singapore, to the BBC. Xi is trying to build a “great and strong Chinese nation with a northern Han core.”

Chinese officials say the law was drafted after consultation with “representatives from ethnic minority communities,” said Reuters. The rules emphasize the “protection of cultural traditions and lifestyles of all ethnic groups,” said an editorial in China Daily, the state newspaper. Minority groups like the Tibetans, Mongols, Hui, Manchus and Uyghurs comprise less than 10% of China’s population, said Reuters, but they live mostly in “regions that together cover roughly half of the country’s land area, much of it rich in natural resources.”

Max Dowman made football history on Saturday. Running from his own half, he fired into an empty net to secure Arsenal a 2-0 win over Everton and become the youngest goalscorer in the Premier League.

But afterwards, in the “ecstatic dressing room, the man of the match wasn’t there”, said Miguel Delaney in The Independent. That’s because Dowman “isn’t actually the man of the match”, but a child. The midfielder, aged 16 years and 75 days, isn’t allowed in the same dressing room as the adults, and gets changed in his own space near the referees’ room.

‘Never left alone’

Dowman “probably cannot even remember a time when he was not skipping past opponents with a ball at his feet”, said Sam Dean in The Telegraph. There has been “a buzz” around his name for years. He was scouted when he was just four; at 13, he became the youngest player to represent Arsenal’s under-18s; at 14, he was the youngest to play for their under-21s. He also played for the England under-17s at 14, and started training with Arsenal’s first team. Earlier this year, he became the youngest player in Champions League history and the youngest starter for Arsenal.

There are “clear rules in place” for minors playing adult football, said BBC Sport. Dowman has to change in a separate room from his teammates, before going into the main changing room for pep talks. The teenager, who is due to sit his GCSEs this summer, divides his non-playing time between a private tutor and school. One member of Arsenal’s security team is “assigned to stay close to Dowman at all times”.

“In the eyes of the law, he is still a child,” said former Leeds United welfare officer Lucy Ward. “He looks and behaves like an adult, he’s in an adult environment and scores goals for Arsenal, but the law says that he is treated as a child until he is 18.” Dowman is “never left alone with anyone” who hasn’t been cleared by a DBS check. His parents must give consent when he travels for an away match, and he has to have a chaperone. “He doesn’t want to stand out – he just wants to fit in – but these safeguarding measures are in place for young players.”

‘Right temperament to deliver’

Last season, Dowman was “so far ahead of his opponents and teammates that he was almost playing a different sport”, said Dean in The Telegraph. It was obvious he had “outgrown youth football”. If Premier League rules hadn’t prevented him from playing for the senior team last year, “he might have broken through even earlier”.

In January, Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta likened the teenager to a young Lionel Messi. That was after Dowman signed a pre-contract agreement with the north London club (his father handled the negotiations). A professional deal will follow when he turns 17 in December.

“For all the skill, though, you need to have the right temperament to deliver” at that age, said Sky Sports. For every wunderkind who went on to a glittering senior career, there are “players who fell through the trapdoor of promise”.

“He doesn’t seem to be fazed by the occasion or the moment or the context or the opponent,” Arteta said on Saturday. “I’ve seen a lot of players with talent but at 16, very few that can cope with that level of demand.”

Dowman’s goal will “go down in Arsenal folklore”, said Sky Sports. The “touch of the head” to gain control of the ball, the “physicality” required to get past Everton left-back Vitalii Mykolenko, and the touch that sent midfielder Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall “to the shops”. It took Arsenal closer to their first Premier League title in two decades, but it looked like Dowman “had been doing that for years”.

“I just felt it was a magical moment for Max Dowman, a magical moment for Arsenal and absolutely it stopped me in my tracks,” said football pundit Gary Neville. “This kid does look different.”

When José Antonio Kast was elected as Chile’s next president in late 2025, it was “one more alarming case of a worldwide trend toward nativist authoritarianism,” said the Chilean American author Ariel Dorfman at The New York Times. It was also a sign of the “rehabilitation” of former dictator Augusto Pinochet, one of the continent’s “most infamous autocrats.”

Kast, as a vocal supporter of the notoriously brutal Chilean strongman, was elected in part for his hard-right bona fides, only to take office in a very different world than the one in which he campaigned. With war raging in the Middle East and a White House demonstrating an eagerness for regime change across the hemisphere, what does Kast’s unapologetically right-wing ascent mean for one of South America’s most robust economies?

‘Nostalgia’ for dictatorships past? Or ‘frustration with the status quo’?

President Kast “built his career” in government by “railing against liberal values from the fringes of Chilean politics,” said National Public Radio. But during this recent election, he “avoided all mention of the hard-line moral agenda” that has been “synonymous” with his decades-long career in public office.

The son of a Nazi party member who fled to South America following the Holocaust, Kast has shown admiration for Pinochet that has left political analysts questioning whether the new president is showing “nostalgia for Latin America’s past dictatorships” or expressing signs of “frustration with the status quo,” said Al Jazeera.

Regardless of Kast’s personal motivations, the global right-wing excitement over his victory transformed the “routine transfer of power” at last week’s inauguration into a “celebration of a movement that is gaining momentum across the hemisphere,” The New York Times said. Kast is now part of a “growing roster of leaders” in South and Central America “aligned” with the Trump regime as the White House leans on “ideological allies” to address narco cartels and “purge Chinese influence from the region.”

Kast has “avoided” commenting on “controversial issues” both domestic and international, but he has nevertheless “made overtures to the Trump administration,” The Associated Press said. Indications of those types of overtures “intensified recently” with his cancellation of a planned submarine cable between Chile and China that had garnered “intense criticism” from — and deepened diplomatic tensions with — the United States.

For his supporters, Kast’s electoral victory and now presidency come as part of his promise to take a “harder line” on migration, crime and poverty — issues Chileans claim have “eroded the country’s sense of order,” said Zeteo. Critics counter that Kast’s “strongman rhetoric, Trump-style political playbook and backing from hard-right coalitions” revives acute “fears of authoritarianism.”

Grappling with an ‘increasingly challenging’ geopolitical landscape

Kast now assumes the Chilean presidency, a position whose relationship with the U.S. has “deteriorated significantly under the second Trump administration,” the AP said. Kast’s predecessor was a “vocal critic” of Trump, at one point labeling Trump’s leadership “as that of a ‘new emperor.’”

Although Kast seems interested in renewed rapprochement with the U.S., he enters office in an “increasingly challenging international geopolitical landscape,” said Guillermo Holzmann, a political analyst from the University of Valparaíso, to Reuters, including “economic risks from the Iran war, the U.S.’ security strategy in the region and China’s influence in Latin America.” Chinese sway, in particular, poses an acute risk to Chile, the “world’s ​largest copper producer,” given that ⁠China is the “biggest purchaser of the metal.”

While the Trump regime “looks on enthusiastically at this trend” of arch-nationalist conservatives taking office across Latin America, said the Times, it “remains unclear” whether Kast’s Chile and others will “work with the United States on security” and move away from China, their “dominant trading partner.”

Long-standing claims of verbal and physical abuse at world-renowned Copenhagen restaurant Noma have finally “come back to haunt” its founding chef, René Redzepi, said The Times.

The “culinary god” has stepped down after shocking details of his “toxic” kitchen culture were revealed by a damning new investigation. “An apology is not enough,” Redzepi said in a statement on Instagram. “I take responsibility for my own actions.”

Empire built on ‘pain’

Redzepi has been “rewriting the rules of fine dining” since Noma opened in 2003, crafting “jewel-like plates” from sustainable and foraged local ingredients, said The New York Times. His innovative approach scooped him three Michelin stars, and Noma has topped the World’s 50 Best Restaurants list on five occasions. He became a revered figure in the culinary world: in 2013, Anthony Bourdain proclaimed he was “without a doubt, the most influential, provocative, and important chef in the world”.

In 2024, Noma transitioned from restaurant to “full-time food laboratory”, developing new dishes and running fine-dining pop-ups in different locations around the world. But an upcoming residency in Los Angeles, with a tasting menu priced at $1,500 (£1,300) a head, “sparked a public conversation” about Redzepi’s treatment of his staff, some of whom came forward to claim his “empire” was built on their “pain”.

Thirty-five former staffers, employed between 2009 and 2017, gave accounts of serious abuse, alleging that Redzepi “punched employees in the face” and “slammed them against walls”. Several claimed he would “crouch under the counters” and “jab them in the legs with his fingers or a nearby utensil, like a barbecue fork”. They also described verbal threats, including to have staff members “blacklisted” from other restaurants or to “have their families deported”. Until 2002, Noma had over 30 unpaid interns, working 16-hour days and covering their own living costs. The restaurant’s “one-woman human resources department” also “happened to be Redzepi’s mother-in-law”.

‘Signs’ were all there

This will come as no surprise to “anyone who has followed modern restaurant culture”, said former restaurateur Richard Crampton-Platt in UnHerd. I visited Noma a decade ago and found it “suffocatingly self-regarding”. It developed a reputation as an “enlightened kitchen” and the “progressive future of fine dining” but the “signs of what was really going on” were all there. Redzepi was filmed “screaming at chefs” in the 2008 documentary “Noma at Boiling Point” and, in 2015, he wrote an article in a food magazine admitting that “I have been a bully for a large part of my career”.

“The backlash was inevitable,” said US chef Andrew Gruel in the New York Post. But it’s “ironic” that a lot of the “outrage is coming from the same elite food world that helped build a culture of abuse”. For years, fine-dining kitchens have been “run like military brigades”, with long hours, unpaid or poorly paid workers and a culture of harassment. The tacit “bargain” aspiring young chefs accept is to “endure the brutality, work the hours, and maybe one day earn your place in the hierarchy”. The price of the excellence that food critics and “elite diners” demand is professional kitchens marred by exploitation, burnout and alcohol and drug abuse.

“It’s dehumanising” and it’s been going on for too long, French food journalist Nora Bouazzouni, author of “Violence in the Kitchen”, told CNN. Her work “exposing the extent of physical, emotional and psychological abuse” in professional kitchens across France “has helped spark a national reckoning” that’s “reached the ears of the country’s lawmakers”. Last year, a motion to create a commission of inquiry into violence in professional kitchens was tabled in the French National Assembly.

Undoing this entrenched “French system” that kitchens around the world have “replicated” won’t be easy. But a 2021 paper which drew on 47 interviews with elite chefs, and was published in the Journal of Management Studies, offers one “compelling, but simple solution: create more open kitchens”. A shift away from the “isolated, closed, hidden spaces” where “regular rules don’t apply” could help to establish a healthier work environment.

Before Redzepi’s resignation, tickets for Noma’s LA pop-up had sold out. This only demonstrates, said The Times, that there are “plenty who can happily separate the art from the artist” as long as “the kitchen is thoroughly soundproofed”.

Since 1959, Cuba’s so-called “white coat army” has been one of the Caribbean island nation’s most distinctive exports. “From Latin America to Africa and beyond”, thousands of highly trained medical professionals have worked to fill gaps in overstretched health systems around the world, generating valuable income for Havana in the process, said Al Jazeera.

But the long-standing scheme is now under strain, as the United States seeks to “starve Cuba of much-needed revenue” by putting pressure on its allies to stop importing Cuban medics to prop up their strained health services.

‘Coercive labour’

“For decades” the Cuban government has sent healthcare professionals to work overseas in diplomatic arrangements in which host nations pay Havana directly for the services of its medics, said The New York Times. Doctors are dispatched to “work in remote villages and cities in dozens of countries” where local healthcare systems have difficulty filling posts, but the medics themselves only receive a “small fraction” of what is paid for their services. It is “unclear” exactly how much Cuba has received from such arrangements, but research estimates a revenue of around $4 billion (£2.9 billion) a year from the export of skilled workers, including healthcare workers and teachers.

US officials argue that the programmes amount to a “coercive labour export scheme”, said the Financial Times. The US has expanded visa restrictions on those involved in medical missions, including officials in host countries, whom it accuses of participating in “forced-labour practices”. Last year, it imposed travel restrictions on several officials from Brazil, “once a top destination” for Cuban doctors but where numbers have now rapidly fallen amid increasing pressure from the US.

‘Close to collapse’

“After nearly 50 years”, arrangements will draw to a close in Guyana, said the Associated Press, while “several other Caribbean countries” including St Lucia, Antigua and Dominica are also reviewing their programmes. Medical missions have also ended in staunch Cuban ally Venezuela, as well as Guatemala.

Cuba framed the end of the medical mission in Jamaica as the nation “yielding to US pressure”, said Cuba’s 14ymedio. But Jamaica’s “version is different”, alleging that Cuba “did not even respond” to a proposal to pay doctors directly for their work.

The impact is being felt well beyond the Americas. In Calabria, one of the poorest regions in Italy, the arrival in recent years of 400 Cuban doctors has been “essential to keeping local hospitals running”, said Reuters. But, under duress from Washington, Calabria has now “scrapped plans” to hire 600 further doctors, and is now scrambling in a “global search for medical staff” expected to cost the region €8 million (£6.9 million), said Euractiv.

Giuseppe Ranuccio, vice-president of the Calabrian regional council, told the outlet that the health system was already “close to collapse”. The Cuban doctors “were supposed to buy time for structural reforms”, he said. “But those reforms never arrived.”

Why is America at war with Iran? When will the conflict end? Two weeks after the launch of the joint US-Israel campaign, the answers to these questions remain no clearer, said Lee Siegel in The New Statesman.

Donald Trump's declared goals change all the time: it's to liberate Iranians; to eliminate an imminent nuclear threat; to destroy Iran's ballistic missiles; to avenge the US. As for how long the war could last, Trump declared last Friday that the US wouldn't stop until it secured Iran's “unconditional surrender”.

But in response to rising fuel prices and market turmoil, he softened his language on Monday, saying the war was “very complete, pretty much” and would end soon. His words helped calm markets: the price of a barrel of oil, which had soared to nearly $120, dipped back below $90. However, Trump later reverted to tough rhetoric, insisting that the US was set to press on as “we haven't won enough”.

‘Scorched-earth treatment’

Tehran, for its part, shows no sign of capitulating, said Arash Reisinezhad and Arsham Reisinezhad in Foreign Policy. While the tempo of its missile and drone attacks on neighbouring countries has declined since the opening days of the conflict, the strikes haven't stopped. The regime is aiming to prolong and widen the conflict – Azerbaijan and Turkey are the latest countries to be targeted with Iranian drones – to “generate pressure across multiple domains: energy markets, maritime logistics, regional alliances and domestic politics within the US and its partners”.

Wars between asymmetrical adversaries are rarely decided by the opening exchange of blows. More often, they become “contests of endurance”. Iran is now getting the “scorched-earth treatment”, said Patrick Cockburn in The i Paper. More than 1,000 civilians are thought to have been killed in the bombing so far. But air power alone is unlikely to defeat the Iranian regime. Just look at Gaza, where Hamas remained in control even after cities were razed to the ground.

Iran's ace card is its control over the Strait of Hormuz, said David Patrikarakos in the Daily Mail. About a fifth of the global oil supply normally passes through this narrow stretch of water, which is also a vital conduit for commodities such as nitrogen fertiliser and helium.

Tehran has effectively blockaded the strait by threatening to attack passing vessels, and several commercial ships have already been targeted. While Iran's regular navy has been largely put out of action, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is responsible for the strait, has access to many small, fast-moving craft and remote-control suicide drone boats. It also has missile launchers and drone systems deployed all along the coast.

If the strait remains closed for an extended period, the impact will be catastrophic: Qatar's energy minister, Saad al-Kaabi, has warned that it could “bring down the economies of the world”. Trump has talked of providing naval escorts for vessels in the strait, said James Rothwell in The Daily Telegraph, but that would commit American forces to a complex and expensive logistical operation – one with the potential to become “a kind of maritime Vietnam”.

‘Escalation dominance’

Trump is in a trap of his own making, said Edward Luce in the FT. Two “very risky gambles” are available to him. One would be to launch a commando raid to seize what remains of Iran's 400kg stockpile of enriched uranium. “Success would offer Trump a spectacular off-ramp.” The other gambit would be to seize Kharg Island, the outcrop 15 miles off Iran's coast that serves as the nation's principal crude oil export hub. But that would require more boots on the ground, and there's little tolerance in America for more US casualties.

Trump's best option is to call it quits after degrading Iran's military capabilities, said The Economist. Critics will claim that he has left the job half done, and Iran may seek to rebuild its nuclear programme, obliging the US to launch future strikes. But “better for America to declare victory early than limp out of an unpopular war because of exhaustion”.

The markets are expecting Trump to do just that, before “he is overwhelmed by a supply-chain shock to match Covid”, said Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in The Daily Telegraph. However, the defiance of Iran's regime will make it harder for him. “It is we who will determine the end of the war,” the IRGC declared on Tuesday. Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said Iran would fight on even after a US declaration of victory. The question now is which aspect of Trump's thinking will prevail: “his fear of losing the US midterm elections? Or his injured vanity and his psychological need to command ‘escalation dominance', always and everywhere?”