28.6 C
London
Saturday, May 23, 2026
Home Blog

German court classifies Jewish Voice as “extremist”

0
german-court-classifies-jewish-voice-as-“extremist”
German court classifies Jewish Voice as “extremist”

The German organisation Jewish Voice for a Just Peace in the Middle East (JV) may, for the time being, continue to be classified as “extremist” by Germany’s domestic intelligence service. This was decided by a court in Cologne last Wednesday.

The organisation describes itself as anti-Zionist and is among the most prominent Jewish voices in Germany advocating for Palestinian rights. It characterises what has been taking place in Palestine for more than 100 years as settler colonialism, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing. Its members appear publicly at demonstrations and as speakers, and support initiatives such as the global BDS movement and the German “Kufiyas in Buchenwald” campaign.

While JV has faced a mixture of systematic ignorance and defamation as “self-hating Jews” from the German mainstream media, it has increasingly come under scrutiny from the authorities amid the intensification of anti-Palestinian repression in Germany since October 2023. Prominent members such as Iris Hefets and Udi Raz, for example, have repeatedly been arrested by police in Berlin during protest actions. In 2024, Jewish Voice was labelled “extremist” for the first time in the so-called “Verfassungsschutzbericht“, an annual publication issued by the domestic intelligence service. As in the case of the Palestinian prisoner solidarity network Samidoun and the group “Palästina Solidarität Duisburg“ (Palestine Solidarity Duisburg, PSDU), which were banned by decree of the Interior Ministry in November 2023 and May 2024 respectively, the authorities accuse JV of violating the principle of “international understanding” (an extremely vague concept drawn from the German constitution) and of spreading “anti-Israeli propaganda”. Unlike in the cases of Samidoun and PSDU, however, the issue with Jewish Voice is not an outright ban on the organisation – at least not yet –, though its classification as “extremist” could pave the way for exactly that. In the immediate term, the registered association’s charitable status is also under threat.

JV therefore filed lawsuits both against this classification and against its inclusion in the 2024 “Verfassungsschutzbericht“. In the latter case, it secured an initial victory at the end of April: a Berlin court ruled that its inclusion in the intelligence service’s public report was impermissible, since the evidence presented was insufficient to substantiate the accusation of “extremism”. The Cologne court has now ruled in precisely the opposite direction. The judges there followed the authorities’ argument so far as to portray statements by JV members questioning the framing of the 7th October uprising as an “antisemitic terrorist attack” as effectively amounting to support for Hamas. The ruling states: “The Court sees sufficiently substantiated indications that the applicant continuously agitates against the State of Israel and thereby indirectly contributes to the Hamas activities that violate the principle of international understanding.” This allegation strongly recalls a term coined specifically for the PSDU ban, namely that PSDU had “mental supported” (“geistig unterstützt”) Hamas.

Wieland Hoban of JV commented that the Cologne ruling “says something about the arbitrariness and contradictions of the so-called “Staatsräson“, where Instagram posts are stylised into acts of support for armed resistance – as though we were directing Hamas. Unfortunately, it also shows very clearly that even legal victories are no proof of a properly functioning constitutional state.” He observed that the far-right AfD party has by now become “more respectable” than Jewish Voice.

Indeed, the situation remains contradictory: Germany’s domestic intelligence service is currently permitted to classify Jewish Voice as “extremist”, but for the time being is not allowed to list it as such in the 2024 “Verfassungsschutzbericht“. Since both cases are interim proceedings, the final rulings are still pending. In addition, the 2025 constitutional protection report is expected in June. In light of the Cologne ruling, it must be assumed that Jewish Voice will once again be included in it.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

France bans Israeli Cabinet Minister Ben-Gvir over treatment of Gaza flotilla activists

0
france-bans-israeli-cabinet-minister-ben-gvir-over-treatment-of-gaza-flotilla-activists
France bans Israeli Cabinet Minister Ben-Gvir over treatment of Gaza flotilla activists

France has banned Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir from entering French territory over what Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot described as “unacceptable actions” against activists aboard a Gaza-bound flotilla, Anadolu reports.

Barrot said Saturday that the move followed incidents involving French and European citizens participating in the Global Sumud Flotilla.

“France cannot tolerate French nationals being threatened, intimidated, or brutalized,” he said, particularly by a serving government minister.

“I note that these actions have been condemned by a large number of Israeli government and political figures. They follow a long list of shocking statements and actions, incitements to hatred and violence against Palestinians,” Barrot wrote on the US social media platform X.

He added: “Like my Italian colleague, I call on the European Union to also impose sanctions on Itamar Ben-Gvir.”

The move follows circulation of footage appearing to show Ben-Gvir, — a key ruling coalition partner of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — walking among detained activists who were kneeling in tightly packed formations with their hands tied behind their backs.

In the footage, Ben-Gvir appears to wave an Israeli flag and taunt detainees.

Earlier, Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani requested that EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas place possible sanctions against Ben-Gvir on the agenda of the next meeting of EU foreign ministers.

Similarly, Irish Prime Minister Micheal Martin wrote to European Council President Antonio Costa requesting formal discussion at the upcoming EU summit on Israel’s treatment of EU citizens aboard the flotilla.

The flotilla, carrying 428 people from 44 countries, departed Thursday from Marmaris, Türkiye, in an effort to break the Israeli blockade on Gaza Strip, which has been in place since 2007.

Solar to overtake coal on Texas grid for the first time ever this year

0
solar-to-overtake-coal-on-texas-grid-for-the-first-time-ever-this year
Solar to overtake coal on Texas grid for the first time ever this year

This story was originally published by Canary Media and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

The Texas sun keeps rising, as Texas coal wanes.

For the first time ever, solar is set to generate more electricity than coal in the power market managed by the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or ERCOT. Nobody is building new coal power plants in the state, but developers are adding more solar there than anywhere else in the country. As a result of those diverging trajectories, the federal government expects ERCOT will receive 78 billion kilowatt-hours from solar in 2026 and just 60 from coal.

This trend does have seasonal variations. Last year, solar output beat coal on a monthly basis from March through August, and this year it is expected to do so from March through December, per the U.S. Energy Information Administration, or EIA, at the Department of Energy.

Nationally, the combination of wind and solar surpassed coal generation in 2024, as noted in an analysis by Ember, a think tank that conducts research on clean energy. In other words, the solar industry is further along in Texas than it is nationwide.

The Texas solar surge undercuts the prevailing energy narratives coming out of the Trump administration, which has attempted to boost coal and gas as tools of ​“energy dominance,” while blocking or canceling American energy that comes from renewables. The Department of Energy, for instance, is keeping struggling coal plants on life support at great expense to taxpayers. Meanwhile, the Department of the Interior is blocking wind and solar developments that intersect with public lands.

Read Next

Trump officials have argued that coal is more reliable than solar because it can generate power around the clock. But even with that advantage, coal plants in Texas can’t keep up with the total annual and monthly production from the rapidly growing solar fleet. This has not damaged grid reliability, because ERCOT meets evening demand with a diverse portfolio, including gas plants, nuclear, wind, and, increasingly, batteries, which store all that excess solar power for use when the sun stops shining.

Of course, Texas leaders did not set out to disprove the Trump administration’s energy claims. The maverick Lone Star State kept its electricity system out of the hands of federal regulators, and in the 1990s and early 2000s reformed it to promote free market competition instead of centralized planning by monopoly utilities. That market, coupled with lots of space and lax building regulations, has made an ideal environment for wind, solar, and batteries to flourish. Now, Texas is fortified with tens of gigawatts of new capacity with which to tackle heat waves and temper price spikes.

Deep-red Texas offers lessons for the liberal states that have committed to lofty climate goals yet failed to build much solar or batteries so far. They can’t immediately switch over to an ERCOT-style market, but they can take steps to speed up the time it takes to get permits and grid connection, dial back the level of deference to habitually conservative legacy utilities, and make sure that clean energy gets a fair shot in the race to serve surging energy needs. And it’s always a good time to reexamine old market rules that subtly privilege entrenched players at the expense of new entrants that would make cheaper and cleaner power.

After more of the rapid-fire solar buildout, EIA expects ERCOT will produce 99 billion kilowatt-hours of solar power in 2027, up 27 percent from 2026. At that point, the upstart industry will have left its well-established coal competition in the dust.


Azov’s drones return to Mariupol as Ukraine expands its kill zone

0

Mariupol became one of the defining symbols of Russia’s invasion and Ukraine’s resistance. Russia reduced the southern port city to ruins during its siege in 2022. Tens of thousands are believed to have died. Satellite imagery later revealed sprawling mass graves outside the city.

Among the Ukrainian units that fought there was Azov, whose last stand inside the Azovstal steel plant became one of the defining images of the war.

Now Azov has returned to Mariupol from the air. On May 8, Ukraine’s 1st Azov Corps released footage showing reconnaissance and strike drones flying over the occupied city. The videos showed roads, industrial sites and military facilities used by Russian forces. Azov fighters described the operation as a “patrol” over their hometown.

“For now, from the air,” the unit wrote on social media. “But there is more to come.”

Mariupol has now spent four years under Russian occupation. Moscow has tried to militarize the city and reshape it demographically, building new apartment blocks while encouraging Russians to settle there.  

The enemy has worked hard to discredit Azov over the years, highlighting the connections of some of its members to far-right groups. After concerns were raised in Congress about its checkered past, the Biden administration State Department performed a vetting process – looking for human rights violations – under the Leahy laws. Once that process was complete, it allowed the brigade to access US weapons in June 2024.

“Beyond the battlefield, this war has also become a fight over historical narratives,” said John Vsetecka, an assistant professor of history at Nova Southeastern University. Ukrainian drones over Mariupol challenge the Kremlin’s narrative that occupation is permanent.

Shaun Pinner, a British fighter captured during the battle for Mariupol and later freed, said Azov’s return to the skies above the city carries both symbolic and military weight.

“Mariupol is not just another occupied city. It was our home,” Pinner said. “It became the centerpiece of Russia’s entire narrative surrounding the war, and Azov itself became central to the Kremlin’s absurd attempt to define an entire nation as ‘Nazi,’ which was always complete garbage.”

He said the drone flights also undermine Russia’s attempt to normalize the occupation.

“The Kremlin wants occupation to appear permanent and stable, but it’s far from that,” Pinner said. “Explosions, drone activity and visible military insecurity damage that image, both for Russian domestic audiences and collaborators inside occupied areas. It gives those waiting for our return hope.”

But the drone flights are not only symbolic. Mariupol now sits at the center of Russia’s southern logistics corridor linking occupied Donbas to Crimea. Since 2022, Russia has invested heavily in roads, rail links and infrastructure around the Azov coast in an effort to reduce dependence on the vulnerable Kerch Bridge. Supplies, fuel and troops increasingly move through this land corridor.

Ukraine is trying to make that corridor unsafe. “There is no safe rear area for the occupiers,” Azov wrote. “There is nowhere to hide and no way to protect themselves.”

Azov says its drones are operating as far as 160 kilometers behind the front line and that strike distances will continue to increase.

Russian military bloggers have noticed. Romanov, a pro-war commentator, warned that Ukrainian forces were now striking logistics routes with drones operating through Starlink and reaching up to 200 km. He added that Ukraine’s AI-enabled Hornet drones “can be seen flying unimpeded over the Mariupol section of the R-150 highway, searching for targets to engage, primarily fuel tankers and other military vehicles.”

“Within six months to a year, we will very likely encounter fully automated Hornets or other drones that won’t be jammed with EW,” Romanov wrote. “The drone will simply fly into a specific area and then circle around until it selects a target, which the neural network prioritizes.”

Dimko Zhluktenko of Ukraine’s 413th Unmanned Systems Regiment said Ukraine’s recent success is not only about the drones themselves. Ukrainian crews, planners and operators have also improved after years of adaptation under battlefield pressure.

Large mechanized assaults have become rarer. Control of the battlefield is increasingly determined by which side can disrupt logistics and command networks farther behind it.

Dmytro Kavun of Dignitas Ukraine said the pace of these strikes has accelerated because several trends have converged at once. Ukraine is rapidly scaling drone production and could potentially produce seven million drones this year.

Communications between drones and operators have improved, while Ukrainian strikes have steadily degraded Russian air defenses, opening corridors for deeper attacks.

“I believe Ukraine has a considerable technological advantage, particularly in electronic warfare, drone connectivity and drone-based air defense,” said Clément Molin, an open-source analyst.

Kavun said the most important targets lie in what Ukrainian planners increasingly describe as the “mid-range” zone, roughly 30 to 300 kilometers behind the front. This is where Russia stores fuel, ammunition and reserves while concentrating the roads and railways needed to sustain frontline operations.

Andrii Pelypenko of Ukraine’s 419th Battalion of Unmanned Systems said Ukrainian engineers spent years designing and testing systems while Russian strikes repeatedly targeted Ukraine’s infrastructure and industry.

Now, he argues, some Ukrainian drone systems have matured enough to secure large state contracts, allowing production to scale further. Domestic production also gives Kyiv greater operational freedom. Western-supplied systems often come with restrictions on how and where they may be used, especially for strikes deep inside Russia. Ukrainian-built drones do not.

George Barros of the Institute for the Study of War said Ukrainian brigades are increasingly trying to destroy the logistics, staging areas and command posts that make Russian assaults possible in the first place. That shift has driven a sharp increase in strikes roughly 30 to 120 kilometers behind the front line.

According to Barros, Ukraine is increasingly using drones to create localized “kill zones” extending 20 to 30 kilometers deep, with the longer-term goal of pushing them to 45 or even 50 kilometers. If Russian logistics hubs and forward bases are forced farther from the front, Moscow’s infiltration-heavy tactics become harder to sustain.

That pattern is already emerging near Dobropillia. OSINT mapper Playfra said fighting there has become increasingly positional, while Azov units have intensified strikes on deeper Russian logistics routes. In the 1st Azov Corps sector, they noted the casualty ratio temporarily improved to as high as 1:20.

Lev Pashko, known by the callsign “Horus,” commander of the 6th Special Purpose Battalion, argued that battlefield adaptation now matters as much as manpower. “Those that adapt faster to changing battlefield dynamics will prevail,” he said.

“The enemy mobilized its modest resources,” wrote the Russian pro-war blogger Alexander Karchenko. “It switched to drone technology and is striving with all its might toward a robot war. Well, that’s when we’ll have to trade a living human for a flying machine.”

The impact reaches beyond the battlefield. Maria Popova, an associate professor of political science at McGill University, said Russia has long relied on the belief that it could eventually overpower Ukraine through superior manpower and attrition. But Ukraine’s expanding strike campaign is beginning to challenge that narrative.

The battle for Mariupol once symbolized Ukraine’s survival. Its skies now reveal how the war is changing. Occupation no longer guarantees safety. Rear areas are no longer truly rearward. Russia’s theory of slow, inevitable victory is becoming harder to sustain.

David Kirichenko is an associate research Fellow at the Henry Jackson Society. Follow him on X: @DVKirichenko.

SpaceX’s Starship V3—still a work in progress—mostly successful on first flight

0
spacex’s-starship-v3—still-a-work-in-progress—mostly-successful-on-first-flight
SpaceX’s Starship V3—still a work in progress—mostly successful on first flight

SpaceX launched the first test flight of its upgraded Starship rocket and Super Heavy booster Friday, with mostly positive results.

The powerful rocket, propelled by 33 methane-fueled main engines, climbed away from SpaceX’s Starbase launch facility in South Texas at 5:30 pm CDT (6:30 pm EDT; 22:30 UTC) Friday. Within a few seconds, the 408-foot-tall (124-meter) rocket, the largest ever built, cleared the launch tower and turned onto an eastward heading over the Gulf of Mexico.

Starship splashed down on target in the Indian Ocean a little more than an hour later to conclude the first flight of the latest version of SpaceX’s stainless steel mega-rocket. Starship V3 fared better on its debut than the first flights of Starship V1 and V2 in 2023 and 2025. Both past versions of Starship broke apart during launch on their inaugural flights.

SpaceX officials appeared pleased with the performance of Starship V3 on Friday. Elon Musk, the company’s founder and CEO, congratulated his engineers with a post on X: “Congratulations SpaceX team on an epic first Starship V3 launch & landing! You scored a goal for humanity.”

“Congrats and a huge thank you to the SpaceX team that always delivers,” Gwynne Shotwell, SpaceX’s second in command, wrote in an X post. “This was an incredible first flight of a brand new vehicle. Our collective future flying amongst the stars has become so much closer.”

Leaders at NASA, relying on SpaceX to provide Starship as a human-rated Moon lander, were closely watching the launch. NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman was in Texas to witness the launch in person. He lauded SpaceX for a “hell of a V3 Starship launch.”

Starship’s 12th test flight was a long time coming. The last Starship test flight took off last October. The gap of more than seven months was the longest interval between Starship flights since the program’s first full-scale launch in April 2023. SpaceX used the time to complete construction and activation of a second launch pad at Starbase as engineers steered Starship V3 through ground testing, which had its own share of setbacks.

Starship climbs away from Starbase, Texas, after liftoff at 5:30 pm local time Friday.

Starship climbs away from Starbase, Texas, after liftoff at 5:30 pm local time Friday. Credit: SpaceX

What was good?

So what worked on Friday’s test flight? Plenty. Most importantly, the ship’s heat shield appeared to hold up during reentry over the Indian Ocean. Onboard cameras showed the vehicle’s aerodynamic flaps intact throughout the fiery descent through the atmosphere. The heat shield and flaps didn’t always fare so well on past Starship test flights. Starship executed a series of banking maneuvers on the way toward the splashdown zone northwest of Australia, simulating the path future ships will take returning to landings at Starbase.

That all went well, with the descent culminating in a dramatic maneuver to flip from horizontal to vertical. A final landing burn with the ship’s Raptor engines downshifted from three to two, then to a single engine as the rocket settled to a gentle water landing. Drones and buoy cameras recorded live views of the on-target splashdown. As expected, the ship—wider than and nearly as long a Boeing 777 jetliner—tipped over and exploded in a fireball, putting an exclamation point on V3’s trip halfway around the world from the Texas Gulf Coast.

Earlier in the flight, SpaceX demonstrated Starship V3’s improved payload deployment mechanism. The system is tailored for releasing SpaceX’s flat-packed Starlink Internet satellites. SpaceX tested the Pez-like deployment system on past test flights, but upgrades on Starship V3 allow the mechanism to release satellites at a faster rate. On Friday, the dispenser deployed 20 mockups of SpaceX’s next-generation Starlink satellites, plus two spacecraft fitted with flashlights and cameras to inspect Starship’s exterior in space.

All of this worked perfectly as the ship soared to a maximum altitude of 121 miles (195 kilometers) in darkness over the South Atlantic Ocean. SpaceX says this version of Starship can haul up to 100 metric tons of payload into low-Earth orbit, more than double the capacity of Starship V2.

Meanwhile, initial inspections of SpaceX’s new launch pad at Starbase, used for the first time Friday, showed the facility weathered the intensity of liftoff with no significant problems. This is a promising sign for SpaceX’s plans for new launch pads at Cape Canaveral, Florida, which use the new Starbase pad as a design template.

What needs more work?

Something caused two Raptor engines—one of 33 on the Super Heavy booster and one of six on Starship itself—to fail during Friday’s launch sequence. Raptor failures are nothing new for SpaceX, but this flight marked the first use of the company’s upgraded Raptor 3, a redesign with higher thrust, lighter weight, and improved efficiency. Collectively, the 33 Raptor engines on the booster produced up to 18 million pounds of thrust at full throttle, twice the power of NASA’s Space Launch System rocket used on last month’s Artemis II mission.

Starship and Super Heavy have engine-out capability, meaning they can recover from an early shutdown of an engine. Both stages proved this Friday. First, an engine in the outer ring on the Super Heavy booster shut down prematurely shortly after liftoff. A few moments later, an outer engine on the Starship upper stage cut off soon after the ship and booster separated from one another high over the Gulf.

The ship compensated by burning its five remaining engines a little longer than usual, and the rocket was still able to reach its planned trajectory. The booster, however, hurtled toward a high-speed impact in the Gulf after it was unable to complete maneuvers to return to a controlled splashdown offshore from Starbase. It was not immediately clear what caused the early end to the rocket’s boost-back burn: whether the malfunction stemmed from an external problem during stage separation or a separate issue within the booster’s propulsion system.

One key objective SpaceX did not accomplish Friday was a planned restart of one of the ship’s Raptor engines in space. Officials elected to forego the brief ignition after the ship’s engine failure during ascent.

What does this mean?

Friday’s results give SpaceX a lot to build on. The performance of the heat shield, widely recognized as perhaps the program’s most challenging engineering problem, must be reassuring for SpaceX officials seeking to eventually recover and rapidly reuse future ships. The ship’s resilience to an engine failure was also encouraging news for SpaceX.

But there’s still more work ahead for SpaceX to perfect the Raptor 3 engine, and skipping the engine relight in space will likely prevent SpaceX from attempting a full orbital flight of Starship on the next launch. All 12 of SpaceX’s Starship test flights to date have flown on suborbital trajectories. Officials want to ensure they can guide Starship back to Earth before putting a vehicle into orbit because an unguided reentry could endanger the public with falling debris. Starship, after all, is the world’s largest and most massive spacecraft other than the International Space Station.

A perfect performance on Flight 12 may have given engineers the data they need for an orbital flight on the next launch, and perhaps even attempt to bring Starship back to the launch site in Texas for a catch by giant mechanical arms on the launch tower. An orbital flight would also move SpaceX closer to beginning critical orbital refueling tests for NASA’s Artemis program, along with deploying real Starlink satellites from Starship.

The results from Friday’s flight show there’s still room for improvement, but SpaceX will be ready to chase perfection again soon. The company has more ships and boosters on track for test flights later this summer.

Review: The Mandalorian and Grogu is … fine

0
review:-the-mandalorian-and-grogu-is-…-fine
Review: The Mandalorian and Grogu is … fine

Hopes were arguably high for The Mandalorian and Grogu, director Jon Favreau’s big-screen offshoot of the popular Disney+ series The Mandalorian. After all, there hasn’t been a new film in the Star Wars franchise since 2019’s The Rise of Skywalker wrapped up the three trilogies that make up the so-called “Skywalker Saga.”

The new film is … fine. It’s an average Star Wars outing, and it will give families a solid Memorial Day Weekend entertainment option. It’s just not the spectacular home run that might have helped launch the flagging franchise into an exciting new era, and diehard Star Wars fans hoping for more are probably going to be disappointed.

(Some spoilers below but no major reveals.)

Grogu (fka “Baby Yoda”) won viewers’ hearts from the moment he first appeared onscreen in the first season of The Mandalorian, and the relationship between the little green creature and his father-figure bounty hunter, the titular Mandalorian, Din Djarin (Pedro Pascal), has only gotten stronger. With the 2023 Hollywood strikes delaying production on season 4 of the series, Favreau got the green light to make this spinoff film.

Mando and Grogu (as his apprentice) are hunting down the scattered remnants of Imperial warlords on behalf of the New Republic, taking orders from Sigourney Weaver’s Colonel Ward, a former pilot with the Rebel Alliance. These missions tend to get messy, with Mando being Mando. Ward really wants the warlords alive to get useful intelligence from them, but they understandably don’t like to come quietly, so sometimes, well, they die with their henchmen. Can’t be helped.

After Mando takes out his latest target, a disappointed Ward offers him a new mission: tracking down Rotta the Hutt (Jeremy Allen White), son of the late Jabba, on behalf of the Hutt Twins, who took over Jabba’s criminal enterprise. In turn, the twins will provide crucial information on the whereabouts of an elusive Empire warlord named Coin. Mando accepts, mostly because Ward offers him a newly refurbished Razor Crest-like ship, just like his old one that blew up at the end of S2.

A paint-by-numbers plot

Alien pilot disembarking from a spaceship

Zeb Orrelios (Steve Blum) is back and working with Mando.

tall woman in red fighter uniform standing next to a fighter spacecraft

Sigourney Weaver plays Colonel Ward, a former Rebel Alliance pilot.

Rotta, it turns out, has become a fan-favorite gladiator on the planet Shakari and doesn’t want to go back home to Nal Hutta, as he’s convinced the Twins will have him killed to cement their power. Complications ensue, and things start to get messy. You don’t want to get on the wrong side of the Hutt Twins, as Mando soon learns to his peril.

The various trailers were thin on plot details, and it’s now clear why: There isn’t much of a plot. Favreau has said that he came up with a new story rather than the one he’d planned for The Mandalorian S4 because of the switch from a streaming series to a theatrical film, but things still feel pretty episodic. The film is largely comprised of a series of side missions in service to the larger arc. There’s some space travel, a fight scene with a cute Grogu moment, a victory, and another cute Grogu moment, then it’s on to the next mission. Rinse and repeat.

It’s all very well-trodden ground with familiar beats happening at the expected times; even the fight scenes are kinda meh. The dialogue in Star Wars films has always been notoriously wooden and uninspired, and The Mandalorian and Grogu is no exception. Good actors can salvage such lines, and Pascal is a very good actor, but it’s much harder when your character wears a helmet the entire time and can’t really emote.

Embo the Kyuzo bounty hunter makes his live action debut.

Mando vs. Dragonsnake.

Otherwise, we’ve mostly got stunt-casting as fan service. We love Weaver, but she’s utterly wasted here. It’s nice to see Embo the bounty hunter from The Clone Wars in his live-action debut, and the return of Zeb Orrelios (voice by Steve Blum), plus the Hutt family characters from The Book of Boba Fett. But casual moviegoers will neither know their history nor care. Bonus: look closely in the climactic battle scene and you’ll spot several directors of Mandalorian episodes and Lucasfilm President and CCO Dave Filoni, the latter reprising his role as Trapper Wolf, a New Republic X-wing pilot.

All that said, there’s no denying that Grogu’s antics are pretty cute, and the little green puppet pretty much carries the entire film. (Grogu partnering with the tiny Anzellans to rescue a kidnapped Mando is tailor-made for merchandising.) The strongest segment is the quietest: Mando collapses from a poisonous bite from a Dragonsnake in the Nal Hutta swamps, sacrificing himself so Grogu can escape. Grogu sticks around instead, building a shelter, finding food, and nursing his father figure back to health. It’s a key turning point in their relationship and the only genuine emotional beat in the entire film.

I don’t know if we’ll ever get that postponed fourth season of The Mandalorian. Box office projections indicate that The Mandalorian and Grogu is tracking even lower than 2018’s Solo, although things might pick up over the holiday weekend. If so, the character dynamics will likely change considerably. And hopefully the series can recover some of that Star Wars magic that is sadly so absent here.

Oil prices rise as investors doubt breakthrough in US-Iran peace talks

0
oil-prices-rise-as-investors-doubt-breakthrough-in-us-iran-peace-talks
Oil prices rise as investors doubt breakthrough in US-Iran peace talks


Oil prices climbed on Friday but were on track for a ‌weekly loss as investors doubted the prospects of a breakthrough in U.S.-Iran peace talks.

Brent crude futures rose $1.66, or 1.6%, to $104.24 a barrel by 0405 GMT, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate futures were up $1.11, or 1.2%, at $97.46.

On a weekly ​basis, Brent was 4.6% lower and WTI was down 7.6%, with prices fluctuating sharply ​as expectations for a peace deal shifted.

A senior Iranian source told Reuters ⁠gaps with the U.S. have narrowed and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke of “some good signs” in ​talks, but the countries are still divided on Tehran’s uranium stockpile and controls on the Strait of Hormuz.

“Oil prices ​would only trend lower when oil market fundamentals materially improve, which looks destined to stretch into 2027,” said David Oxley, chief commodities economist at Capital Economics.

Six weeks since a fragile ceasefire took effect, efforts to ​end the war have shown little progress, while elevated oil prices have fuelled concern ​over inflation and the outlook for global economy.

“WTI is likely to remain in a $90–$110 range next week, as it has ‌largely ⁠done since late March,” said Satoru Yoshida, a commodity analyst with Rakuten Securities.

BMI, a unit of Fitch Solutions, raised its average 2026 dated Brent price forecast to $90 from $81.50 to reflect the supply deficit, time required to repair damaged Middle East energy infrastructure, and the six-to-eight week ​post-conflict normalisation window.

Around 20% ​of global energy ⁠supplies transited the Strait before the war, which has removed 14 million barrels per day of oil – or 14% of global supply – from the ​market, including exports from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates ​and Kuwait.

Full ⁠oil flows through the Strait will not return before the first or second quarter of 2027, even if the conflict ended now, the head of the UAE’s state oil firm ADNOC said.

Seven leading ⁠OPEC+ ​oil-producing countries will likely agree to a modest hike to ​July output when they meet on June 7, four sources said, though delivery for several remains disrupted by the Iran ​war.

Source:  Reuters

Pakistan’s moment in the Sun: Can it really end the Iran war?

0
pakistan’s-moment-in-the-sun:-can-it-really-end-the-iran-war?
Pakistan’s moment in the Sun: Can it really end the Iran war?

In the gilded conference rooms of Islamabad, where Field Marshal Asim Munir has lately played host to American envoys and Iranian diplomats alike, one can almost hear the echoes of an older diplomatic theater — Oslo, Camp David, even the Geneva of 1985. The casting is unfamiliar but the script is the same: a junior power, suddenly indispensable, shuttling between two adversaries who cannot yet bring themselves to speak directly.

The proposition that Washington’s commentariat is now being asked to swallow whole is that Pakistan — that perennially fragile, perpetually broke nuclear state on the Indus — is about to deliver what five decades of American statecraft could not.

Color me unconvinced. Not because Pakistan has done nothing — it has done a great deal, more than its detractors in New Delhi care to admit — but because the very things that make Islamabad useful as a postman also limit what it can deliver as a peacemaker.

Consider first what Pakistan actually brings to the table, since the realist tradition demands we begin with capabilities rather than aspirations.

Pakistan shares a 900-kilometer border with Iran and has spent decades cultivating the awkward, transactional relationship that geography imposes on neighbors who would rather not be. It maintains warm-enough ties with Tehran, whose forbearance keeps Balochistan from becoming entirely unmanageable.

It maintains close ties with Riyadh, whose checkbook keeps Pakistan’s lights on.

Most importantly, in the era of Donald Trump’s second presidency, Pakistan has cultivated something more valuable than institutional partnerships: a personal rapport between Munir and the American president, who has reportedly taken to calling the field marshal his “favorite fighter.” In a White House where personality trumps process — pun intended — that matters.

It is also true, and worth conceding to Islamabad’s defenders, that Pakistan has already done something tangible. The April 8 ceasefire that paused the joint US-Israeli campaign against Iran, following the strikes that killed Ayatollah Khamenei, did not negotiate itself.

Pakistani officials carried the fifteen-point American proposal to Tehran in March. They hosted the Islamabad Talks in April. They are now, as of this week, shuttling Iranian counter-proposals back to Washington while Trump publicly warns that the talks are on “the borderline” between a deal and renewed strikes.

This is not nothing. It is, in fact, considerably more than the European Union, the United Nations, or the Gulf states have managed.

But here we must distinguish — as Hans Morgenthau insisted we always must — between the mediator who facilitates and the mediator who delivers.

Oslo did not succeed because the Norwegians were clever; it succeeded, for as long as it did, because Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, each for his own structural reasons, had concluded that the existing arrangement had become more costly than compromise.

Egypt and Israel made peace at Camp David because Anwar Sadat had decided, after October 1973, that he could not afford another war and Menachem Begin had decided that Sinai was negotiable in exchange for permanence elsewhere. Jimmy Carter and his team mattered, but they were the catalysts, not the cause.

What, then, are the structural conditions on which Pakistan’s mediation must rest? Here the picture darkens considerably.

The American proposal — an end to Iran’s nuclear program, limits on its missile arsenal, the reopening of Hormuz, restrictions on its regional proxies, conditional sanctions relief — is essentially a demand for Iran’s strategic surrender, dressed in the language of negotiation.

The Islamic Republic, even bloodied and leaderless, has been here before; it is the same package Washington has placed on the table since the Bush administration, with cosmetic adjustments. That Pakistan is the courier does not change what is in the envelope.

Meanwhile, Iran has used the ceasefire to do what wounded states always do when given a pause: It has, according to American military assessments, restored access to thirty of its thirty-three missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz and rebuilt its missile stockpile to roughly seventy percent of pre-war levels.

Tehran’s hardliners — and after Khamenei’s killing, the moderates are a vanishing species — are not preparing for capitulation. They are preparing for the next round. Pakistan cannot mediate that away.

Nor should we forget Islamabad’s own predicament, which the city’s mediators rarely advertise to their American interlocutors.

Pakistan is simultaneously fighting a war on its Afghan frontier, managing an energy crisis worsened by the Hormuz disruption and contending with a public that does not particularly want its government to do Washington’s bidding against a Muslim neighbor. The Munir government’s room for maneuver is narrower than the Atlantic Council’s panel discussions suggest.

The honest assessment, I think, is this:

Pakistan is performing the role of indispensable postman with skill and, by the standards of South Asian diplomacy, remarkable discretion. It deserves credit for keeping channels open at a moment when the alternative is American B-2s returning to Iranian skies.

But the structural distance between Washington’s maximalist demands and Tehran’s diminished but still defiant red lines is not a distance that any mediator, however gifted, can talk away. Munir is not Henry Kissinger, and even Kissinger — let us recall — needed Mao and Zhou Enlai to want the opening before he could engineer it.

If the Iran War ends in 2026, it will end because Trump, facing midterm elections and a domestic electorate furious about gasoline prices, decides he wants a “deal” he can sell as a win, and because Tehran’s new leadership concludes that survival is worth more than enrichment percentages.

Pakistan will be the venue, perhaps the photographer of the handshake. It will not be the reason.

That is no small thing. But it is not what the headlines, in their excitement, are promising.

This article was originally published on Leon Hadar’s Global Zeitgeist and is republished with kind permission. Become a subscriber here.

Meghan Markle Thinks She’s More Powerful Without Prince Harry

0
meghan-markle-thinks-she’s-more-powerful-without-prince-harry
Meghan Markle Thinks She’s More Powerful Without Prince Harry


Meghan Markle is reportedly ready to step out of Prince Harry’s shadow — and she may believe she is the bigger star of the Sussex brand.

According to a royal insider, the Duchess of Sussex is convinced she can make more money and gain more power on her own than she can alongside her husband.

The claim comes after Meghan, 44, made a solo trip to Geneva, Switzerland, for a high-profile speech that did not exactly become the packed global moment some may have expected.

The former actress spoke on May 17 about the dangers children face online and the devastating toll of social media abuse. Meghan appeared in a sleek black Giorgio Armani pantsuit reportedly worth $5,300, with her hair pulled tightly back as she stood before lightboxes showing the faces of 50 children who died by suicide after online bullying or harm.

It was clearly designed to be a serious, emotional, headline-making appearance.

But the crowd reportedly fell flat.

Despite barricades being set up as if officials were expecting a much larger audience, fewer than 100 people reportedly showed up, including invited guests and curious passersby.

Now, insiders claim Meghan is still determined to push ahead as a solo powerhouse.

“Their brand as a couple has not worked,” royal commentator Rob Shuter said during a May 20 appearance on Maureen Callahan’s The Nerve podcast. “And Meghan is now getting ready to really branch off, and she sees this moment as an opportunity to step on the world stage without Harry.”

Shuter claimed Meghan now believes she has more earning power without the Duke of Sussex attached to every project.

“She now believes that she is more powerful,” he said, citing sources. “She’s gonna make more money by stepping forward by herself, not with him.”

The comment is especially explosive because Harry, 41, was once viewed as the royal name that gave the couple their biggest draw after they walked away from palace life in 2020.

But years later, the Sussex brand has taken plenty of hits.

Their expensive Hollywood deals brought massive attention at first, but not every project turned into the kind of long-term success the couple likely hoped for. Meghan’s Spotify podcast Archetypes ended after one season, while her Netflix lifestyle series With Love, Meghan reportedly failed to become the breakout reinvention she needed.

Her As Ever lifestyle brand has also faced questions about whether it can become a serious business or another celebrity vanity project struggling to find its footing.

According to the insider, Meghan may now see Harry as part of the problem.

“Even she now acknowledges that Harry is a problem,” Shuter claimed. “She’s a problem, too. She hasn’t quite got to that point, but she knows there’s a problem with Harry.”

That alleged realization may explain why Meghan appears to be trying to create more distance between herself and Harry’s never-ending royal battles.

Ever since the couple left the monarchy and moved to California, Harry’s strained relationship with King Charles and Prince William has followed them everywhere. From interviews to memoirs to lawsuits and family snubs, the drama has often overshadowed Meghan’s attempts to build her own identity.

Shuter admitted that Meghan may have a point there.

“The one thing I will say in her defense, it’s tricky because I don’t often defend Meghan Markle, is that whenever she is with Harry, all the royal drama comes up,” he said.

He added that every time Meghan is seen with Harry, the focus shifts back to his father, his brother, and his bitter break from the royal family.

That makes it difficult for Meghan to sell herself as a polished lifestyle mogul, humanitarian, or businesswoman without the Sussex soap opera stealing the spotlight.

Still, the big question remains: can Meghan Markle actually become a bigger brand without Prince Harry?

Her Geneva speech may have been meant to show the world she could stand alone. Instead, the small turnout gave critics another opening to say the public is not nearly as interested as Meghan believes.

For now, the Duchess of Sussex appears ready to keep trying.

But if she truly thinks she is more powerful than Harry, her next solo move may need to prove it.

Podcast by Jasim Al-Azzawi with CIA analyst Larry Johnson: Who is winning this war?

0
podcast-by-jasim-al-azzawi-with-cia-analyst-larry-johnson:-who-is-winning-this-war?
Podcast by Jasim Al-Azzawi with CIA analyst Larry Johnson: Who is winning this war?

Middle East Monitor

Creating new perspectives since 2009

  • English Edition expand_more

    • English Edition
    • Portuguese Edition
  • Free Subscription

  • search

    Exact matches only

    Search in title

    Search in content

Middle East Monitor

  • Free Subscription

  • search

    Exact matches only

    Search in title

    Search in content

    • Loading…

  • Asia & Americas,
  • Iran,
  • Israel,
  • Middle East,
  • Podcast by Jasim Al-Azzawi,
  • US,
  • Videos & Photo Stories,

Larry Johnson is a former intelligence analyst at the CIA who also worked at the US State Department’s Office of Counterterrorism.

Podcast by Jasim Al-Azzawi with Avi Shlaim: The journey of a moral historian from Baghdad to Israel to Oxford

0 Comments

Latest news

See all

  • Podcast by Jasim Al-Azzawi with CIA analyst Larry Johnson: Who is winning this war?

    • Muhammad Hussein

  • Has the Flotilla finally exposed the West’s moral double standard?

    • Muhammad Hussein

  • Iran says 25 ships passed through Strait of Hormuz in past 24 hours

    • Muhammad Hussein

  • AOHR UK to EU and UK Gov’t: Hold  Israel accountable for its maritime piracy

    • Muhammad Hussein

  • Israel pounds Gaza, Lebanon in daily breaches of ceasefires

    • Muhammad Hussein

  • Subscribe to our newsletter

Islam Race and Rebellion in the Americas: Transatlantic Echoes of the West African Jihads

Engaging the World: The Making of Hamas’s Foreign Policy

Related Posts

Trending

  • Today
  • This week
  • Article Indonesia’s foreign minister didn’t defend the flotilla detainees. He defended Israel’s language
  • News Pakistan army chief heads to Tehran to discuss US-Iran talks
  • News ‘First apartheid, then transfer’: Israeli columnist warns of West Bank expulsion plan
  • Videos & Photo Stories Podcast by Jasim Al-Azzawi with Col. Wilkerson: Is Pax American in decline?
  • News Situation worsening in West Bank, warn Italy, UK, France, Germany
  • News Jewish groups launch new diaspora movement rejecting Israel’s ethno-nationalism
  • News South Korea president urges review of ICC warrant for Netanyahu: Report
  • News Despite blackout, satellite images reveal damage to Israeli military bases during Iran war
  • Article Saudi Arabia is pulling Europe toward a “Gulf Helsinki” deal with Iran — because Washington failed
  • News US outlines 5 conditions for Iran deal: Report

0FansLike
0FollowersFollow
0FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
- Advertisement -
Google search engine

Recent Posts