16.9 C
London
Thursday, June 4, 2026
Home Blog

Armenia’s ties with Russia continue to deteriorate as election day approaches

0
armenia’s-ties-with-russia-continue-to-deteriorate-as-election-day-approaches
Armenia’s ties with Russia continue to deteriorate as election day approaches

Armenia was once widely considered Russia’s closest ally in the South Caucasus, with the two nations maintaining deep political, economic and military ties. But ahead of pivotal parliamentary elections on June 7, Armenia is facing the deepest crisis in its relations with Moscow since it secured independence from the Soviet Union in 1991.

One week before the elections, Russia recalled its ambassador to Armenia, Sergei Kopyrkin, in protest at Yerevan’s growing ties with the EU.

Kopyrkin’s return came a day after the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, warned Armenia that it was leaving itself exposed to what he called the “Ukrainian scenario” by deepening its cooperation with western institutions.

This diplomatic rift has been accompanied by economic pressure. Russia has imposed a series of restrictions on Armenian exports since late May, citing sanitary and technical concerns, while simultaneously threatening to suspend its gas deal with Armenia.

The leaders of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, who make up the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), have also recently demanded that Armenia hold a referendum to choose between them or the EU.

A few years ago, this rift would have been difficult to foresee. Russia has widely been regarded as Armenia’s principal strategic partner and security guarantor for decades. Armenia joined the Moscow-led Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) in 2002 and the EAEU later in 2015. It also hosts a Russian military base near the north-western city of Gyumri, and depends heavily on Russia for energy supplies and trade.

Their partnership began to erode in 2024. That year, Armenia froze its participation in the CSTO, accusing the bloc of failing to intervene during Azerbaijan’s 2023 offensive against the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh. The two countries had previously fought a war over the region in 2020, which ended with a Russian-brokered ceasefire.

The Armenian government, which is led by Nikol Pashinyan, subsequently pursued closer political and security ties with the EU and US. It expanded defence cooperation with France and publicly questioned the value of Armenia’s traditional dependence on Russia. Armenia also recognised the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in 2024, despite the court having issued an arrest warrant for Putin.

These moves culminated in the adoption of the EU Integration Act in March 2025, paving the way for the Armenian government to begin the process of gaining EU membership. Months later, in December, the EU and Armenia formally adopted a framework designed to deepen political, economic and security cooperation.

Armenia’s westward engagement has become increasingly visible throughout 2026. More than 30 European leaders, including European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and European Council president António Costa, gathered in the Armenian capital of Yerevan in early May for a summit of the European Political Community.

US secretary of state Marco Rubio visited Armenia later in the month and signed a strategic partnership agreement with Armenia’s foreign minister, Ararat Mirzoyan.

A map of Armenia and Azerbaijan, highlighting the Nagorno-Karabakh region.

Armenia and Azerbaijan have fought two major wars over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region. Nemanja Cosovic / Shutterstock

Russia is not only losing a longstanding ally in Armenia. It is also losing one of its main levers of influence in the South Caucasus: its key role as a mediator in the Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict.

Already in late 2023, Azerbaijan and Armenia initiated a process to agree on and formally define their shared border. And over the past year, the two countries have held direct bilateral talks in Abu Dhabi and signed a declaration on peace at the White House. They have also begun trade and economic cooperation.

These efforts have influenced public attitudes in Armenia. The proportion of Armenians reporting national security and border issues as the top problem facing their country dropped from 44% in June 2025 to 21% in February 2026. Russia’s regional influence will only decline further as Armenia and Azerbaijan move towards longstanding peace.

Armenia’s choice

This broader geopolitical realignment forms the backdrop to Armenia’s upcoming elections. Pashinyan’s Civil Contract party promotes a pragmatic “post-Karabakh” course. This involves acknowledging current realities, pursuing normalisation with Azerbaijan and its close ally Turkey, and gradually deepening ties with western partners.

The two main opposition forces – the Strong Armenia Alliance and the Armenia Alliance – advocate closer strategic coordination with Moscow. They blame the current leadership for the loss of Nagorno-Karabakh and promise to halt the peace process with Azerbaijan and Turkey if they come to power.

The Strong Armenia Alliance was founded in 2025 by billionaire Russian citizen Samvel Karapetyan. The Armenia Alliance, on the other hand, is led by Robert Kocharyan, who served as Armenia’s president from 1998 to 2008. Kocharyan was also a board member of the Russian investment giant, Sistema. He stepped down in 2021.

The European Parliament has raised concerns about Russian interference in the election. Russia has been accused of conducting a massive pre-election campaign to undermine Pashinyan. This has allegedly involved the spread of online disinformation and a plan to transport tens of thousands of Armenians living in Russia home to vote for the opposition.

As Armenians head to the polls, they will be deciding more than the composition of their next government. They will be choosing between competing visions of the country’s future. In many ways, they will be determining whether the post-Soviet era of Armenia’s close dependence on Russia is coming to an end.

Polling suggests that the Civil Contract party is on track to win. This means Armenia will probably continue its normalisation process with its neighbours while deepening cooperation with western partners.

Yet Russia’s growing efforts to support the Armenian opposition cannot be dismissed. A different outcome on June 7 could bring dangerous revanchist sentiments, stalling regional peace efforts and slowing Armenia’s integration with Europe.

The US and Europe are diverging on how to deal with Belarus — and that could benefit Putin’s loyal ally

0
the-us-and-europe-are-diverging-on-how-to-deal-with-belarus-—-and-that-could-benefit-putin’s-loyal-ally
The US and Europe are diverging on how to deal with Belarus — and that could benefit Putin’s loyal ally

When it comes to relations with Belarus, the Trump administration has been pursuing a dual approach of late.

In May 2026, President Donald Trump renewed the U.S. national emergency on Belarus, noting that the government of longtime Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko still posed an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to U.S. security and foreign policy.

The emergency, which in practice underpins the legal basis for targeted U.S. sanctions on the former Soviet republic, has been in force since June 2006, when President George W. Bush imposed it after a Belarusian election widely seen as undemocratic.

But just weeks before the latest renewal, the Trump administration eased U.S. sanctions on Belarus, including those affecting the country’s financial and fertilizer industries, in exchange for the release of 250 political prisoners.

This bargaining logic has history. Lukashenko has ruled Belarus since 1994 and has used political prisoners as bargaining assets with both Europe and the U.S. before, including in 2008 and 2015. The U.S. also tested engagement with the Moscow-aligned nation during Trump’s first term, when his then-secretary of state visited Belarus in February 2020 — the first such visit in 26 years.

But the mixed signals Washington is giving to Belarus stand in contrast to the United States’ allies in Europe.

Amid renewed concerns that Belarus could once again serve as a springboard for Russian attacks on Ukraine, the European Union has taken a harder line than the U.S. The bloc in April adopted a sanctions package aimed at Belarus and its ally Russian, with a strong focus on sanctions evasion, financial channels, trade restrictions and crypto. Not only does this differ from the two-track U.S. approach of sanctions and engagement, but it is also emblematic of the widening gulf of priorities between the U.S. and Europe under Trump.

As a scholar of Eastern Europe, I see the difference between U.S. and European views on Belarus as tactical in form and strategic in effect. Europe wants sanctions to constrain Belarus as part of the threat emanating from Russia. The Trump administration, however, wants sanctions flexible enough to produce visible deals. That mismatch gives Lukashenko more room to bargain and tests how much common ground remains between Europe and the U.S. on Russia.

Soldiers stands next to a securitized border wall.

Polish border guards are seen at a fence on the border between Poland and Belarus. AP Photo/Czarek Sokolowski

Europe’s security concerns

Since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Belarus has become far more central to European security.

In the eys of the EU, Belarus as a neighbor tied closely to Russia’s economy, military logistics and search for ways around Western sanctions.

The EU’s April 2026 package continued the bloc’s alignment of Belarus-related measures with Russia sanctions, especially in regard to enforcement and circumvention.

For the EU nations closest to Belarus, this is also about border security.

In 2025, Lithuania took Belarus to the International Court of Justice, accusing the Lukashenko government of organizing large-scale migrant smuggling into Lithuania.

Meanwhile, Lithuania, along with Estonia, Latvia and Poland, has existing or planned defense programs along NATO’s eastern flank, aimed in part at deterring potential Russian or Belarusian military incursions. Poland’s East Shield program commits US$2.7 billion to fortifications and terrain obstacles, while Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are developing the Baltic Defense Line, which includes bunkers and obstruction elements near Russia and Belarus.

Further, in May 2026, Lithuania’s leaders were moved to bunkers after a suspected drone incursion linked to Russia’s war in Ukraine triggered an airspace alert — a reminder that border security is now a daily governance problem, not just a military planning issue.

That’s why the U.S. request in May for Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine to allow Belarusian potash transit was interpreted as pressure to carve out exceptions to the sanctions regime and reopen export corridors for potash fertilizer producer Belaruskali, rather than keep Belarus economically cut off. For Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine, reopening transit would revive a revenue channel for Lukashenko through countries already worried about their borders with Belarus and Russia.

The US desire for quid pro quos

For the U.S., Belarus is part of a wider problem involving Russia’s war against Ukraine and the perceived danger that Belarus becomes so dependent on Russia — or China — that Western governments lose influence over its choices.

Europe’s approach continues a policy of keeping pressure on Belarus tied to pressure on Russia in a bid to restrict Russia’s options. Since the beginning of the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and even before, Russian President Vladimir Putin has looked to Belarus to advance Russia’s strategic goals, including using the country as a staging ground against Ukraine and a way to force Ukraine and NATO’s eastern flank to devote resources to the Belarusian border.

The Trump administration has kept the legal sanctions framework in place. However, it is using it more flexibly than the Biden administration, whose approach was more closely aligned with the EU’s current sanctions-first view of Belarus as both a domestic repression problem and an extension of Russia’s war architecture.

A man in a suit sits at a desk.

President Donald Trump speaks to reporters as he signs executive orders in the White House. AP Photo/Evan Vucci

The shift under Trump is driven in part by broader trends. Years of pressure have pushed Belarus further toward non-Western partners. Belarusian trade with Russia doubled from US$29.5 billion in 2020 to $62 billion in 2025. Meanwhile, trade with China rose from $4.6 billion to more than $8.8 billion over the same period.

The same shift can be seen in the potash industry, a major source for fertilizer. Western sanctions began hitting Belarus’ potash sector in 2021, after Lukashenko’s crackdown on the 2020 protest movement, with the U.S. targeting major state-linked potash companies and Lithuania later halting transit of the fertilizer through the Baltic port of Klaipėda.

Before those restrictions on leading Belarusian potash companies, Belarus exported roughly 10 million to 11 million tons of the mineral a year through established routes to global markets. By 2025, the volume had recovered – but via alternative routes, largely through Russia. Belarus exported 11.6 million tons of potash fertilizers through Russian ports, and China became a major buyer, making Belarus Beijing’s second-largest potash supplier after Russia.

That gives the Trump administration a political and economic argument at home. It can say that the Biden-era expansion of sanctions produced few immediate political changes inside Belarus, while targeted relief has produced visible prisoner releases. Trump’s team can also present potash relief as practical at a moment when fertilizer costs are sensitive for U.S. farmers facing fertilizer shortages exacerbated by the war in Iran.

This all means the Trump administration is treating sanctions less as a stable wall of pressure and more as a lever for visible results.

How Lukashenko can exploit the EU-US split

For Lukashenko, the benefit of the transatlantic split is concrete. With the U.S., prisoners become the bargaining asset. If some are released, the U.S. can claim a result. If others remain jailed, Lukashenko keeps something to trade later. The human rights organization Viasna still counts more than 870 political prisoners in Belarus after earlier releases, which shows why the tactic works.

Lukashenka’s leverage with Europe, meanwhile, comes from perceptions of risk. In May 2026, French President Emmanuel Macron called Lukashenko and warned him against deeper involvement in Russia’s war. The call showed that Belarus has become too important to European security for European leaders to ignore.

Amid these transatlantic divergences, Belarus has been increasingly tied to Russia’s war-making capacity. Satellite imagery in early 2026 pointed to a possible Russian Oreshnik missile site in Belarus. Ukrainian officials have also said missile fragments from a May strike contained Belarusian microchips. And finally, more than 500 Belarusian industrial sites are reportedly involved in weapons production, military repairs, ammunition or logistics.

This is particularly where tactical differences between the U.S and Europe begin to harden into a political divide. The U.S. search for leverage appears to undercut Europe’s demand for pressure. Lukashenko gains bargaining power, and the West’s common position becomes harder to sustain.

Hezbollah Leader Calls Ceasefire ‘Humiliating’ as Security Cabinet Discusses Proposal 

0
hezbollah-leader-calls-ceasefire-‘humiliating’-as-security-cabinet-discusses-proposal 
Hezbollah Leader Calls Ceasefire ‘Humiliating’ as Security Cabinet Discusses Proposal 


Hezbollah Secretary-General Naim Qassem rejected as ‘humiliating’ and ‘disgraceful’ a proposed security arrangement that would exclude the group from areas south of the Litani River, as Israeli leaders weighed the framework in a high-level security meeting. 

“The result of the direct, humiliating and disgraceful negotiations is rejected by broad parts of the Lebanese people.” He added, “The Washington declaration conditions the basic principles that America and Israel want, toward the subjugation of Lebanon to the Greater Israel project.” 

Qassem’s remarks came after Israel and Lebanon announced Wednesday that they had agreed to establish a series of pilot security zones in southern Lebanon from which Hezbollah would be excluded. Under the arrangement, Hezbollah’s presence south of the Litani River would effectively come to an end. 

Israeli officials continued discussions on the proposal Thursday. According to an Israeli official cited by The Times of Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened a security cabinet meeting at the Kirya military headquarters in Tel Aviv early Thursday evening to discuss the ceasefire framework announced the previous night. 

Earlier in the day, Netanyahu visited the northern Israeli town of Shlomi, where he reiterated his government’s commitment to protecting communities along the border. 

“We will continue to act decisively against all threats,” Netanyahu said. 

Approximately 30 minutes after Netanyahu departed the town, drone alerts sounded across parts of northern Israel, including Shlomi. 

 

After 11 years at Mars, NASA’s MAVEN spacecraft went out with a whisper

0
after-11-years-at-mars,-nasa’s-maven-spacecraft-went-out-with-a-whisper
After 11 years at Mars, NASA’s MAVEN spacecraft went out with a whisper

NASA’s MAVEN spacecraft was in excellent shape when it disappeared behind Mars on December 6 of last year. The routine passage, called an occultation, was supposed to last less than an hour, but ground teams didn’t hear from the spacecraft when it was supposed to regain contact with Earth.

The loss of communication triggered contingency plans for engineers to try to restore a link with MAVEN, which orbits Mars more than 200 million miles from Earth. To no avail, they listened for faint signals and uplinked commands in the blind. Hopes of saving the mission faded over time, and NASA officials announced Wednesday that they’re giving up on it.

“NASA has ceased efforts to search for the MAVEN spacecraft and are beginning activities to decommission the mission,” said Mike Moreau, MAVEN’s project manager at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. 

Loss of signal

It will take some time for engineers to try to unravel what happened to the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution (MAVEN) spacecraft, which launched from Earth in 2013 and arrived in orbit around Mars in 2014 to study the interaction between the Martian atmosphere and the solar wind. MAVEN was an unqualified success, lasting 11 years at Mars and far outliving its original prime mission. But the spacecraft’s sudden failure was a surprise. Many of NASA’s planetary exploration missions operate for decades.

With the scant information available,  investigators may never determine exactly what went wrong with MAVEN. Investigators are combing through data the spacecraft transmitted before Mars blocked the signal, and engineers were able to recover fragments of telemetry from MAVEN after it reemerged from behind the planet.

“As part of this investigation, the team members at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory were successful in recovering some fragments of telemetry and Doppler shift data from the spacecraft,” Moreau said. “These data were extracted from recorded signals that were recovered during the hours following the loss of signal.”

Ground controllers didn’t see these faint signals in real time. They were recorded as part of a separate science campaign seeking to gather information about the density and dynamics of the upper Martian atmosphere, which can distort radio signals that pass through it.

“One of the bits of that we were able to confirm is an inertial rate measurement that told us the spacecraft was spinning at about 2.7 revolutions per minute,” Moreau said. “We also confirmed that that was consistent with a Doppler signature that we saw in the data. That’s faster than the spacecraft is expected to rotate, and that indicates a problem that the spacecraft probably couldn’t recover from.”

Without the ability to point its solar arrays toward the Sun, the tumbling spacecraft likely drained its batteries within hours.

“That was one of the data points that helped us understand that the spacecraft probably reached a power state that was not supportable to continue operations,” Moreau said. “Those are the facts that we know. The anomaly review board is still looking at the root cause of what actually initiated the failure.”

MAVEN is orbiting Mars on an oval-shaped, elliptical path taking it as close as 110 miles (180 km) and as far as 2,500 miles (4,000 km) from the planet’s surface. The spacecraft, about the size of a small car, will remain in this orbit for 50 to 100 years before naturally falling into the Martian atmosphere and burning up.

Artist’s illustration of the MAVEN spacecraft in its elliptical orbit around Mars (not to scale).

Artist’s illustration of the MAVEN spacecraft in its elliptical orbit around Mars (not to scale). Credit: NASA/University of Colorado/LASP

What is lost?

There are two answers to this question. MAVEN was built as a research platform to help scientists understand how the atmosphere of Mars has changed over billions of years. Before MAVEN, scientists knew Mars must have been warmer and wetter and that it had a thicker atmosphere in the ancient past. The atmosphere on Mars today is too thin to support liquid water at the surface, and there is now widespread evidence of a network of lakes and rivers that covered Mars billions of years ago.

MAVEN found evidence of the mechanisms that stripped molecules from the upper layers of the atmosphere, a process known as atmospheric escape. The spacecraft’s science instruments monitored how the Martian atmosphere responded to blasts of charged particles emitted by massive eruptions from the Sun.

“One of our most exciting discoveries used 11 years of MAVEN data to observe, for the first time at any planet, an atmospheric escape process called sputtering,” said Shannon Curry, MAVEN’s principal investigator at the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado Boulder. “This is where charged particles crash into the upper atmosphere and splash out the neutral atmosphere, much like doing a cannonball in a pool. Our team used noble gas isotopes to confirm that this process has been a dominant escape mechanism for billions of years.”

A solar storm in 2024 hit Mars particularly hard. “We saw orders of magnitude more atmospheric escape, and we even captured images of glowing aurora across the planet,” Curry said.

MAVEN’s scientific legacy is secure, but the goodbye isn’t easy for teams working on the project, which scientists first proposed to NASA in 2006.

“I think the team has really experienced the loss of a loved one with the end of the mission,” Moreau said.

“At the same time, we are incredibly proud of the science we’ve accomplished over the last decade,” Curry said. “MAVEN was the best observer of atmospheric escape anywhere in the Solar System. We now have a better understanding of atmospheric escape at Mars than at any other planet, including Earth.”

The second answer is a little more uncertain. For most of its time at Mars, the MAVEN spacecraft provided a relay for scientific data uplinked from NASA’s rovers and landers on the Martian surface. The relay allowed NASA to return significantly more data and imagery from rovers like Perseverance and Curiosity than would be possible through a direct-to-Earth radio connection.

With MAVEN out of the picture, NASA has four other orbiters it can use to provide this critical radio link. But officials aren’t sure how much longer they will last. Three of the four remaining relay orbiters are older than MAVEN, which played an outsized role in the relay network thanks to its higher orbit.

“Over the life of the mission, MAVEN supported more than 8 percent of all of our relay sessions planned by our rovers and landers, but it accounted for nearly 18 percent of all of the data returned, illustrating its usefulness when returning large data volumes,” said Tiffany Morgan, director of NASA’s Mars Exploration Program.

The network still has plenty of capacity to support the Perseverance and Curiosity rovers, with some minor caveats.

“We do have remaining assets, and those assets have adjusted the amount of data that they return, and the rovers have also adjusted their planning for how they connect to those assets,” Morgan said. “There is a slight delay on occasion, because we don’t have as many assets in view, to getting our science data back, and MAVEN was critical in returning science data versus operational data. But the Mars Relay Network is resilient enough at this point in time to accommodate, for the most part, the loss of MAVEN with the added delay.”

NASA is asking commercial companies to develop a replacement for the existing Mars Relay Network. The new commercial system, called the Mars Telecommunications Network, is expected to provide higher throughput and broader coverage for NASA’s future missions to the red planet.

“Instead of each mission designing its own communications solution, we’ll build in a more capable architecture deliberately designed for Mars,” said Greg Heckler, deputy program manager for capability development at NASA’s Space Communications and Navigation office. “It will be built on the lessons from MAVEN, from the other orbiters, from every mission operating in this environment, including the current rovers, and from some of our growing endeavors around the Moon.”

NASA wants the Mars Telecommunications Network to be operational by the 2030s. The agency released a request for proposals last month.

“I think there’s … urgency,” Heckler said. “I think NASA establishing this infrastructure is going to be very important to continue science operations of the current missions here today and then enable us to execute on these newer, bigger missions yet to come.”

EU preparing economic support package for Armenia after Russian pressure on it

0
eu-preparing-economic-support-package-for-armenia-after-russian-pressure-on-it
EU preparing economic support package for Armenia after Russian pressure on it


The European Union is preparing an ​economic support package worth an ‌initial amount of €50 million ($58.1 million) for Armenia after Russia ​hit Armenia with some ​trade restrictions, European Commission President ⁠Ursula von der Leyen ​said on Thursday.

“Today I spoke ​with Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan about Russia’s recent restrictions targeting Armenia. ​This is nothing ​short of economic coercion, and it ‌is ⁠unacceptable,” said von der Leyen.

“By extending export restrictions on Armenian products, Moscow is ​weaponising ​economic relations ⁠for political pressure. We know this ​playbook all too well. ​This ⁠is why Europe stands firmly with Armenia. We ⁠are ​preparing an EU ​support package.”

Israel’s military creep killing Gaza peace plan

0

In recent days, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ordered the Israeli army to seize 70% of Gaza – a sizeable increase from the 60% it currently controls.

This follows an updated map sent to aid agencies in Gaza in late March featuring a new “orange line” demarcating the restricted area under military control – about 11% larger than the area agreed to with the “yellow line” in the October ceasefire with Hamas.

Israel’s defense minister has also confirmed in recent days the government’s intention to move large numbers of Palestinians out of Gaza “at the right time and in the right manner.”

All of this is happening in a charged political environment in Israel: the Knesset dissolved itself on May 20, creating the possibility of an early election in September.

Israel’s actions are in clear violation of the 20-point Gaza peace plan, which called for a staged withdrawal of Israeli troops and actively “encouraged” residents to stay. It reads:

No one will be forced to leave Gaza, and those who wish to leave will be free to do so and free to return. We will encourage people to stay and offer them the opportunity to build a better Gaza.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has acknowledged as much, telling a congressional hearing this week that the peace plan “doesn’t call for” expanded military control of the strip.

The 2.1 million Palestinians in Gaza are being squeezed into an ever-smaller pocket of the decimated, overcrowded territory. And it appears the international community is doing little to stop it.

Laws against conquering territory

International law permits militaries to occupy foreign territory in pursuit of war aims, but there are two key limitations here.

First, an occupying force cannot pursue a legal claim to the territory it holds. The UN Charter has clearly outlawed the right to conquest under Article 2(4). Breaches of this article are treated very seriously, as the world’s reaction to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shown. This can be considered a war crime – the crime of aggression.

For Israel, this means its control of Gaza cannot result in a claim to sovereignty over any part of the strip. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) underscored this in its 2024 advisory opinion on Israel’s actions in the occupied Palestinian territories.

Second, any occupying military power must comply with international humanitarian law and international human rights law in a conflict. This means ensuring the welfare of the population under its control.

This has been the case in Gaza since Israel captured it from Egypt in the Six-Day War in 1967, beginning a decades-long occupation of the strip.

In fact, Israel’s obligations as an occupying power continued even after it pulled out its troops and dismantled its settlements in 2005.

As part of these obligations, an occupying power must preserve the demographic composition of the territory it controls. In this specific case, international law prohibits the removal of a population (the Palestinians) and the transfer of another population (Israeli settlers) onto occupied land.

A flawed peace plan

Despite these clear legal principles, enforcement of Israel’s obligations will be at best difficult, slow and piecemeal.

In its 2024 advisory opinion, for instance, the ICJ ordered Israel to withdraw fully from the occupied Palestinian territories, saying its presence is in breach of two key legal principles – self-determination and the prohibition against conquest.

The UN General Assembly endorsed the findings and set a deadline of September 14 2025 for the withdrawal. Israel ignored the deadline. The General Assembly can’t enforce an ICJ ruling; only the Security Council can. And this avenue is blocked due to the US veto power.

More worrying is that the clarity provided by international law – prohibiting conquest, genocide, settlements and forced displacement – is being blurred by the 20-point peace plan mediated by US President Donald Trump and the so-called Board of Peace overseeing the process.

US President Donald Trump stands with other world leaders at a Board of Peace meeting in Washington in February 2026. Photo: Mark Schiefelbein / AP via The Conversation

Last November, the UN Security Council endorsed Trump’s plan to end the conflict, disarm Hamas and establish a new transitional government system under the auspices of the Board of Peace and an International Stabilisation Force to keep the peace.

But the ceasefire agreement was flawed from the start. The text, for instance, did not include any specifications about Israel’s presence in the strip, accountability for alleged crimes or demilitarisation of Palestinian groups.

Since the ceasefire, the entire process has predictably stalled. Israeli strikes have continued, killing more than 900 Palestinians. Aid delivery is far below the needs of a desperate population. And Hamas refuses to disarm without firm guarantees on future Palestinian self-determination.

Behind the ‘yellow line’

This stalemate suits Israel perfectly. Under the map of the ceasefire agreement, Israel was permitted to keep its troops in areas behind a “yellow line” encircling the majority of the population along the coast. This gave Israel military control of just over half of Gaza.

Then, in the area under its control, Israel began two activities that speak to its longer-term political aspirations.

First, it leveled entire neighborhoods and hundreds of buildings, turning this part of Gaza into a wasteland devoid of inhabitants and any recognizable landmarks. Second, on this blank canvas, it constructed an impressive array of military roads, outposts and barriers, including permanent earthen berms (walls).

This gives Israel the possibility of perpetual control of a territory devoid of Palestinians. If this status quo continues, it would amount to forced displacement and conquest.

Day by day, Palestinian Gaza is shrinking and a new Gaza is being forged through bulldozers and barriers. Netanyahu has indicated Israel may not stop at 70% depopulation and control.

It may seek to preserve a large “buffer” zone in Gaza – as it is doing in Lebanon and Syria – or perhaps revive the project of Israeli settlement of the strip, which is in full swing across the West Bank.

All of this is happening in violation of international law and a “peace” plan that has no clear vision for a long-term solution for the Palestinian people.

Michelle Burgis-Kasthala is professor of international law, La Trobe University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Megawatt diplomacy: Water as the missing link in the new architecture of Middle East energy security

0
megawatt-diplomacy:-water-as-the-missing-link-in-the-new-architecture-of-middle-east-energy-security
Megawatt diplomacy: Water as the missing link in the new architecture of Middle East energy security

From oil geopolitics to the water-energy nexus

For more than a century, energy security in the Middle East has been defined by oil and gas. Strategic waterways, export routes, production capacities and geopolitical rivalries have shaped the region’s role in the global energy system. Yet while policymakers continue to debate energy transitions, decarbonisation and the future of hydrocarbon markets, a more fundamental challenge is emerging beneath the surface: water.

The Middle East is simultaneously one of the world’s most energy-rich regions and one of its most water-scarce. This reality is not merely an environmental concern; it is increasingly becoming a strategic one.

As the region seeks to maintain its energy leadership while adapting to climate change and economic transformation, water is emerging as a decisive factor in the future of energy security.

The forgotten foundation of energy security

Energy and water have long been treated as separate policy domains across much of the Middle East. In reality, however, the two are deeply interconnected.

Oil and gas extraction require water. Refineries consume water. Thermal power plants depend on water for cooling. Petrochemical industries require reliable water supplies. Even renewable energy projects and the production of green hydrogen rely on significant quantities of water.

This means that future energy security cannot be measured solely by reserves, production capacity or export infrastructure. It must also be assessed through the availability and sustainability of water resources.

Countries may possess abundant hydrocarbons, but without sufficient water, their ability to sustain energy production and industrial growth will become increasingly constrained.

Electricity diplomacy: The new power in the Middle East

Megawatt diplomacy in an era of scarcity

The concept of energy diplomacy has traditionally revolved around oil contracts, pipeline politics and gas exports. The emerging reality of the twenty-first century demands a broader framework—one that may be described as “Megawatt Diplomacy”. Megawatt Diplomacy refers to a new model of regional cooperation in which electricity networks, desalination technologies, renewable energy projects and water management become central pillars of strategic engagement.

The Gulf states have invested heavily in desalination infrastructure and renewable energy projects. Other countries possess valuable water resources but often lack investment, technology or energy infrastructure. These asymmetries create opportunities for cooperation rather than competition.

Regional electricity interconnections, shared desalination initiatives and cross-border investments in water and energy infrastructure could generate forms of interdependence that strengthen regional stability.

Green hydrogen and the new geography of power

Across the Middle East, governments are positioning themselves for the emerging hydrogen economy. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Oman have announced ambitious plans to become major exporters of green hydrogen. Yet there is a critical reality often overlooked in discussions about the energy transition: green hydrogen requires water.

As global demand for low-carbon energy sources grows, access to sustainable water resources will become a strategic advantage.

In the coming decades, water may prove just as important to the energy economy as oil was during the twentieth century.

The countries that successfully integrate water policy with energy strategy will be better positioned to lead in the next phase of global energy competition.

The geopolitics of energy algorithms: Who will control oil markets in the age of Artificial Intelligence?

Rethinking regional security

The architecture of Middle East energy security is undergoing a profound transformation. Oil and gas will remain important, but they will no longer be sufficient on their own.

Climate resilience, renewable energy systems, electricity connectivity and sustainable water management are becoming essential components of national and regional security.

This shift requires policymakers to rethink traditional assumptions.

Water can no longer be viewed solely as an environmental issue or an agricultural resource. It is increasingly a geopolitical asset, an economic necessity and a strategic determinant of energy security.

Conclusion

The Middle East is entering an era in which the geopolitics of energy will be inseparable from the geopolitics of water. If the twentieth century was defined by oil diplomacy, the decades ahead may well be defined by Megawatt Diplomacy—a framework in which water becomes the missing link connecting energy production, economic development and regional stability.

The most important question for the region’s future is no longer which country possesses the largest oil reserves. It is which countries can most effectively manage the relationship between water, energy and security in a rapidly changing world.

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

I Got Access to Hundreds of Teacher Misconduct Complaints in California — and You Can Too

0
i-got-access-to-hundreds-of-teacher-misconduct-complaints-in-california-—-and-you-can-too
I Got Access to Hundreds of Teacher Misconduct Complaints in California — and You Can Too

I was a new reporter at KQED in 2021 when former elementary teacher Joseph Brian Houg was sentenced to more than three decades in prison for sexually abusing 10 students. He’d taught at the same San Francisco Bay Area school for more than two decades. Were there warning signs?  

I soon discovered parents on social media saying they had complained to school administrators for years about Houg. I also knew that schools could release such complaints if they were substantiated or if teachers were disciplined. So I filed public records requests with Houg’s school — something anyone can do. 

I received 43 pages of records within a few months showing that parents had reported Houg to the principal at least four times since 2009. They complained about him for asking students to strip down to their underwear in his classroom in order to try on costumes for a play he was directing, and for coming into their changing room. They also complained about his touching boys’ chests or stomachs and tapping one boy on the butt. I learned that the principal had twice warned Houg to stop touching students. But he was allowed to keep teaching. (The principal said in a deposition that while Houg’s actions crossed professional boundaries, they were not reported to her as sexual.)

Over the next two years, I reported on similar cases of teachers remaining in the classroom after complaints of unwanted touching. Another Bay Area elementary school, in Benicia, reported a teacher to the state’s licensing body after he resigned due to accusations of misconduct. He was hired by another school, and his educator license remained in good standing until he was criminally charged. (He is currently fighting those charges.)

This raised a whole different set of questions for me: Should these teachers have been allowed to keep teaching in new schools? How much about a teacher’s disciplinary history did potential employers know? And what was the state’s responsibility for acting on, and sharing, the information it had about these teachers?

After I entered journalism school at the University of California, Berkeley in 2023, I wanted to investigate how common it was for teachers to continue working with kids after schools found that they had committed misconduct. California law bars the teacher licensing agency from releasing disciplinary records to the public, so my classmate and I requested records from the 300 largest school districts in California. We asked for complaints of teacher sexual misconduct made to schools in the five previous years. We also asked for any reports sent by schools to the state’s teacher licensing agency, which are required to be filed when public school educators are fired or resign due to alleged misconduct.

Read More

Dozens of districts responded within two months. We began building a spreadsheet of teachers against whom complaints were raised. Getting the records was slow: California requires public agencies to determine whether they have records to disclose within 10 days, and to release them promptly, but most dragged their feet. Whenever schools stopped responding, I copied school board members and attorneys on my emails, citing the law. By the time I graduated more than a year after filing the records requests, I had received more than 350 complaints, which I used in my recent investigation with KQED and ProPublica.

To this day, Los Angeles Unified, the largest school district in California, still has not released any records pertaining to teacher misconduct cases that it reported to the state. Instead, the district said it would charge me $8,000 ($100 an hour for 80 hours of work) for it to “investigate approximately 2,500 potentially responsive personnel files.” The First Amendment Coalition, a California nonprofit that advocates for free speech and government transparency, is representing me in a lawsuit filed in May. We argue that the Los Angeles school district is violating public records laws with its failure to release documents pertaining to alleged educator misconduct. A Los Angeles Unified spokesperson told me in a written statement this week that its policies balance the public’s right to access records with “responsible stewardship of public resources” and the law. 

Districts slow-walking their responses isn’t the only obstacle to getting records from schools. Districts typically notify teachers before releasing complaints to give them the opportunity to block the documents’ release. The former Benicia teacher who was criminally charged with sexually abusing students in 2024 sued to block the release of complaints made against him at two school districts. The First Amendment Coalition represented me in that case, too, and we won. It took nine months to get the records. In another case in which I had requested records, the court granted an injunction preventing release of the teacher’s records, but the legal filings contained the details of the allegations against him, so the nature of the complaint became public anyway.

At least four teachers have called or emailed me directly to ask why I’m requesting their disciplinary records. They wanted to share their side of the story, which I was more than happy to hear, and some argued that their cases were not worth my time. One asked me to retract my request. (I did not.) Another sent a 1,700-word email saying that the allegations were only partially true and lamented that he did not have the money to defend himself. 

While I appreciated the complexity of individual cases, I believed that those misconduct complaints might contain important truths. Undeterred by school districts’ recalcitrance, I followed the public record-seekers’ mantra: If you can’t get records from one agency, the answers you’re looking for may exist somewhere else. 

Records of state disciplinary hearings are presumed public when teachers object to their dismissals by school districts or appeal the suspension or revocation of their licenses. And those records reside in the Department of General Services, a state agency that houses another agency responsible for convening administrative hearings of public employees. 

This agency proved helpful with the case of Jason Agan, a San Francisco Bay Area math teacher who KQED and ProPublica reported on last month. Agan had been fired for sexually harassing high school students but went on to teach at two more schools, even after an independent panel convened by the Office of Administrative Hearings deemed him “unfit to teach.” Because he had asked for an outside hearing after the district moved to fire him, I requested those records. 

I got them the next day. The documents contained summaries of testimony from students, administrators and Agan himself at his dismissal hearing. Agan, who has not been accused of a crime, admitted to touching students’ shoulders but denied any sexual motivation, stating during his dismissal hearing that he did so to offer them support and encouragement. He maintained his teaching license. 

Getting a response from the Department of General Services was like discovering a secret portal to obtaining records quickly and easily. 

So I requested five years’ worth of decisions about other teachers by independent panels from this agency, in search of further insights into how the state’s teacher disciplinary system works and where it falls short. I obtained a gold mine of documents in less than a week.

I had learned some important lessons: What seems to be secret isn’t always so. Sometimes you just need to know who to ask, and for what.

How some data center operators are tackling their water use problems

0
how-some-data-center-operators-are-tackling-their-water-use-problems
How some data center operators are tackling their water use problems

On Monday, SpaceX amended its initial public offering to state that water conditions—including water scarcity, regulations around water, and drought—could constrain data center development.

It isn’t the only tech company trying to assess how water scarcity might impact its business. Water use is emerging as one of the most contentious data center issues. A recent Gallup poll found that seven out of 10 Americans are opposed to data center development, with water scarcity ranking as the top resource concern. Facing increasingly fierce resistance, some tech companies are scrambling to assure the public that they’re facing the issue head-on.

Data centers primarily use water to cool server racks, which throw off massive amounts of heat. One popular technique, known as evaporative cooling, uses fresh water to absorb the heat, which is then pumped to cooling towers where it evaporates outside.

Using more water can save money and reduce emissions for big tech companies by reducing the power needed for cooling that relies on energy-intensive pumps to recirculate water. But it can also come with a large water footprint: Google’s facility in Council Bluffs, Iowa, for instance, which uses evaporative cooling, consumed more than 1 billion gallons in 2024.

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory predicted in a 2024 report that hyperscale data centers could consume up to 33 billion gallons of water by 2030 if they relied heavily on evaporative cooling. That’s on par or even less than other thirsty industries, like agriculture or oil and gas—a single fracked well can use 1.5 to 16 million gallons of water—but it poses a risk in regions where water is already scarce. The risk is particularly acute in summer, when data center cooling needs tend to skyrocket at the same time as municipal water use.

“Water is a highly local, highly regional issue,” says Shaolei Ren, a professor of engineering at UC Riverside. “It’s a limited resource, and we have to manage it very carefully.”

Some tech giants, including Microsoft, OpenAI, and Oracle, have made statements in recent months indicating that they are moving away from evaporative cooling entirely in order to save water. That includes OpenAI and Oracle’s massive Stargate expansion in a number of states, including a water-stressed region of Texas.

Google is taking a different approach. On Wednesday, the company rolled out a series of water-related commitments to communities where it has data centers, along with funding announcements for water-related projects in the US.

They include pledges to replenish more freshwater than the company consumes, via investments in local water projects; to scale up the use of reclaimed and recycled water; and to disclose annual water use in data centers. (Other tech companies, including Microsoft, have similar promises around water replenishment and local investment. Google has been working on most of these pledges for a few years.) There’s also a promise to use “a data-driven framework” to decide what data center designs would work best with local watersheds.

Ben Townsend, the global head of infrastructure and sustainability at Google, says that data center design is a lot more complicated than simply swearing off one type of cooling in all cases. The company, he says, has been doing detailed hydrologic assessments of its sites for the past four years to determine what types of cooling would work best.

“Water is scarce in some regions and plentiful in others,” he says. “A one-size-fits-all strategy just doesn’t work.”

In April, Google defended evaporative cooling for areas with what it called “abundant” water in a filing to the European Union as necessary for developing truly sustainable data centers. Google’s arguments line up with new research from Ren and his team, who found that if all data centers in the US were to adopt some kind of evaporative cooling during peak demand, it could free up an additional 10 to 30 gigawatts of power. In areas where grids are stressed but water resources aren’t, using evaporative cooling could provide a meaningful headroom to utilities trying to balance load.

“If you don’t use water, the challenge is that you’re going to be using a lot more power in the summer, and that will push up the cost,” Ren says.

Most tech giants, including Google, have seen their carbon emissions skyrocket as a result of the AI boom. Totally avoiding evaporative cooling could increase emissions if data centers rely on dirty energy to keep facilities cool. Using less evaporative cooling could also mean more water used offsite for electric generation, depending on how data centers are getting their electricity.

Despite efforts to curb water use, tech companies are still struggling to do so—and it could eventually impact business. Even as Microsoft is moving away from evaporative cooling, The New York Times reported in February that the company’s internal records indicate that its water use is set to skyrocket. In 2024, Google halted plans for a data center outside of Santiago, Chile, after a court partially revoked its permits over water concerns. (The permits for that data center were granted in 2020; Townsend says the company adopted its water scarcity framework for new locations a few years after that.)

In 2021, Google funded a lawsuit filed by a town in Oregon fighting a local newspaper to avoid disclosing how much water the tech giant would use for an expansion of its existing data center. The company began disclosing water use from specific data centers in annual reports in 2023.

Priscilla Johnson, an independent consultant who served as Microsoft’s director of water strategy between 2017 and 2020, agrees with Ren that there’s trade-offs between water and power. However, she says, there are ways to push companies to develop better designs that use both less water and energy. Public pushback and regulation, she says, is crucial.

“The industry has to be challenged to design smarter and simplify things,” she says

This story originally appeared on wired.com.

Marilyn Monroe’s Secret Baby Exposed in Heartbreaking Letter

0
marilyn-monroe’s-secret-baby-exposed-in-heartbreaking-letter
Marilyn Monroe’s Secret Baby Exposed in Heartbreaking Letter


Marilyn Monroe was the ultimate Hollywood bombshell, but behind the glowing smile, platinum curls, and movie-star glamour was a woman haunted by pain, loneliness, and one dream she feared she had destroyed.

The late screen legend reportedly worried that her use of sleeping pills and alcohol may have played a role in the loss of an unborn child, according to a heartbreaking handwritten letter that has cast new light on her private torment.

Monroe, who died in 1962 at just 36 years old, spent much of her short life battling severe health problems, emotional turmoil, and a desperate longing to become a mother.

Now, decades after her death, the tragic note reveals just how terrified she was that the pills and booze she turned to during moments of suffering may have harmed the baby she so badly wanted to keep.

Born Norma Jeane Mortenson, Monroe became one of the most famous women in the world. But fame could not protect her from the painful medical battles that reportedly plagued her for years.

The actress suffered from severe endometriosis, a brutal condition that can cause intense pain and fertility problems. Over time, it reportedly led to repeated hospital stays, powerful medications, and struggles to carry a pregnancy.

Monroe is believed to have endured fertility heartbreak and multiple suspected miscarriages during her lifetime.

One source familiar with Monroe’s medical history said the tragedy of her story lies in how badly she wanted a child.

“What makes this story so tragic is that Marilyn desperately wanted a baby and genuinely feared that the medication and drinking she turned to in moments of pain may have harmed her pregnancy,” the source said. “Her letter shows panic, guilt and heartbreak all at once.”

The devastating fear was laid bare in a handwritten note that later surfaced publicly and was put up for auction.

In the letter, Monroe described symptoms that made her believe she might have been pregnant.

“I think I’ve been pregnant for about three weeks or maybe two,” she wrote.

She described painful breasts, cramps, and bleeding that appeared to be getting worse.

Then came the gut-wrenching question that revealed her fear.

Monroe wrote that she had taken several Amitall sleeping pills on an empty stomach and had also consumed sherry wine. Then she asked whether she could have “killed it” by doing so.

Her words showed not a glamorous movie queen, but a panicked woman begging for reassurance.

“If it is still alive I want to keep it!” she wrote.

A Monroe historian said the letter was a rare and painful look at the real woman behind the Hollywood image.

“This wasn’t Marilyn Monroe the movie star,” the historian said. “This was a frightened woman confronting the possibility that she might lose the child she had always wanted. The language in the letter reveals how desperate she was for reassurance.”

Monroe’s beauty and fame made her a global sensation, but those close to her have long said her life behind closed doors was far darker than the fantasy sold to the public.

Anthony Summers, author of the 1985 biography Goddess: The Secret Lives of Marilyn Monroe, documented the devastating toll her endometriosis took on her body, her career, her relationships, and her dreams of motherhood.

According to Summers, the condition was so severe it affected nearly every part of her life. He wrote that before modern treatment options were available, Monroe’s pain helped lead to increasing use of strong painkillers, tranquilizers, and sleeping medications.

Bryan Johns, president and chief executive of the ICON Collection, said Monroe’s health problems were often dismissed or misunderstood during her lifetime.

“She had terrible, debilitating endometriosis, and was hospitalized and under medical supervision for that condition throughout her life,” Johns said.

He claimed that even when Monroe told studio bosses about her health struggles, they often accused her of exaggerating or making excuses.

That pressure only added to the heartbreaking image of a woman trapped between the demands of Hollywood and the reality of a body in constant pain.

Family friend and stylist Amy Greene later recalled that doctors once suggested Monroe undergo a hysterectomy because of her suffering.

But Monroe refused.

According to Greene, Marilyn was firm about wanting to become a mother.

“I can’t do that,” Monroe reportedly said. “I want to have a child. I’m going to have a son.”

Greene said Monroe often talked about having a son.

Those words make the resurfaced letter even more heartbreaking.

For millions, Marilyn Monroe remains the ultimate symbol of Old Hollywood glamour. But the private notes and memories left behind tell a much sadder story.

She was not just a sex symbol. She was a woman in pain, a woman desperate for love, and a woman whose dream of motherhood was crushed again and again.

Decades after her death, the tragedy still cuts deep because the fear in her own handwriting is so raw.

Marilyn Monroe had the world at her feet, but the one thing she wanted most may have been the one thing fame could never give her.

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

Recent Posts