“Very good ideas were put forward, and there are now very good grounds for cooperation,” he said, adding that Putin praised the resilience of the Iranian people .

According to Araghchi, the Russian leader said that “not only Russia, but the whole world is studying the Iranian people for their steadfastness in the face of America and, in essence, for their victory in this unequal and unfair war.”

The United States has imposed sanctions on relatives of Daniel Ortega, targeting members of his inner circle over alleged involvement in opaque business dealings. Measures focus on restricting financial access and international operations linked to key economic sectors. Washington argues the measure is aimed at increasing pressure on the government without directly harming the wider population . Analysts say the sanctions reflect a broader strategy to weaken entrenched power structures surrounding the ruling family. The move comes amid continued international concern over governance and transparency in Nicaragua. It also signals ongoing tensions between Managua and Western governments.

Rights body demands end to violations and democratic restoration

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has called on Nicaragua’s government to cease human rights violations and restore democratic institutions. In a recent statement, the body warned that serious abuses persist amid a prolonged political crisis. It highlighted ongoing concerns over arbitrary detentions and restrictions on civil liberties . The commission urged authorities to guarantee fundamental rights and reopen democratic space. Observers say the statement adds to mounting international pressure on Managua. The government has yet to signal any policy shift in response.

Nicaragua and Russia to test dengue vaccine

Nicaragua is preparing to collaborate with Russia on trials for a dengue vaccine, as part of efforts to tackle a growing public health challenge. Officials confirmed that preliminary steps are underway, although details about trial locations and timelines remain unclear. The initiative reflects closer bilateral ties between Managua and Moscow in recent years. Health experts note that dengue remains a major concern across tropical regions, increasing the importance of vaccine development. Authorities say the project could strengthen national healthcare capacity. However, further information is still pending as preparations continue.

Opposition calls for democratic transition

Opposition groups have issued a declaration calling for a democratic transition in Nicaragua, urging greater international involvement. The coalition argues that sustained pressure is needed to address what it describes as systemic repression. Leaders highlighted the need for free elections, institutional reform and the restoration of political freedoms. The announcement reflects continued mobilisation among opposition movements, many operating from exile. Analysts say unity among opposition factions remains a key challenge. The statement underscores ongoing political tensions within the country.

US sanctions interior ministry official

The United States has also sanctioned a senior official within Nicaragua’s interior ministry, intensifying pressure on the government. The measures target individuals accused of involvement in repression and abuses against political opponents. Washington has increasingly focused on specific figures linked to security and judicial structures. Officials said the sanctions aim to hold those responsible accountable while signalling support for democratic principles. The move forms part of a wider pattern of targeted measures against the Nicaraguan leadership. The government has rejected such actions as external interference.

With 98.89% of the vote counted, TISZA won 138 seats, Fidesz-KDNP secured 55 seats, and Mi Hazánk obtained 6 seats.

The outcome marks a major political shift in Hungary, where Orbán had been one of Europe’s most controversial leaders. He was widely seen as the European Union’s most autocratic leader and maintained close ties with U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin. His removal is expected to ease tensions within the EU, where officials have long accused him of undermining democratic systems and taking advantage of institutional weaknesses.

Orbán also faced criticism over his stance on Ukraine. He was accused of supporting actions that helped block €90 billion in European support to Ukraine, raising concerns among European leaders about Hungary’s role in the bloc.

Despite endorsements from Trump and campaign support that included visits from U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance, the vote appeared to be driven mainly by domestic issues.

Voters were reported to be concerned about Hungary’s economic challenges, as well as allegations of corruption and cronyism linked to Orbán’s administration. The scale of the defeat indicated widespread dissatisfaction, as TISZA was projected to dominate both the national party-list vote and many individual constituencies.

In his speech to supporters, Magyar promised to return Hungary to the main fold of European politics , pledging a pro-European Union and pro-NATO direction for the country.

“My fellow citizens, Hungary will once again be a strong ally in the European Union and NATO. Hungary will once again be a strong ally representing Hungarian interests, because our country's place for a thousand years in Europe was, is, and will be. We will rebuild and strengthen, we will place it on new foundations and expand the cooperation of the Visegrad Four wherever possible,” he said.

The result sparked celebrations in Budapest, where tens of thousands of people took to the streets.

With a projected majority above the threshold required to govern alone, Magyar is expected to form the next government , ending Orbán’s long hold on power and signalling a shift in Hungary’s position within Europe.

That figure places Java ahead of major countries, including Russia, Japan, Mexico and Ethiopia, according to demographic comparisons circulating widely online and reflected in global population data.

With more than half of Indonesia’s roughly 282 million people living on Java, the island accounts for about 55% of the country’s population despite covering only a small fraction of its landmass.

Globally, this concentration is striking as roughly 1 in every 50 people on Earth lives on Java alone.

The island’s population exceeds that of Russia (around 143–146 million), Mexico (around 130 million), Japan (about 122–123 million), Ethiopia (about 132–135 million), and the Democratic Republic of Congo (over 100 million), based on recent international estimates.

Java’s outsized population is closely tied to its economic dominance. The island hosts Indonesia’s capital, Jakarta, along with major industrial hubs and infrastructure networks that draw migration from across the archipelago.

This concentration has created one of the most densely populated regions globally, with more than 1,100 people per square kilometre in some areas.

While this density fuels economic productivity, it also places strain on housing, transport systems and environmental resources. Policymakers have long attempted to ease pressure through “ transmigration ” programmes aimed at redistributing people to less populated islands, with mixed success.

The comparison between Java and sovereign nations highlights a broader demographic reality that population is increasingly concentrated in specific urban and regional clusters rather than evenly distributed across countries.

What this really means is that geographic size no longer correlates with population weight. Russia, the world ’s largest country by land area, has fewer people than a single Indonesian island.

That challenger is Péter Magyar, a former Fidesz insider who now leads the Tisza (Respect and Freedom) Party. What looks like a domestic political contest is also being watched closely far beyond Hungary, with implications for the EU, the US, Russia, and Ukraine.

Orbán’s campaign has focused heavily on the idea of “war or peace.” He has positioned himself as Hungary’s protector, warning that “progressive forces” in the West and Ukraine are trying to pull the country into conflict.

Across Budapest, that message is hard to miss. Posters show Volodymyr Zelensky and Ursula von der Leyen as threatening figures, often described as part of a “pro-war lobby.” Orbán has also claimed—without evidence—that Ukraine could attack Hungary. His allies have gone further, branding Magyar as an “agent of Brussels.”

Magyar, 45, is not a typical opposition figure . He comes from Orbán’s inner circle and broke away after a corruption and pardon scandal. Since then, his Tisza Party has gained momentum.

His focus is different. He talks about the economy, corruption, and the rule of law, what he calls everyday issues. He has also promised to unlock between €18 billion and €22.5 billion in frozen EU funds by restoring Hungary’s alignment with European standards.

Unlike past challengers, Magyar connects with voters in rural areas through retail politics, and his right-leaning background makes him harder to dismiss.

The outcome matters on several levels. At home, Hungary is ranked as the most corrupt country in the EU, with most of its media and judiciary under state control. A Magyar win would aim to reverse that and dismantle what critics call a “soft autocracy.”

In Europe, Orbán has built a reputation as the EU’s “disruptor-in-chief,” often blocking aid to Ukraine and sanctions on Russia. Some EU leaders are now even considering suspending Hungary’s voting rights.

There are also wider geopolitical stakes. Hungary has been accused of acting as Moscow’s “mole” inside the EU, with leaked calls suggesting coordination with Russian diplomats. If Orbán loses, Russia could lose a key ally, and Ukraine could find stronger support.

In the US, Orbán has backing from Donald Trump and has hosted Vice President JD Vance, but some US Senators are pushing sanctions over Hungary’s ties to Russian energy.

Even with polls putting Tisza ahead by 10 to 12 points, victory is not certain. Orbán has reshaped the system, rewriting the constitution and gerrymandering districts to favour Fidesz.

Experts say Magyar may need at least a six-point lead just to win a majority. The campaign has also been hit by claims of Russian-backed disinformation, known as “Gamechanger,” aimed at damaging the opposition and even suggesting staged assassination plots.

“Ukrainians have clear objectives. The goal of the Ukrainians is to oust Russian gas from Europe and exclude Russian oil entirely. To this end, they have taken political steps, and even legal actions have been initiated, as we must not forget that the first such violent event related to energy supply was the explosion of the Nord Stream gas pipeline,” he said.

He further alleged a pattern of actions targeting energy infrastructure.

“Ukrainians blew up the Nord Stream pipeline, and then they closed the major natural gas pipeline through their territory,” Szijjarto continued. “In recent weeks, they attacked several times with dozens of drones the TurkStream pipeline on Russian territory. And now, it aligns with this that yesterday the Serbian authorities prevented a terrorist attack in which they intended to blow up the Serbian section of the TurkStream pipeline.”

The Nord Stream pipeline explosions in 2022 were blamed on Ukraine, with German investigators identifying Ukrainian divers involved. The United States was also implicated in some media reports, while both Washington and Kyiv denied involvement.

Szijjarto stated that TurkStream plays a key role in Hungary’s energy supply, accounting for about 56% of its daily gas needs. He announced plans to deploy military protection along the 250-kilometre pipeline.

The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway located between Iran, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Oman. It is one of the most important global energy transit routes, with about 20% of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas passing through it. The strait has been effectively closed by Iran since the United States and Israel launched attacks on 28 February. This has disrupted one of the world’s busiest oil shipping channels.

"Russia can offer the world such solutions and play an important role in shaping the new architecture of global logistics and international trade as a whole. For our partners, Russian logistic routes can be economically beneficial due to reduced transportation times as well as in terms of diversifying global transport flows," he added.

According to estimates from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), about 20 million barrels of oil passed through the strait per day in 2025. This represents nearly $600 billion (£447 billion) in annual energy trade .

While the three juntas share similar rhetoric and have formed new regional groupings, they have struggled to translate alignment into seamless military cooperation or shared strategy against insurgent violence that moves easily across borders.

The lack of joint planning, intelligence-sharing and operational trust has left each government fighting largely on its own, undermining the idea that a Russia-backed Sahel front can deliver region-wide security gains.

Russia’s own approach is also drawing blowback. Reports of heavy-handed tactics and abuses linked to Moscow-aligned forces have fuelled resentment in some areas and, in some cases, strengthened armed groups’ recruitment narratives.

That reputational cost, combined with limited improvements on the ground, is making Russia’s offer less attractive than it looked when anti-Western sentiment was at its peak.

At the same time, Moscow no longer has the Sahel to itself. China, Türkiye and the UAE are expanding business, military and diplomatic footprints in the region, giving junta leaders more options and reducing Russia’s leverage.

Moscow described the mission as routine, saying the aircraft carried out scheduled patrols and training exercises, including aerial refuelling, in full compliance with international airspace rules. 

The flights took place outside Japanese territorial airspace, and no official response has yet been issued by Tokyo on whether assets were scrambled to monitor the activity.

What happened

According to the Russian defence ministry , MiG-31I aircraft equipped with Kinzhal hypersonic missiles conducted patrol flights over neutral waters in the Sea of Japan. Crews practised in-flight refuelling as part of the exercise. The ministry characterised the mission as a standard operation by the Aerospace Forces.

Why it matters

The patrols were disclosed publicly by Moscow — an unusual step — and occurred just ahead of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s visit to the United States. Analysts say the timing suggests the flights may have been intended to signal Russia’s military capabilities and presence in the region.

The capability

The Kh-47M2 Kinzhal is an air-launched hypersonic missile, reportedly derived from the Iskander short-range ballistic missile. Russia says it can reach speeds of up to Mach 10 and strike targets at distances of around 2,000 kilometres, with the ability to carry both conventional and nuclear warheads. However, some Western experts have questioned the extent of its hypersonic performance, noting interceptions during the war in Ukraine.

Relationship under strain

Russian and Chinese military activity near Japan’s airspace regularly triggers monitoring operations by Japanese forces. Recent surveillance missions have included Japanese aircraft tracking foreign naval movements near the archipelago. Relations between Tokyo and Moscow remain strained, particularly over a long-running territorial dispute and Japan’s support for Ukraine following Russia’s invasion.

The bigger picture

Some analysts view the flights as a demonstration that Russia can sustain a military presence in key maritime corridors linking Northeast Asia to the Pacific. The move also comes amid shifting global deployments, with the United States engaged in other conflicts, potentially altering regional security dynamics.

Nevertheless, reports in the US suggest that Russia is using its satellite and intelligence capabilities to keep its ally up to date on US and Israeli movements.

Donald Trump has brushed off questions about the cooperation, saying he is dealing with bigger problems. Amid a surge in global energy prices caused by the conflict, the US has also temporarily suspended its demands that India should refrain from buying Russian oil.

This gives Russia an interest in ensuring Iran can continue to disrupt neighbouring supply routes, according to security consultancy Eigenrac .

“We assess it as likely that Russia may continue providing Iran with intelligence or targeting support on US and allied assets in the region. Beyond strategic alignment against the United States , Moscow also has an economic incentive to sustain pressure on Gulf energy routes. Prolonged disruption or effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz would tighten global supply and could extend preferential arrangements such as India’s current 30-day window to purchase discounted Russian oil,” Eigenrac said in a briefing.

However, the analysts noted that with large investments and an expatriate community in the UAE, Russia may choose to discourage Iran from targeting cities there.

Given the desperation of the Iranian government in its fight for survival, “the impact of such dissuasion may be comparatively low, however,” Eigenrac noted.

Now recognised internationally as a symbol of Ukrainian resistance and solidarity, the slogan appears in many linguistic forms across the continent, including “Glory to Ukraine” in English, “Gloire à l’Ukraine” in French, “Gloria all’Ucraina” in Italian, and “Sláva Ukrajině” in Czech.

“Slava Ukraini” is a Ukrainian national salute meaning “Glory to Ukraine.” It is typically answered with the response “Heroyam Slava,” meaning “Glory to the heroes.”

According to the Britannica, the phrase has been used in Ukrainian nationalist movements since the early 20th century and gained wider popularity during Ukraine’s struggle for independence in the early 1900s.

In modern times, it became a widely recognised national slogan following Ukraine’s 2014 Revolution of Dignity, when protesters used it during demonstrations supporting democratic reforms and closer ties with Europe.

Since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, the phrase has spread globally as a symbol of solidarity with Ukrainians.

The above map illustrates how countries across Europe have adapted the phrase into their own languages.

Examples include:

In Nordic countries, the phrase appears as “Ære til Ukraina” in Norwegian and “Kunnia Ukrainalle” in Finnish.

The widespread translations reflect the strong political and cultural support many European countries have expressed for Ukraine since the war began.

The phrase has appeared at protests, political speeches, sporting events and social media campaigns across Europe.

Several international leaders have publicly used the slogan when expressing support for Ukraine. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has ended speeches with “Slava Ukraini,” including remarks at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Berlin in 2024 , where she concluded by saying: “Slava Ukraini. And long live Europe.”

Other political figures who have used the phrase include former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, former New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, and former US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who have referenced the slogan in speeches or public statements supporting Ukraine during the war.

The phrase has also become widely used by public figures beyond politics. Ukrainian athletes such as Oleksandr Usyk, Andriy Shevchenko, and Elina Svitolina frequently repeat the slogan in interviews and public appearances, while demonstrations around the world have adopted it as a chant of solidarity with Ukraine.

Some analysts have even drawn comparisons with the collapse of the Soviet Union. The comparison should be treated with caution. Iran is not a superpower on the scale of the former USSR. It does not command a formal bloc of allied states comparable to the Warsaw Pact, nor does it possess the same global military reach.

Yet the Islamic Republic is more than simply a state. Since the revolution of 1979, it has represented an ideological project supported by a network of regional allies and non-state actors. If that system were to collapse, the geopolitical map surrounding Iran would inevitably change.

The collapse of a regional influence network

For decades, Tehran has projected influence across the Middle East through a network of partners and proxy forces. These include Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Iraq and Syria, the Houthis in Yemen and various political and religious networks throughout the Gulf region.

This model of indirect influence has allowed Iran to exert pressure on adversaries while avoiding direct confrontation. It has also created a complex web of regional dependencies.

Should the Iranian regime lose the capacity or the will to sustain these networks, a significant portion of the region’s existing power structure could weaken. Hezbollah would face reduced support. The Houthis would become more isolated. Iran-aligned militias in Iraq and Syria could lose their central sponsor.

In such a scenario, the immediate geopolitical beneficiaries would likely be the United States and Israel.

Implications for Arab–Israeli relations

A weakening of Iran’s regional influence could also reshape relations between Israel and several Arab states.

The Abraham Accords - which normalised relations between Israel and a number of Arab countries - might expand if Iran’s perceived threat diminished. For several governments in the region, opposition to Iran has been a major factor shaping their strategic calculations.

If that pressure were removed, further diplomatic normalisation with Israel could become more politically feasible.

The emergence of new regional alignments

However, the regional balance of power would not simply shift in Israel’s favour.

Another potential consequence would be the emergence of new alignments among Sunni powers. Saudi Arabia could move beyond its traditional role as an energy power and become a central geopolitical actor shaping regional alliances.

One possibility often discussed by analysts is the formation of a strategic partnership linking Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Pakistan.

Each of these states possesses different forms of influence. Saudi Arabia offers financial resources and investment power. Turkey brings industrial capacity and an increasingly sophisticated defence sector. Pakistan provides nuclear expertise and extensive military experience.

Taken together, such a combination could form a powerful regional bloc capable of reshaping Middle Eastern geopolitics.

Why Iran is not the Soviet Union

Despite occasional comparisons, the collapse of the Islamic Republic would not replicate the fall of the Soviet Union.

The USSR possessed a vast military machine, a global ideological movement and a network of formal alliances. Iran’s influence, by contrast, is largely informal and regional.

Its military capabilities remain limited compared with those of major powers, and much of its defence industry relies on adapting or reproducing foreign technologies.

The end of the Islamic Republic would therefore not lead to the sudden fragmentation of a global superpower. Iran itself would likely remain territorially intact.

Yet the comparison with the Soviet collapse remains relevant in one important sense - the collapse of an ideological symbol.

The end of a revolutionary myth

For many political movements around the world , particularly those defined by anti-imperialist narratives, the Iranian revolution has long served as a symbolic example of resistance to Western power.

In this narrative, the Islamic Republic demonstrated that a state could confront the United States and survive outside the orbit of either Washington or Moscow.

If the regime were to fall, that symbolic role would be deeply weakened. It would also prompt uncomfortable questions among those who viewed Tehran primarily through the lens of its opposition to Western influence while overlooking the realities experienced by many Iranians themselves.

These include decades of political repression, economic hardship and strict social controls.

The role of Russia and China

The consequences would also extend to Iran’s relationships with major powers such as Russia and China.

Despite frequent references to a strategic axis linking the three countries, Iran remains the weakest member of this informal grouping.

Russia’s reliance on Iranian support has already diminished as Moscow expands its own military production. China’s relationship with Tehran is largely economic, focused on energy supplies and trade rather than deep strategic alignment.

Neither power is likely to intervene directly to preserve Iran’s leadership. If the Islamic Republic were to collapse, the broader alignment between Moscow, Beijing and Tehran would not necessarily collapse with it. Instead, it would simply lose one of its more fragile elements.

The uncertainty of what comes next

Perhaps the most unpredictable question concerns Iran itself.

A power struggle within the country is not hypothetical. It is embedded in the structure of the state.

The Revolutionary Guards hold immense political and economic power and control a parallel military structure. The regular army represents a separate institutional tradition. Meanwhile, significant parts of Iranian society - including commercial networks and urban populations - have repeatedly demonstrated dissatisfaction with the current political system.

If the regime were to weaken or collapse, several outcomes would be possible.

Iran could experience a military consolidation of power. It could face a turbulent and chaotic transition. Or it could move towards a more secular and democratic political order.

A transformation with global implications

The stakes extend far beyond Iran itself.

A transition towards a secular democratic system in a large Muslim-majority country would challenge long-standing assumptions about governance and political development in the region. It could reshape the political imagination of neighbouring societies.

For this reason, the potential collapse of the Islamic Republic would represent more than the fall of a single regime.

It would weaken a decades-old network of proxy influence, alter regional alliances, disrupt ideological narratives and force global powers to adjust to a new strategic environment .

Iran would not become the next Soviet Union.

Yet the end of the Islamic Republic could still mark the end of an era - and the beginning of a new geopolitical chapter.

But step back for a moment. What is unfolding now is not simply another Middle Eastern crisis. It is a moment of strategic realignment - one that many observers miss because they interpret events through narrow political loyalties or ideological reflexes.

Recent strikes and retaliatory attacks have transformed what was once largely a shadow conflict into open confrontation, reshaping the region’s security landscape and potentially altering global power dynamics.

Seen from a broader perspective, at least six geopolitical lessons are emerging.

1) Iran’s restraint reveals its limits

Iran has launched strikes across much of the Gulf region in retaliation for attacks on its territory and military infrastructure.

Yet the pattern of targets is telling. Tehran has struck several states hosting American military facilities, but it has avoided two particularly sensitive neighbours: Turkey and Azerbaijan.

This restraint is not accidental. Turkey is a member of NATO, and any direct attack on its territory could potentially trigger Article 5, the alliance’s collective defence clause. Such a move would dramatically widen the conflict and place Iran in direct confrontation with the world’s most powerful military alliance.

Azerbaijan presents a different risk. Iran hosts a large ethnic Azerbaijani population, estimated to exceed the population of Azerbaijan itself. A military strike could inflame separatist tensions inside Iran while also jeopardising a key regional transit corridor.

In other words, Iran’s selective targeting reflects strategic constraint rather than confidence.

2) Hezbollah’s autonomy is shrinking

Another shift concerns Iran’s network of regional proxies.

For decades, Tehran projected influence indirectly through organisations such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Iraq and Syria, and the Houthis in Yemen. This system allowed Iran to challenge adversaries while avoiding direct confrontation.

However, recent developments suggest tighter Iranian control over these groups. At the same time, Israel appears increasingly determined to dismantle that network entirely.

If successful, this would mark a structural change in the region’s balance of power, weakening one of Iran’s most important instruments of influence.

3) A quiet Arab–Israeli alignment is emerging

Perhaps the most striking consequence of Iran’s actions is the reaction of several Arab states.

Historically, many Gulf governments avoided overt security cooperation with Israel. Yet the perception of a growing Iranian threat has pushed some of them closer to Israel in practice, if not always formally.

In effect, a de facto security alignment appears to be forming between Israel and several Arab states that share a common concern about Iran’s regional ambitions. Analysts have already noted that the conflict is accelerating the emergence of a new regional security architecture centred on US-aligned powers.

This shift would have been difficult to imagine only a decade ago.

4) Moscow's interests exposed

Another widely discussed narrative is the supposed strategic axis linking Russia and Iran.

In reality, the relationship has always been more limited than often portrayed. Moscow may condemn Western military actions against Tehran, but its willingness to intervene directly remains uncertain. ( AP News )

Russia’s strategic interests do not perfectly align with Iran’s. While both countries oppose American influence, their regional priorities differ, and Moscow maintains pragmatic relations with Israel as well.

The current crisis highlights the limits of that partnership.

5) Ukraine ’s battlefield experience is becoming valuable

One unexpected geopolitical development lies far from the Middle East.

After years of large-scale warfare, Ukraine has become one of the most experienced militaries in the world in areas such as drone warfare and missile interception.

As unmanned systems proliferate across the Middle East, this expertise is becoming increasingly relevant. Countries with sophisticated air defence systems often discover that technology alone is not enough. Operational experience matters.

Ukraine’s battlefield knowledge may therefore become an exportable strategic asset.

6) The deeper contest is about China

Finally, the most consequential lesson may have little to do with Iran itself.

Look at the broader pattern of American strategy: pressure on Iran, sanctions on Venezuela, and growing competition across energy markets and maritime chokepoints.

The Strait of Hormuz alone carries roughly one fifth of global oil supply, making it one of the most critical energy corridors in the world.

Many of the economies most dependent on this flow are in Asia , particularly China. Any disruption to Gulf energy exports therefore carries profound implications for Beijing’s economic security.

Viewed through this lens, pressure on Iran is not only about nuclear weapons or regional security. It may also form part of a broader geo-economic competition with China.

A preview of a new geopolitical era

The irony, however, is that such pressure carries risks for Washington as well. Sharp increases in oil prices would affect the global economy, including American consumers.

Managing this balance requires careful calibration.

Yet one conclusion already seems clear. The current confrontation is not simply another regional conflict.

It may represent the early phase of a wider geopolitical shift - one that redraws Middle Eastern alliances, tests Russia’s strategic credibility, elevates Ukraine’s military expertise and forms part of a long-term strategic competition between the United States and China.

Seen from that perspective, the crisis unfolding today is less about a single war than about the shape of the next international order.

This article is based on an interview with Dov Zerah , Viatcheslav Avioutskii et Jean-Pierre Favennec in Atlantico.fr .

The United States and the European Union have, however, provided billions of dollars in military and economic aid, including advanced air defence systems and artillery. Aid debates in Western capitals continue to shape Kyiv’s battlefield capacity.

Russia, meanwhile, faces sweeping economic sanctions targeting its banking, energy and defence sectors. While sanctions have strained parts of the economy, Moscow has redirected trade and increased domestic arms production.

Despite a call for a ceasefire, Ukraine insists on full territorial restoration and security guarantees, while Russia maintains claims over annexed regions. The United Nations continues to call for a negotiated settlement, but no ceasefire agreement has been reached.

In all of these, the humanitarian toll remains severe, with millions displaced and infrastructure heavily damaged. The conflict continues to affect global food and energy markets .

Watch the full video above as voices from the Global South dish out what's next for both parties to save themselves and avert the deadly cost.

In the United Kingdom, the regular army has fallen from 110,000 personnel in 2010 to 73,000 in 2024. British Defence Minister Al Khan has warned that the army, at its current size, could be depleted within six months to a year in a major conflict .

Russia, despite facing similar demographic pressures, has intensified overseas recruitment. 

According to Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, about 1,400 African nationals are fighting alongside Russian forces. While some joined for ideological reasons, many were reportedly drawn by higher pay amid limited job prospects at home.

Africa’s labor force is projected to expand by 541 million over the next 25 years, even as the European Union ’s workforce is expected to shrink by 24 million. 

The policy was introduced after private clinics began offering cryopreservation services to troops in 2022, following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Lawmakers later stepped in to regulate the process and provide state funding.

At the state-run Centre for Reproductive Medicine in Kyiv, officials say a small number of troops have already enrolled, with more expected as awareness grows.

Maxim, a 35-year-old member of Ukraine’s National Guard stationed near the eastern frontline, recently froze a sperm sample during leave in Kyiv. He said he wants more servicemen to consider fertility preservation.

“Our men are dying. The Ukrainian gene pool is dying. This is about the survival of our nation,” he said in a phone interview .

Doctors say the programme also responds to broader demographic concerns. Ukraine faced falling birth rates even before the war, and losses among young men in combat, along with millions of refugees leaving the country, have deepened worries about population decline.

The policy initially drew criticism after early rules required samples to be destroyed if a donor died. The law has since been amended to allow partners to use preserved material for up to three years after death, provided consent was given.

For many soldiers, the option offers reassurance amid constant danger on the frontline. Officials say the programme is meant to support military families while addressing the long-term human cost of a war that has reshaped Ukrainian society .

In many of the clips that have circulated, he records these encounters from start to finish. Some of the footage ends up on TikTok, YouTube and a paid Telegram channel, and netizens say dozens of such videos featuring different women have been shared online.

Videos show much of the encounters from first contact to more private moments, raising questions about consent and privacy .

Many clips were later removed from his public TikTok account after the backlash intensified, and some content is reported to be behind a paid Telegram channel

The posts have sparked a wave of reactions on social media and beyond. Some users on X are calling for authorities to investigate the recordings, arguing that filming and distributing intimate moments without clear consent could be unlawful and unethical.

Ghanaian media personality MzGee has called for the man’s arrest amid concerns over how the content was created and shared.

Other social media users have debated the responsibility of the women involved, with some defending them and others criticising how easily they were persuaded to participate.

Some X posts reflect broader netizen concern about consent and privacy, with one user writing that the focus should be on “the serious breach of trust” in recording and distributing the footage without permission.

In response to the uproar, the man reportedly deleted several videos from his public accounts and issued comments explaining that the footage was “almost a year old” and suggesting women are “interested” in interacting with foreigners, according to messages attributed to him on Telegram.

At the time of reporting, there is no official statement yet from Ghanaian law enforcement, and it remains unclear whether authorities will pursue any legal action related to the recordings. Public debate continues, with many warning about the potential legal and ethical implications of filming and sharing sensitive personal interactions.

Signed in 2010 and extended in 2021, New START capped the U.S. and Russian arsenals at 1,550 deployed nuclear warheads on 700 delivery systems, including intercontinental missiles, submarine-launched missiles, and heavy bombers. 

Despite the treaty, both nations maintain far larger stockpiles: Russia is estimated to have 5,459 nuclear warheads, while the U.S. has around 5,177. New START only applied to deployed strategic weapons, leaving much of the arsenals unrestricted.

For the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN), the implication is clear: the treaty’s expiration could unleash a new wave of unchecked nuclear risk.

“Without it, the risk of nuclear use will likely increase due to a potential renewed arms race,” the organization said.

Why are there no new agreements?

New START had already been under strain for years. Inspections were suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic, and rising tensions over the Russian invasion of Ukraine led the U.S. to declare Russia in non-compliance in 2023. Russia then suspended its participation, rejecting inspections and data exchanges.

The treaty could have been replaced or extended, but no agreement has been reached. Russia suggested a one-year continuation of the limits, and U.S. President Donald Trump expressed interest in a broader deal including China — but nothing has been finalized.

ICAN emphasized that all nuclear-armed states remain legally obligated to pursue disarmament under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). The next NPT Review Conference is scheduled for April to May 2026 in New York.

“At times of high tension among nations, disarmament measures are all the more important,” ICAN said. “The dire international security environment at present, rather than serving as an excuse for inaction, must spur urgent action on disarmament.”

ICAN warned that with the treaty gone, “it is in no country’s interest to increase global nuclear arsenals. All nuclear-armed states should adhere to and implement existing international agreements on nuclear disarmament.”

The expiration of New START leaves the world at a critical juncture. Without enforceable limits on the U.S. and Russia, the risk of miscalculation, escalation, and a renewed nuclear arms race is rising.

Data from the Federation of American Scientists (FAS) show that the global nuclear arsenal remains dominated by the United States and Russia, with steady expansion elsewhere.

Russia remains the world’s largest nuclear power, with an estimated 6,200 to 6,300 nuclear warheads, according to FAS . The United States follows closely with roughly 5,500 warheads.

With New START set to expire in 2026, Moscow warns that the absence of a replacement treaty could remove the last formal limits on US and Russian strategic nuclear forces, increasing the risk of renewed arms racing and reduced transparency. This warning comes after Russia called for the agreement to be extended by a year, with no response.

"In just a few days, the world will be in a more dangerous position than it has ever been before," spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists on Tuesday, February 3.

China also emerges as the fastest-growing nuclear power. According to SIPRI and FAS, Beijing’s arsenal reached approximately 600 warheads by early 2026, up from just a few hundred a decade earlier. Satellite imagery analysed by independent researchers and cited by Reuters showed the construction of hundreds of new missile silos, signalling a shift away from China’s historically minimal deterrence posture.

Arms control experts cautioned that China’s expansion, combined with the potential collapse of US-Russia limits, could push the global system toward a three-way nuclear competition for the first time.

Beyond the major powers, several countries maintained smaller but strategically significant nuclear forces. France held about 290 warheads, while the United Kingdom possessed roughly 225, according to SIPRI. In South Asia, Pakistan (around 180 warheads) and India (about 170) continued gradual expansion amid ongoing regional tensions.

Israel, which does not officially acknowledge its nuclear arsenal, was estimated by FAS to have around 90 warheads, while North Korea was believed to possess roughly 50, with continued missile and warhead development reported by Reuters.

Though smaller in number, these arsenals carry outsized risk due to regional rivalries, limited communication channels, and shorter missile flight times.

What is the New START agreement?

New START (the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) is a nuclear arms control agreement between the United States and Russia. It was signed in 2010 by then-presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev and entered into force in 2011.

Its purpose is to limit and monitor the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals.

Under New START, both countries agreed to caps on:

The treaty also includes on-site inspections, data exchanges, and verification measures, which allow both sides to check that the other is complying. This transparency is widely seen by arms-control experts as one of the treaty’s most important features.

However, New START expires on February 5, 2026. It was originally set to last 10 years, with the option of a single five-year extension. That extension was agreed in 2021, making 2026 the final expiration date. The treaty cannot be extended again under its current terms.

If New START expires without a replacement:

The intelligence agency claims that Macron has authorised a plan to “eliminate ‘undesirable leaders’ in Africa,”  comparing the strategy to historical American operations in South America.

The SVR report describes the French leadership as “refined racists from Paris” who are struggling to maintain their reputation as a “parasitic metropolis, robbing its former colonies and hindering their development”.

The agency further alleges that France is “directly supporting terrorists of various stripes” and collaborating with the “Ukrainian regime” to supply militants in the Sahel with drones and instructors to destabilise sovereign governments.

A primary target of this alleged "destructive attention" is Madagascar, where a military takeover in October 2025 ousted President Andry Rajoelina. 

The SVR claims that because the new government under Colonel Randrianirina is “committed to developing relations with BRICS,” Paris is actively “exploring ways to overthrow” the new president to “restore a loyal regime”.

The coup in Madagascar followed a period of intense domestic turmoil triggered by widespread economic discontent, with 80% of the population living below the poverty line and the country suffering from high levels of corruption. The immediate spark for the 2025 protests involved persistent power outages and water shortages in the capital, Antananarivo. 

The movement was largely driven by Generation Z activists, organised via the "Gen Z Mada" social media movement, which used symbols like the "Jolly Roger" flag from the anime One Piece to represent rebellion against oppressive systems. 

The transition of power was finalised on October 15, 2025, after the elite military unit CAPSAT aligned with demonstrators and Parliament impeached Rajoelina, who eventually fled into exile citing an assassination plot.

The SVR’s warnings of French-backed destabilisation coincide with a major security incident in Niger. 

On January 29, General Abdourahamane Tiani, leader of Niger’s military junta, accused France, Benin, and Côte d’Ivoire of sponsoring a "terrorist attack" on the Diori Hamani International Airport in Niamey.

The assault, which involved gunfire and explosions, damaged the fuselage and wings of commercial aircraft belonging to ASKY Airlines and Air Côte d’Ivoire. During a televised address, General Tiani named President Macron as a primary sponsor of the operation. 

“We have heard them bark, they should be ready to hear us roar,” Tiani declared. He also extended specific gratitude to Russian troops stationed at the base for “defending their sector” during the skirmish.

The SVR report also links France to an attempted coup in Burkina Faso on January 3, which aimed to assassinate the country's military leader, Captain Ibrahim Traoré. 

Russian intelligence asserts that “France’s involvement... has already been established,” and claims similar efforts are underway to overthrow President Assimi Goïta in Mali through city blockades and terror against civilians. 

Bangladesh, by contrast, covers just 147,570 square kilometres, making it roughly 115 times smaller.

According to data from Wordometer , Bangladesh’s population stands at around 176 million, while Russia’s population is approximately 143 million.

The country sits on the fertile Ganges–Brahmaputra Delta, one of the most agriculturally productive regions on the planet. For centuries, this allowed dense human settlement supported by farming, fishing, and river-based trade .

While fertility rates have declined sharply since the 1980s, a trend documented by the World Bank , population momentum keeps total numbers high due to a large base of young people.

Today, Bangladesh has made notable progress in healthcare, child survival, and life expectancy, all of which contribute to population size even as birth rates fall. The UN notes that Bangladesh is now approaching replacement-level fertility, a major shift from past decades.

Russia’s population challenge

Despite its vast landmass and natural resources, the country faces long-term population decline. According to the United Nations and Rosstat , Russia has struggled with low fertility rates, high mortality among working-age men, and outward migration. These trends have been compounded by economic pressures and, in recent years, geopolitical instability.

Large parts of Russia are also sparsely populated due to harsh climate, limited infrastructure, and historical settlement patterns. Much of the population is concentrated in the west, leaving enormous regions with very low population density.

According to recent data, Nigeria records around 7.5 million live births annually, while Europe, together with Russia, see roughly 6.3 million births per year.

Nigeria’s high fertility rate, which averages around 4.6 births per woman, plays a big role in these figures. That rate is well above global averages and far higher than most of Europe, where fertility rates commonly fall below replacement level (about 1.4 to 1.6 children per woman).

By contrast, much of Europe has a deeply aged population and decades of low birth rates. Countries such as Italy, Spain and Germany have fertility well under replacement level, contributing to slower natural population growth and, in some cases, declining native population totals.

Russia in particular illustrates this trend as its fertility rate is among the lowest in the world at roughly 1.4 births per woman, and official statistics show persistent declines in the number of births as the population ages.

Low fertility rates in Europe are already prompting incentives for families, reforms in parental support, and debates about immigration policy as governments seek ways to stabilise future population size and workforce strength.

Nigeria’s youth-heavy population and higher birth rates, on the other hand, have helped it become a demographic powerhouse , even as many European countries confront ageing populations, shrinking workforces and fiscal pressures linked to elder care.

Nigeria’s demographic trends also carry implications. Rapid population growth can fuel economic expansion if accompanied by investment in education, health and employment.

The World Economic Forum suggests that "A population projected to reach 400 million by 2050 needs jobs aligned with a fast-digitising economy. But youth unemployment remains among the highest globally, with 23% of young Nigerians actively looking for work, while another 32% are out of employment altogether. Employers also report persistent shortages in technical and digital skills, underscoring the need for coordinated investment."

The danger, it said, does not come from a single crisis but from several unfolding at once. Growing competition involving Russia, the United States and China has coincided with wars, weakened arms control and a retreat from multilateral institutions.

Scientists pointed to Russia’s war in Ukraine, recent clashes between India and Pakistan, and concerns over Iran ’s nuclear ambitions as increasing the risk of miscalculation. Even limited conflicts, they warned, could escalate quickly.

Climate change is also adding to the risk, with extreme weather events accelerating as governments struggle to agree on meaningful action. The bulletin warned that delays and policy rollbacks are narrowing the window to prevent lasting damage.

Emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and biotechnology are further raising concerns, as their rapid deployment outpaces global safeguards.

Daniel Holz, chair of the group’s science and security board, said growing “us versus them” thinking is driving the danger. 

“If the world splinters into an us-versus-them, zero-sum approach, it increases the likelihood that we all lose,” he said.

The bulletin said the clock could still be pushed back if countries rebuild arms control, restore climate cooperation and set clear rules for new technologies.

The talks covered cooperation in space exploration and the use of Russian space technologies in Burkina Faso. Both sides also reaffirmed their commitment to working through United Nations frameworks to address concerns about the militarisation of outer space.

During the meeting, Gorbunov presented the prime minister with Burkina Faso’s national flag, which had spent about six months aboard the International Space Station during his mission.

The engagement builds on a September agreement signed in Bamako, where officials from Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger reached a deal with Russia’s space agency, Roscosmos, to jointly develop telecommunications and remote-sensing satellites.

The initiative is intended to support regional priorities such as strengthening security , improving disaster response and expanding high-speed internet access.

Dr Joseph Siegle, who leads research on Russian influence in Africa at the Africa Centre for Strategic Studies, said Moscow’s engagement is driven more by geostrategic goals than long-term economic investment.

Russia has positioned itself as an alternative ally by offering diplomatic backing and security cooperation to the transitional governments in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, he said.

Siegle also described the AES as largely symbolic, warning that the three governments lack the economic and security capacity to operate as a cohesive bloc. “The promotion appears intended more to enhance the international credibility of these governments than to achieve tangible regional cooperation,” he told Space in Africa .

Russian officials see local-currency trade as a way to strengthen cooperation with Zambia in sectors such as mining, energy, agriculture and infrastructure, while lowering transaction costs and reducing demand for US dollars, Lusaka Times reports.

Supporters of the idea say settling trade in domestic currencies could ease pressure on Zambia’s foreign exchange reserves, especially during periods of limited dollar liquidity. 

However, economists and financial institutions have urged caution. They warn that local-currency trade requires strong financial systems, stable exchange-rate mechanisms and clear settlement frameworks to manage risks linked to currency fluctuations.

Zambia’s economy remains closely tied to dollar-based pricing, particularly because its main export, copper, is traded on global markets in US dollars. Government officials have said any move toward local-currency trade would be guided by economic prudence, regulatory readiness and consultations with banks and businesses.

While city officials have urged residents to temporarily leave Kyiv if possible, zoo animals have no such option. Among them is Tony, a 51-year-old gorilla, one of the zoo’s most well-known residents.

“You can tell people to go to the countryside, but I can’t say that to Tony,” said zoo director Kyrylo Trantin. “He doesn’t have a grandmother in the countryside where he could stay.”

To keep Tony’s enclosure at a steady 20 degrees Celsius, staff feed firewood into a stove up to five times a day. Generators run constantly to provide heat to other animals, including horses, bison and an elephant.

Power cuts have also disrupted water supplies, but zoo workers have prepared for emergencies. Staff member Viktoriia Sluzhenko said the zoo maintains enough water reserves to operate independently for up to three days. The elephant alone requires about 150 litres of water each day.

“Every day is a battle for warmth and power,” Trantin said. Trantin, like many others are juggling the responsibility of caring for animals while also coping with the same hardships affecting the rest of the city.

The Board of Peace, announced by Trump as part of his renewed foreign policy agenda, is framed as an alternative diplomatic mechanism aimed at resolving major international conflicts, including the war in Gaza and broader Middle East tensions.

According to reporting by Al Jazeera, participation in the board is by invitation, with countries free to accept or reject based on their political alignment and strategic interests.

Who has joined

The map shows a mixed response across regions. Several countries in the Middle East, parts of Asia, and Latin America have accepted invitations , viewing the board as a potential channel for influence or de-escalation:

Morocco, Argentina, Hungary and Belarus have also agreed to join, raising the number of countries that have confirmed participation to at least 24.

Countries that have rejected

In contrast, several prominent European and North American allies have explicitly declined the invitation, underlining scepticism about the initiative’s structure and neutrality. Countries that have rejected participation include:

In the same way, several other countries, including the UK, Italy, Japan, China and Russia, have been invited but have yet to take a stand on participation.

The Board of Peace gained prominence after Trump publicly linked it to efforts to end the war in Gaza, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The initiative, first linked to post-ceasefire governance discussions around Gaza, has expanded into a broader proposal for a new international body aimed at conflict resolution and reconstruction.

Trump’s team describes it as a platform to promote stability and long-term peace. Critics argue it risks bypassing existing multilateral institutions, particularly the United Nations .

Countries invited and early acceptances

According to officials familiar with the process, invitations have been sent to dozens of governments across Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and the Americas.

A limited number of countries have confirmed acceptance. Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, publicly welcomed the invitation, describing it as an opportunity for closer diplomatic cooperation. Hungary has also confirmed participation , with Prime Minister Viktor Orbán signalling support for Trump’s approach to peace negotiations. Vietnam has likewise accepted, with its leadership confirming involvement through diplomatic channels.

Several other countries, including India, Australia, Pakistan, Egypt , Turkey, Jordan, Greece, Cyprus, Canada, and Albania, have acknowledged receiving invitations but have not formally committed.

Rejections and reluctance from major powers

Some governments have already drawn clear lines. France has indicated it does not intend to join at this stage, citing concerns about the board’s purpose and structure. Brazil has also taken a cautious stance, with officials questioning whether the initiative complements or competes with existing international frameworks.

Canada’s position has been more nuanced. While Ottawa has not ruled out participation, officials have pushed back on reports that membership could involve large financial contributions, stressing that any involvement would need to align with Canada’s diplomatic priorities.

Other major powers, including the United Kingdom and Germany, are reported to be in internal discussions but have yet to make public commitments.

The proposal has generated additional controversy following reports that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin received an invitation . The Kremlin confirmed it was reviewing the offer, a move that has unsettled European diplomats, given Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine.

According to briefings from U.S. officials and reporting by international media, the Board of Peace is intended to:

Some reports suggest membership could involve fixed-term participation or long-term seats tied to significant financial contributions, a feature that has drawn criticism from several governments.

Here’s what that story looks like:

Louisiana Purchase (1803): The deal that doubled a nation

The biggest land deal in U.S. history began in the wake of Napoleon’s setbacks in Europe. President Thomas Jefferson agreed to pay France $15 million for the vast territory of Louisiana in 1803, nearly doubling the size of the young republic and laying the groundwork for expansion across the continent. The purchase, which stretched from the Mississippi River to the Rocky Mountains, later became all or part of 15 modern states.

Florida Purchase Treaty (1819)

Just over a decade later, the United States turned its attention south. Through the Adams-Onís Treaty , Spain ceded Florida to the U.S., and the government agreed to assume roughly $5 million in claims by American citizens against Spain. That deal didn’t just secure strategic territory; it also clarified borders and eased tensions between two former colonial powers.

Mexican Cession (1848)

The Mexican-American War concluded with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848. Mexico ceded an enormous swath of territory, including present-day California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona and parts of Colorado, Wyoming and New Mexico. While not a “purchase” in the classic sense, the U.S. paid $15 million and assumed certain claims as part of the deal, and its scale made it one of the biggest expansions in history.

Gadsden Purchase (1854)

Looking to build a southern transcontinental railroad and settle lingering border disputes with Mexico, U.S. diplomats negotiated the 1854 Gadsden Purchase. For $10 million, the United States acquired nearly 30,000 square miles of what is now southern Arizona and New Mexico, finalising the contiguous continental border.

Alaska Purchase (1867)

Perhaps the most infamous bargain was the Alaska Purchase . In 1867, the U.S. bought more than half a million square miles from Russia for just $7.2 million, about two cents per acre. Critics at the time mocked it as “Seward’s Folly,” but the territory proved rich in resources and strategic value, eventually becoming the 49th state.

U.S. Virgin Islands (1917)

Not all American purchases were on the mainland. In 1917, during World War I, the United States bought the Danish West Indies , now the U.S. Virgin Islands, from Denmark for $25 million in gold. The acquisition secured a key naval position in the Caribbean and remains the most recent major land purchase for the country.

Contrary to popular belief, no country actually owns the North Pole. The image above makes this clear. At the very top of the world sits a central zone labelled International Waters, surrounded by five Arctic states: Russia, Canada, Denmark via Greenland, Norway, and the United States via Alaska.

What this really comes down to is the seabed.

Under the Arctic ice are vast reserves of oil , natural gas, and critical minerals. As climate change melts ice and makes the region more accessible, the economic and strategic value of the Arctic has surged. Control over the seabed means control over future energy routes, resources, and influence.

The North Pole itself sits in international waters, meaning it cannot be claimed outright by any single state. However, countries can claim rights to parts of the Arctic seabed if they can prove that the underwater continental shelf is a natural extension of their land territory.

This is where the competition begins.

All Arctic claims are governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea , known as UNCLOS. Under this framework, coastal states have an Exclusive Economic Zone extending 200 nautical miles from their shore. Beyond that, they can submit scientific evidence to claim additional seabed rights.

These claims do not grant sovereignty over the water or ice above. They grant rights to resources beneath the seabed.

The image shows how each Arctic nation’s claim fans out toward the pole, creating a patchwork of overlapping ambitions.

Russia’s aggressive push

Russia has been the most assertive player in the Arctic. It has submitted extensive claims arguing that underwater ridges, including the Lomonosov Ridge , connect its continental shelf directly to the North Pole. In 2007, Russia famously planted a titanium flag on the seabed beneath the pole, a symbolic act that drew global attention.

While the flag had no legal standing, it underscored Moscow’s long-term Arctic strategy, which combines scientific research, military expansion, and infrastructure development.

Canada, Denmark, and Norway’s competing claims

Canada and Denmark, through Greenland, have also submitted overlapping claims based on geological evidence linking the seabed to their landmasses. Denmark’s case is particularly notable because Greenland gives it a strategic Arctic footprint far larger than most people realise.

Norway’s claims are more limited geographically, but it remains a key Arctic actor with advanced polar research capabilities and significant offshore energy experience.

Where the United States stands

The United States, via Alaska, is shown in the image as one of the five Arctic states. However, its position is complicated by the fact that it has not formally ratified UNCLOS. Despite this, the US still conducts seabed mapping and asserts its interests through customary international law and diplomatic channels.

Vitaly’s video showed him grabbing a security guard’s cap, attempting to seize another guard’s firearm, and threatening to rob a woman — acts prosecutors said merited three counts of unjust vexation.

On Thursday, the Philippines’ Bureau of Immigration (BI) said its Board of Commissioners has issued a deportation order against the 33-year-old Russian national, following the resolution of criminal cases filed against him.

He was charged with three counts of the offence before courts in Taguig, cases that have since been settled, thereby clearing the way for his removal from the country, according to immigration officials.

After 9 months in jail

Earlier, Interior and Local Government Secretary Jonvic Remulla had insisted that Vitaly would serve his sentence locally , saying deportation was not immediately possible.  Neither Russia nor the United States — where the vlogger holds a green card — had agreed to receive him.

At the time, Remulla said Vitaly had written to him seeking the dismissal of the charges, citing mental health concerns, but stressed that the law would take its course.

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. had also condemned the vlogger’s action, warning that abuse disguised as entertainment would not be tolerated in the Philippines.

Remulla later clarified that while Vitaly holds US residency, he remains a Russian citizen travelling on a Russian passport, underscoring where responsibility for his return ultimately lies.

Tourists welcome, but…

Vitaly’s case has drawn attention to the limits of prank culture in the age of viral content, particularly when performed in foreign countries.

“Let this be a reminder to all our visitors here in the Philippines that we always welcome tourists and visitors,” Remulla said. “We treat them with respect and we expect them to follow the same rules as we follow the same rules when we travel.” 

Vitaly has more than 10 million subscribers on YouTube and is known for provocative stunts across the world . Because of his actions, he has been declared persona non grata , or an “unwelcome person,” in several countries, including the Philippines. 

He said that the US will take Greenland “one way or the other” to prevent Russia or China from doing the same on Sunday, January 11.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has warned that any attempt by the U.S. to seize Greenland would effectively destroy NATO, given that both Denmark and Greenland are members of the alliance.

“If the United States chooses to attack another NATO country militarily, then everything stops. That is, including our NATO and thus the security that has been provided since the end of the Second World War,” Frederiksen told Danish broadcaster TV2.

This is the second time Trump has threatened to take the Island since he started his second term in January 2025. You may have wondered, "Why Greenland?"

Greenland hosts a wide range of minerals that modern economies depend on. Although copper and gold remain fundamental to construction, electronics and finance, the country also boasts graphite, rare earths , nickel, iron ore and zinc that stretch along its coasts.

Graphite and nickel are increasingly critical for batteries , electric vehicles and renewable energy systems. Iron ore and zinc support heavy industry, while rare earth elements play a central role in wind turbines, advanced electronics and defence technologies.

Geological surveys show that many of these resources are concentrated in distinct zones, particularly in southern and western Greenland, reflecting the island’s unique and ancient rock formations.

What makes Greenland especially significant is not just the presence of common metals, but the breadth of strategically important ones as well.

Studies indicate that Greenland contains a large share of the minerals classified by the European Union as critical raw materials. These are essential resources for economic security, yet they are vulnerable to supply disruptions.

Rare earth elements, in particular, have attracted global attention because production is currently dominated by a small number of countries, leaving Europe and North America exposed to geopolitical risk.

However, here’s the thing: mineral wealth on paper does not automatically translate into mining success. Greenland’s mining sector remains small, and only a limited number of projects have moved beyond exploration.

Environmental regulation plays a major role. The government’s ban on uranium mining, for example, has stalled or cancelled several rare earth projects because uranium often occurs alongside those minerals. Legal disputes and investor uncertainty have followed, slowing development further.

Still, progress is happening. One notable example is the Amitsoq graphite project , which recently secured a long-term mining permit with backing from the European Union. If developed as planned, it could supply high-grade graphite for lithium-ion batteries and help reduce Europe’s reliance on external suppliers.

Beyond economics, Greenland’s mineral map has geopolitical weight. As competition over critical minerals intensifies, the island’s location between Europe and North America makes it strategically important. Interest from major powers is driven not only by commercial opportunity but also by concerns about supply chain resilience in an increasingly fractured global economy.

That massive number places it above Saudi Arabia, Iran and Canada, a fact that once made the country one of the most influential players in the global oil market.

The bulk of these reserves lies in the Orinoco Oil Belt, a vast region of heavy and extra-heavy crude that dwarfs conventional deposits in both scale and potential.

Yet, despite having the largest reserves, it produces only a small fraction of the global supply of roughly 1 million barrels per day, less than a third of its output two decades ago.

Reserves on paper do not automatically mean oil reaches the market. Much of Venezuela’s crude is heavy and difficult to extract and refine. Producing it requires advanced technology, large-scale investment and reliable infrastructure. Years of economic crisis, political instability and international sanctions have weakened all three.

The world’s energy markets are paying close attention for a few reasons:

1. Strategic energy stocks and shifting geopolitics

Recent events, including the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces, have intensified global focus on who controls Venezuela’s oil. The United States has signalled plans to invite American and international companies back into the nation’s energy sector to unlock its resource potential.

2. Global supply implications

If Venezuela could boost production, it would reshape oil flows and regional influence. Heavy crude from the Orinoco Belt is particularly valuable because many refineries, especially on the U.S. Gulf Coast, are structured to process dense oil grades.

3. Investment and infrastructure challenges

Rebuilding Venezuela’s oil industry won’t happen overnight . Experts estimate tens of billions of dollars would be needed to modernise ageing facilities, address underinvestment and restore capacity lost to years of neglect and sanctions.

4. Geopolitical flashpoints

Venezuela’s oil isn’t just an economic asset. It’s a geopolitical lever. China, Russia and other states hold financial and energy ties with Caracas, and shifts in Venezuelan production can ripple into diplomatic and strategic relationships.

After all these areas of scrutiny and worry, the question remains: Who controls Venezuela's oil now?

“Donald Trump has ushered in a new world order where the military might prevail over rule of law and respect for an independent country’s sovereignty,” he said, arguing that the seizure of a foreign leader by force placed the US in the same category as the powers it routinely condemns.

Julian Borger, a senior international correspondent at The Guardian, described the strikes and abduction as a devastating blow to global norms. 

“The overnight strikes on Venezuela, the abduction of its leader, Nicolás Maduro, and his wife, and Donald Trump’s declaration that the US would ‘run’ the country and sell its oil, have driven another truck through international law and global norms,” he wrote .

For Mogato, the implications extend far beyond Venezuela, and complicates Washington’s stance in criticising Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine or Beijing’s potential use of force against Taiwan. 

“Washington has lost its moral ascendancy after launching military operations in Caracas and grabbed its leader, Nicolas Maduro,” he said.

What’s the real purpose?

Hours after Maduro’s removal, the US president said his administration was ready to fix Venezuela’s oil industry and sell its output. 

Borger said Trump had made clear he was “more covetous of Venezuela’s oil than motivated by a desire to bring Maduro before a court, or deliver democracy.”

He cited US analyst David Rothkopf, who labelled the shift the “Putinization of US foreign policy ”, noting that Moscow has long argued that great powers are entitled to dominate their neighbourhoods by force.

Despite just days after the operation, Mogato said the consequences were already visible. 

“The world has become more dangerous and chaotic in 2026,” he said, describing a landscape in which “stronger states imposed their will on smaller and weaker states.”

Borger warned that anxiety would not be confined to Latin America , pointing to Trump’s recent threats against Iran, Greenland and Cuba. Events in Venezuela, he said, would “cause immediate anxiety” among governments that now fear they could be next.

Putin added that the strong ties between Moscow and Beijing serve as a “significant factor of stability in the world ,” stressing that cooperation between the two countries continues to expand across multiple sectors.

He highlighted collaboration in high-tech manufacturing, science, education, humanitarian exchanges and space exploration as evidence of deep mutual trust. Putin also pointed to close military cooperation, including regular joint exercises, strategic aviation patrols, naval drills and operations involving ground forces.

The remarks were made during the televised event Year in Review with Vladimir Putin , which combines the president’s annual phone-in with citizens and his end-of-year press conference. Both formats have been held since 2001 and were merged into a single event in 2023.

The broadcast typically spans several hours and covers a wide range of issues, including international relations, global conflicts, domestic social concerns, and economic and technological developments.

Last year’s edition attracted about 2.4 million questions from the public, with 76 answered live on air. The programme ran for four hours and 30 minutes, just 10 minutes short of its longest-ever duration in 2008.

While most European countries mark Christmas on December 25, several observe it on January 7, and in a few places it is not a public holiday at all. This divergence is not accidental but rooted in history, theology, and calendars that still shape modern Europe today.

December 25 vs January 7

The majority of Europe celebrates Christmas on December 25, following the Gregorian calendar , which was introduced by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 and is now the global civil standard. Western Christian traditions, including Roman Catholic, Protestant, and many Anglican churches, use this calendar to commemorate the birth of Jesus Christ.

However, parts of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, including Russia, Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, parts of Ukraine, and Georgia, celebrate Christmas on January 7. These countries largely follow Eastern Orthodox Christianity , which still uses the Julian calendar for liturgical purposes. The Julian calendar currently runs 13 days behind the Gregorian one, meaning December 25 (Julian) corresponds to January 7 (Gregorian).

The map also highlights countries where Christmas Day is not an official public holiday, most notably Turkey, where Christianity is a minority religion and public holidays are aligned with Islamic traditions. While Christmas is widely observed by Christian communities there, it does not carry national holiday status.

This calendar divide has taken on renewed significance amid current geopolitical and cultural developments. In Ukraine, for example, Christmas has become part of a broader conversation about national identity.

In 2023, Ukraine officially moved its Christmas Day public holiday to December 25, distancing itself from Russian religious tradition and aligning more closely with Western Europe.

“I’m here today to tell you where NATO stands, and what we must do to stop a war before it starts,” he said. “And to do that, we need to be crystal clear about the threat. We are Russia’s next target, and we are already in harm’s way.”

Rutte said he has repeatedly warned since taking office last year that the conflict in Ukraine could extend to NATO territory if member states fail to act decisively. “I fear that too many are quietly complacent, too many don’t feel the urgency, and too many believe that time is on our side. It is not. The time for action is now,” he added.

Moscow has consistently rejected accusations that it intends to attack NATO members, insisting the conflict remains limited to Ukraine. Russian officials have instead accused the alliance of escalating hostilities by supplying weapons to Kyiv and entertaining discussions about deploying troops.

Russian intelligence recently claimed that France was preparing to send up to 2,000 soldiers to Ukraine, a claim Paris denies. Meanwhile, the UK confirmed earlier this week that a British soldier had been killed while observing a weapons test in Ukraine. However, officials stressed the incident occurred far from active fighting.

Rutte’s remarks come amid rising tension between Russia and Western governments, as NATO reassesses its defence posture ahead of next year’s key strategic planning meetings.

Putin noted that defence cooperation between the two countries remains strong, with Indonesian military personnel currently undergoing training at Russian institutions. “Our military departments have direct bilateral ties… at the level of good professional interaction, and we are ready to expand this cooperation,” he said.

The Russian leader also congratulated Indonesia on joining the BRICS group in January and reaffirmed support for negotiations between Jakarta and the Eurasian Economic Community (EurAsEC) on a potential free trade zone.

Subianto’s official visit to Moscow focused on strengthening the Russian-Indonesian strategic partnership and discussing key international and regional developments, according to the Kremlin.

New data from World’s Top Exports shows that Spain and Mexico dominate the global pumpkin market in 2024, together accounting for more than 64% of worldwide pumpkin exports.

With international demand rising for year-round cooking, health foods, and processed pumpkin products, the industry has become more important to farmers and exporters across Europe, North America, Africa, and Oceania.

According to the 2024 export rankings, Spain leads the world with 32.8% of global pumpkin exports, valued at about $574 million. Mexico follows closely with 32%, earning $559 million.

The large market share held by both countries reflects their strong agricultural infrastructure, export-oriented farming, and access to major global markets.

The rest of the top exporters include:

How global events are shaping the pumpkin market

Climate change is shifting growing seasons

Farmers across Europe and North America are adjusting planting cycles due to unpredictable rainfall, heat waves, and changing soil conditions. Some regions in Spain and Mexico have benefited from longer warm seasons, allowing for stronger yields.

Food security continues to be a global priority

With conflicts disrupting trade routes , such as the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war, countries are looking toward more stable and diverse agricultural suppliers. Pumpkins, being versatile and widely cultivated, fit into this wider push to secure reliable food imports.

Rising global celebrations and food trends

Pumpkin has become more than a seasonal item . From soups and baked goods to the globally popular “pumpkin spice” trend, food producers are buying more pumpkin for processing and export. This helps keep demand strong throughout the year.

The latest data from World’s Top Exports shows a clear picture of which nations dominate this highly specialised industry, and why demand continues to grow.

According to the 2024 rankings, Germany, France, and the United States remain the world’s top helicopter exporters, together controlling nearly 49% of global export value. The data includes both large military helicopters and smaller civilian models.

Top 10 helicopter exporting countries in 2024

These figures highlight how concentrated the global helicopter market is, with European and North American manufacturers leading in engineering, technology, and international partnerships.

According to data from World ’s Top Exports, demand for both military and civilian helicopters has been steadily increasing as countries rethink how they respond to conflict, disasters, and modernisation needs.

One major driver is the surge in defence spending across Europe, Asia, and Africa. With geopolitical tensions, from the Russia–Ukraine war to instability in the Sahel, many nations are strengthening their aviation capabilities as helicopters remain essential assets for transport, surveillance, emergency missions, and rapid deployment.

At the same time, climate-related disasters are pushing governments to invest in more versatile aircraft. Helicopters play critical roles in wildfire response, flood rescues, medical evacuations, and humanitarian operations. As extreme weather events become more frequent, countries are building air-response fleets that can react quickly and reach areas inaccessible by road.

Modernisation is another key factor. Many nations are replacing ageing, Cold-War-era aircraft with newer models that offer better safety, efficiency, and lower maintenance costs. This shift has strongly benefited leading exporters such as Germany, France, and Canada, whose aviation industries are known for reliability and long-term value.

Indonesia, the world’s largest archipelago , stretches between Asia and Oceania, with the easternmost islands of Papua forming its easternmost reach. According to the CIA World Factbook, Indonesia encompasses over 17,000 islands, making its transcontinental footprint both vast and culturally diverse.

Russia remains the most iconic transcontinental nation, divided between Europe and Asia by the Ural Mountains. Roughly 77% of Russia’s landmass lies in Asia, but 75% of its population resides in the European portion, a contrast that has historically shaped its foreign policy and identity. Russia uses its European–Asian reach to justify political involvement across two major regions, shaping both European security and Asian energy strategies.

Egypt, long celebrated as the cradle of ancient civilisation, bridges Africa and Asia through the Sinai Peninsula. This region, in global headlines due to Red Sea tensions and shifting trade routes, underscores Egypt’s strategic role. Egypt’s Suez Canal handles about 12% of global trade. Current Houthi attacks in the Red Sea show how dependent the world still is on Egypt’s geography.

Kazakhstan, the world’s largest landlocked country, spans both Europe and Asia with a small but symbolically important portion west of the Ural River. Since the launch of China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Kazakhstan has become a pivotal transit hub for Eurasian trade. Kazakhstan also profits from rail and pipeline routes linking Europe and Asia.

Panama, linking North and South America, owes its global prominence to the Panama Canal , which now faces pressure from drought-induced restrictions on international shipping. Its transcontinental nature enhances its geopolitical value as both a physical and economic connector.

And Turkey, positioned between Europe and Asia, remains a central player in current diplomatic efforts involving Ukraine, NATO expansion, and Middle Eastern stability. The Bosporus Strait, one of the most critical shipping lanes, literally divides the country into two continents.

And around much of the world, that framing feels oddly narrow. After all, this was a meeting between the leaders of the world’s sixth- and ninth-largest economies, two pivotal actors in the dramatic transformation of global power over the past two decades. Arguably, only China’s Xi Jinping has played a larger role in reshaping the geopolitical landscape.

Yes, Ukraine is a defining issue for Putin. But for Modi, it is not. India is likely the only major power in the global top ten that genuinely refuses to choose sides between the United States and China. That alone makes this summit significant.

The operative word is multipolar .

The oil story

Let’s begin with the topic Western news outlets tend to foreground: Russia's oil exports.

India, which is now the world’s third-largest oil consumer, once imported just 2% of its crude from Russia. Today that figure sits at roughly one-third. This shift is not primarily an act of solidarity with Moscow. It is the product of market logic: Russian oil has become deeply discounted as Western states attempt to restrict it.

With the world’s largest population and enormous developmental demands, Modi cannot ignore cheap energy. But there is also a political message: India rejects the idea that any other power can dictate who it trades with.

That stance has hardened in recent years. When U.S. President Donald Trump imposed a 25% tariff on certain Indian imports, the move was received in Delhi not as pressure but as a challenge and an opportunity to demonstrate strategic independence, even if the tariff did sting economically and has changed trade patterns.

India has long maintained a strong partnership with the United States, in large part because its principal rivals - Pakistan and China - traditionally aligned with one another. But that relationship is loosening for several reasons.

Four-dimensional chess

First, India no longer feels compelled to pick sides. It can share leadership with China in forums such as BRICS and the G20, institutions where member states have little appetite for lecturing one another on domestic politics or economic management.

Second, India has developed formidable domestic industries while cultivating global partnerships, including a durable relationship with Russia.

Third, the U.S.–India relationship has become strained by immigration tensions. Indians account for more than two-thirds of America’s H-1B visas for highly skilled workers. Recent U.S. proposals to raise visa processing fees dramatically—into the tens of thousands of dollars—have caused anxiety in India’s tech sector and frustration in Delhi.

The local spin

While Europe and the U.S. interpret the summit primarily through the lens of Ukraine, the leaders themselves clearly want to project a different message.

Putin’s travel options are severely limited by an International Criminal Court warrant, yet he remains a welcome guest in Beijing and Delhi. At his joint appearance with Modi, he emphasized Russia’s role in supporting the growth of its partners: not only with discounted oil but also through cooperation in nuclear energy, a sector crucial to sustaining India’s expanding and increasingly digital economy.

Modi, ever attuned to domestic priorities, focused on economic outcomes. For him, economic strength is both policy and political strategy—and it continues to deliver at the ballot box.

But the real significance of the meeting lies deeper.

Russia’s repositioning

Russia’s pivot toward Asia is no longer a temporary response to Western sanctions . It marks a structural shift.

For centuries, Russia oriented itself toward Europe because Europe oriented much of the world toward itself. Yet Europe is now preoccupied with internal technological, social, and environmental challenges. In the meantime, a fundamental change in global order has accelerated with too little recognition.

In 1990, the G7 accounted for nearly 70% of the world economy. Today, it is closer to 40%. The numbers are well known; the implications remain underappreciated.

When European policymakers reduce a Modi–Putin meeting to a referendum on Ukraine, what they are really saying is: “Our priorities still define the global agenda.”

But for much of the world, they no longer do.

What Multipolarity Really Means

Debates on multipolarity often revolve around a single question: When will China surpass the U.S.? Perhaps it already has by some measures; surely it soon will. But this is not a simple handover from one hegemon to another.

India, notably, is the only top-ten power that refuses to align fully with either Washington or Beijing. And many emerging powers - Brazil, South Africa, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia-have no desire to replace American dominance with Chinese dominance.

They want a different system altogether.

Their priorities are clear:

Growth. Energy. Security.

These are the pillars that deliver domestic prosperity and secure a meaningful place on the global stage.

Beyond the handshakes

Here are three takeaways that frame the meeting in a global—not Euro-Atlantic—context:

A multipolar world is messier. It is less predictable. It is more transactional.

But it is also more representative of how the world truly operates in the 21st century.

Click here to watch our previous episodes

World Reframed is produced in London by  Global South  World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

ISSN 2978-4891

Among the 17 men reportedly recruited, eight were family members. Authorities say the men, aged between 20 and 39, left South Africa under false pretences, believing they would get “bodyguard training” or other employment . In reality, distress calls received by South African authorities indicate they found themselves on the frontlines.

South Africa’s elite crime-fighting unit, The Hawks, has opened a criminal investigation into the allegations. The charges under consideration include human trafficking, fraud, and violations of the foreign-military-assistance law.

Her half-sister formally filed the complaint, saying she felt a “moral obligation” to act, especially after learning some of the men were close relatives.

On November 28, 2025, MK Party, led by Jacob Zuma, announced that Zuma-Sambudla had stepped down from her parliamentary seat, effective immediately. Party officials described the resignation as voluntary and not an admission of guilt. The party also pledged to support the families of the affected men and assist in efforts to repatriate them safely.

If proven, the case marks one of the most serious mercenary-recruitment scandals involving foreign nationals and raises new concerns about the exploitation of vulnerable individuals.

Notably, as of now, it does not have formal ties with any of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council — the United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom and France.

This is because the country has long prioritised sovereignty, cultural preservation, and its unique philosophy of Gross National Happiness over broad global entanglements. Its monarch and government steer its foreign relations in accordance with Article 20 of its Constitution.

Despite its cautious stance, Bhutan formally established relations with the Philippines on October 6. Just days later, it signed a similar agreement with Qatar on October 16, 2025.

The recent tie-ups with the Philippines and Qatar show Bhutan is willing to connect when it suits its interests.

The country's ambassador to India, Major General Vetsop Namgyel, in a joint statement with the Philippines, said, “Over the years, Bhutan has benefited from education and training opportunities in the Philippines for our students and officials, through the Colombo Plan, the Asian Development Bank, and the JICA Third Country Program. Many Bhutanese students have completed undergraduate and master’s degrees in Philippine universities.”

The kingdom hoped to reap the benefits of its relations with Qatar as well.

"The establishment of diplomatic relations between the Kingdom of Bhutan and the State of Qatar reflects the shared desire of the two countries to strengthen cooperation at the bilateral and multilateral levels," a joint statement from the two countries read.

Why Bhutan’s relations are unique

While most countries maintain hundreds of bilateral relationships, Bhutan has deliberately kept its circle small . This limited outreach reflects its focus on sovereignty, stability, and balance.

By maintaining fewer formal ties, Bhutan protects its culture and decision-making from outside influence. Its closest and most important partner remains India, a relationship built on history, security, and economic cooperation

Geographically, Bhutan is situated between India and China, making its foreign policy a careful balancing act. Border issues with China continue to shape its cautious diplomacy.

The absence of ties with major powers such as the U.S., China and the rest exemplifies Bhutan's commitment to a controlled and purposeful engagement with the world .

Lavrov stressed that Russia, along with state arms exporter Rosoboronexport, is working with “friendly nations” to bolster their sovereignty and reduce reliance on Western countries.

He criticised former colonial powers, claiming many states remain economically dependent despite gaining political independence.

“Many countries that are now freeing themselves from the neocolonial dependence of their former metropolises... still remain economically dependent on the West,” Lavrov stated, adding that Russia’s defence cooperation helps partners build “full-fledged, independent statehood.”

Lavrov also referenced previous cooperation with NATO, recalling that the alliance once relied on Russian helicopters for operations in Afghanistan before opting for its own hardware.

His comments come after Rostec CEO Sergei Chemezov announced earlier this week that Rosoboronexport has supplied weapons to more than 120 countries over the past 25 years, with export deliveries exceeding $230 billion.

He confirmed the measure would take immediate effect but stressed that single-entry visas would not be affected. 

"What I'm saying today is about a multiple-entry visa. That means a single-entry visa remains possible. There's stronger scrutiny, but I'm not going to speculate about any future actions," he added.

The move marks a tightening of EU travel restrictions on Russian citizens amid continuing tensions over the war in Ukraine . 

On Thursday, the Commission said it could not prevent Russians from obtaining single-entry visas, as decisions on those applications rest with individual member states.

Multiple-entry Schengen visas allow holders to travel freely between countries in the Schengen zone, while single-entry visas limit travellers to one entry.

Moscow had not issued an official response at the time of publication.