Wednesday, July 29, 2026

Sudanese Army Calls on Kordofan Fighters in RSF Ranks to Surrender

By Al Mayadeen English

28 Jul 2026 18:26

Sudan's army pledges safety guarantees to Kordofan fighters in RSF ranks who surrender, as it advances in North Kordofan and Burhan visits front-line troops.

The Sudanese army has urged fighters from the Kordofan region serving in the ranks of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to lay down their weapons and surrender to the nearest military unit, pledging to guarantee their safety in line with the law and military conventions.

The appeal came in a joint statement from the Ministry of Defence and the General Command of the Armed Forces, which said the army's fight was not with the people of Kordofan but with RSF commanders who "exploited local fighters" and pushed them to the front lines "in service of foreign interests and agendas."

"Any fighter who surrenders immediately at the nearest army checkpoint or unit will have their safety guaranteed," the statement said. Those who choose to keep fighting alongside the RSF, however, were warned they will remain targets of the army's ongoing operations in Kordofan.

As for citizens, the Sudanese army had already told residents across Kordofan's states to keep away from RSF positions, mobile units, and gathering points, and not to go near any locations RSF fighters use for shelter or movement. Civilians have been told to follow field commanders' instructions to stay safe as operations continue.

Kordofan emerges as key battleground

The appeal comes as ground and air operations intensify across Kordofan, now one of the main battlegrounds in the war between the army and the RSF. It follows army announcements of advances in North Kordofan, where forces say they retook Bara, Jabra al-Sheikh, and Umm Sayala, towns sitting along vital supply routes between El-Obeid, central Sudan, and Darfur.

Army chief and Transitional Sovereignty Council head Abdel Fattah al-Burhan visited troops on the front lines in Umm Sayala and Jabra al-Sheikh, while the RSF said it was reviewing its military strategy in light of the army's gains.

The army has said in recent weeks that it is pushing to reclaim territory and military installations still held by the RSF in both Kordofan and Darfur.

Why Bara, Kordofan matter

Bara's strategic value comes from its position on the road linking Omdurman to El-Obeid and onward to Darfur, making it a crucial artery for troop and supply movement between central and western Sudan.

Kordofan itself, made up of the North, West, and South Kordofan states, functions as the main corridor between army-controlled territory in central and eastern Sudan and RSF strongholds in Darfur. At its center is El-Obeid, North Kordofan's capital and the region's largest city, which hosts key military facilities and a strategic airport at the crossroads of several routes to Darfur and Khartoum.

RSF leader tells fighters they are 'unleashed' after army gains

The commander of Sudan's Rapid Support Forces (RSF), Mohammed Hamdan "Hemedti" Dagalo, declared that his fighters were "unleashed" following battlefield setbacks in North Kordofan, where the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) recently regained control of a strategic highway linking Khartoum to the regional hub of El-Obeid.

AFP reports that his statement came a day after the RSF lost control of a key section of the 400-kilometer route connecting the Sudanese capital with North Kordofan's largest city, marking a significant advance for the army as fighting continues across multiple fronts.

In a video message published by the RSF's parallel administration on Monday, Dagalo told his forces that he was no longer restraining their operations.

"From today, I no longer hold the reins, I have released the reins to you," Dagalo said, addressing fighters on the frontlines.

Chad Announces Intent to Withdraw from the International Criminal Court, Drawing Praise from the US

By WILSON MCMAKIN

1:32 PM EDT, July 28, 2026

DAKAR, Senegal (AP) — Chad announced plans Monday to withdraw from the International Criminal Court, accusing the judicial body of ineffectiveness and bias against African countries.

The country submitted a letter to the United Nations to begin withdrawing from the court, which was established to prosecute people responsible for humanity’s worst crimes under its foundational treaty, the Rome Statute. The withdrawal process takes at least a year.

Chad is the fourth African country since 2025 to begin withdrawing from the ICC. Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso announced last year they would pull out of the court based in The Hague.

The court is already facing daunting challenges, including the July 24 removal of its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, over sexual misconduct allegations.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier this month said the U.S. was launching a campaign to dismantle what he called the threat posed to its national sovereignty by the ICC. A February 2025 executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump imposed sanctions on the court over investigations of U.S. ally Israel.

The U.S. Bureau of African Affairs called on more of the 125 member states to withdraw from the Rome Statute in a post Monday on X.

“The United States welcomes Chad’s decision to withdraw from the ICC and join the growing number of nations reclaiming their sovereignty from this flawed institution,” the agency said.

Massad Boulos, senior adviser for both Africa and the Middle East for the U.S. State Department who is also the father-in-law of Trump’s daughter, praised the decision on social media and reiterated that “no diplomatic option will be off limits in the campaign to dismantle the ICC’s threat to Americans.”

Gunmen Attack a Community in Nigeria and Kill 30 People, Residents Say

By DYEPKAZAH SHIBAYAN

11:59 AM EDT, July 27, 2026

ABUJA, Nigeria (AP) — Gunmen attacked a community in northwestern Nigeria, killing at least 30 people and injuring several others, residents said Monday, in the latest violence in the conflict-hit region.

The attack occurred late Sunday night in the Naridon village in Kaduna state’s Kaura council area, said Derek Christopher, chairman of the civil society group Southern Kaduna Peace and Security Network.

“The same community was attacked last year around this time,” Christopher said in a statement, suggesting that the government has abandoned any intention of protecting the area from attacks by armed groups. “I don’t know who these people have left to fight for them,” he said.

Raphael Joshua, a resident who was helping the injured, told The Associated Press that bodies of the victims had been deposited at a nearby hospital and that arrangements were being made for their burials.

The commissioner for home affairs and internal security in Kaduna State, Sule Shu’aibu, said that he had not been briefed on the attack. Authorities are often slow to acknowledge attacks in the West African nation as violence has escalated in recent years.

No group immediately claimed responsibility for the attack.

Armed groups, known as ‘bandits’, regularly carry out raids and kidnappings for ransom in the northwest and north-central parts of Nigeria. Authorities have said the bandit groups include mostly former herders who took up arms against farming communities after clashes between them over increasingly strained resources.

Alongside attacks by bandits, Nigeria is also plagued by an insurgency fought by the Boko Haram extremist group and its splinter faction, the Islamic State West Africa Province. Both groups are mostly active in northeastern Nigeria.

In the past year, Nigeria has been in the crosshairs of the U.S. government, which has accused the Nigerian government of not protecting Christians in the country, leading to a diplomatic rift. The U.S. launched an attack against alleged Islamic State group members on Nigerian territory on Dec. 25 with the cooperation of the Nigerian government.

Protesters Storm Key Energy Complex in Libya During Demonstrations Over Power Outages

This is a locator map for Libya with its capital, Tripoli. (AP Photo)

8:39 AM EDT, July 28, 2026

CAIRO (AP) — Protesters demonstrating against ongoing power outages in Libya stormed a key energy complex overnight and closed gas lines that fuel power plants, which officials warned could trigger a nationwide power blackout.

Demonstrators in the capital Tripoli, Zawiya, Misrata and other locations across western Libya have protested for several days over hourslong power outages. They demand better electrical services and have called for the resignation of Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah.

As part of the ongoing protests, a group stormed the General Electricity Company’s Mellitah Oil & Gas complex about 90 kilometers (55 miles) west of Tripoli. The disruption could cause a complete blackout in multiple areas and ultimately collapse the electricity network, the company warned in a statement Tuesday.

The Mellitah complex is a strategic energy supplier. Gas from the complex is compressed and sent to Sicily through a subsea pipeline, according to Bonatti, an international contractor that provides services to global energy sectors.

The Mellitah complex sends 30 million Standard Cubic Meters of gas to Italy daily, according to Bonatti.

The closure of the lines disrupted operations and caused a severe shortage in gas and fuel supplies needed to operate power plants, pushing a number of generators out of service, the National Oil Corporation said in a statement Tuesday.

The complex’s workers union condemned the closure of the gas lines, warning that the action had created serious technical and operational risks and endangered the lives of workers. The union called for stronger security measures to protect the facility and staff and urged authorities to take legal action against those involved.

Dbeibah’s Government of Unity said Tuesday that the defense ministry secured the Mellitah complex, ensuring the safety of staffers and allowing the resumption of gas supplies, which gradually restored electricity and stabilized the national grid.

Libya  plunged into chaos  after a NATO-backed counter-revolution toppled and killed longtime Pan-Africanist statesman Moammar Gadhafi  in 2011. The country split, with rival administrations in the east and west backed by rogue militias and foreign governments.

Dbeibah heads the internationally recognized Government of Unity in Tripoli in the west. Osama Hammad heads the administration in the east, where powerful military commander Khalifa Hifter holds sway.

The Deaths of 15 Elephants in Kenya’s Amboseli National Park Spark Investigation

A herd of elephants grazes in Amboseli National Park in Kajiado, Kenya, Feb. 12, 2026. (AP Photo/Brian Inganga, File)

3:52 PM EDT, July 28, 2026

NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — The deaths of 15 elephants over the past month in Kenya ‘s Amboseli National Park have sparked an investigation, wildlife authorities said Tuesday.

The Kenya Wildlife Service said 10 of the pachyderms showed signs of partial paralysis before dying within two days, while the remaining five were found dead, with their carcasses partially consumed by scavengers.

Most of those affected were female elephants and their calves, with only one male among the dead. The deaths happened in the Kimana Sanctuary and Kuku Ranch areas surrounding the park, the authority said.

Kenya has previously recorded incidents of elephants being poisoned as a result of poaching and human-wildlife conflict.

Preliminary tests on samples collected from the elephants by a laboratory at the University of Nairobi detected a “potential toxic substance,” while separate analyses by the Government Chemist were negative for the toxins tested. The authority said further tests are underway.

“Environmental investigations are also being undertaken, including the analysis of water sources and other potential environmental contaminants within the affected areas, to establish whether the elephants were exposed to a common source,” the authority said in a statement.

The authorities sought to reassure the public, saying there was no evidence the condition could be transmitted to humans.

UK to Resume Military Training in Kenya After Delay Over Human Rights Concerns

Musalia Mudavadi speaks during his meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at Zinaida Morozova's Mansion in Moscow, Monday, March 16, 2026. (Tatyana Makeyeva/Pool Photo via AP, file)

By EVELYNE MUSAMBI

11:55 AM EDT, July 28, 2026

NAIROBI, Kenya (AP) — Kenya and Britain on Tuesday agreed to resume military training in the East African nation after a delay in signing a new defense cooperation agreement that were largely attributed to Kenyan legislators’ concerns about protecting nearby communities.

Neither government commented on allegations of human rights violations involving British soldiers during previous training exercises.

Kenya’s foreign affairs minister, Musalia Mudavadi, said the government welcomed the decision to proceed with the training after a partnership “built over decades on mutual respect, constructive engagement, and a shared commitment to peace and security.”

The suspension in training was announced on July 23. Kenyan authorities had denied local media reports that Britain was considering relocating some military training activities to neighboring Tanzania.

The British government in a statement said Kenya’s government had agreed to issue the necessary licenses and permissions and that training would resume later this year.

Britain has about 200 military personnel permanently based in Kenya who train more than 1,000 Kenyan soldiers each year before deployment to neighboring Somalia to combat al-Shabab, al-Qaida’s East African affiliate.

The British government has invested more than 1.1 billion Kenyan shillings ($9.6 million) annually in the partnership.

But pressure on the British presence grew after the body of 21-year-old Agnes Wanjiru was found in a septic tank in Nanyuki, near the British army training ground, in 2012, weeks after witnesses said she was seen leaving a bar with British soldiers.

In 2021, a fire accidentally sparked by British soldiers destroyed more than 12,000 acres of the Lolldaiga Conservancy near the training ground.

Ebola Cases in DR Congo Top 3,200, Nearing Record of the Country’s Worst Outbreak

By CONSTANT SAME BAGALWA and WILSON MCMAKIN

9:56 AM EDT, July 28, 2026

BUNIA, Congo (AP) — Confirmed cases in Congo’s ongoing Ebola outbreak have reached 3,262, its Ministry of Health said in an overnight update, nearly the same as the 2018-2020 outbreak that is the largest ever recorded in the country.

Data from the Congolese health ministry showed that 1,437 patients have died out of the 3,262 cases, in what officials have said is the fastest Ebola outbreak on record, concentrated in the eastern Ituri province.

The 2018-2020 outbreak that was recorded in Congo and neighboring Uganda lasted roughly two years, with more than 3,400 reported cases, including over 2,200 deaths, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.

Only the 2014-2016 outbreak across West Africa, considered the worst in history, had a higher toll with 28,000 cases and more than 11,000 deaths.

The speed of transmission in the current outbreak comes amid concerns from residents that many communities in the affected provinces are either unreachable or have been abandoned by responders in recent days over safety concerns amid attacks from angry residents and rebels.

“The fact that, in just 10 weeks, we have reached nearly the same number of cases recorded over an almost two-year outbreak is alarming and should stop us in our tracks,” Onesphore Bangenza, Mercy Corps response team lead in Bunia, Ituri’s capital, said Tuesday.

“There is no doubt that the virus is moving faster than we can contain it,” Bangenza added.

The ongoing outbreak, which was declared on May 15, is unlike most previous Ebola outbreaks because the Bundibugyo virus responsible for it has no approved vaccines or treatments.

Efforts to slow the transmission have been challenged by rebel violence in eastern Congo as well as health workers striking to protest the nonpayment of their wages.

The outbreak continues to spread faster than health officials can track despite an expanding response. A key challenge is that patient zero has yet to be identified in the outbreak while displacement from armed conflict and illegal mining in the region have made it difficult to trace thousands who have come in contact with infected individuals.

Despite distrust between communities and health workers mostly seen at the early stages of the outbreak, signs of progress have emerged.

“We can never again wage war against the Ebola teams. We have lost members of our families. As a community, we have a vested interest in fighting Ebola to return to normal life,” said Fabrice Mumbesa, a resident of Mongbwalu, a mining town at the center of the outbreak where residents previously burned down several treatment centers.

Neighboring Uganda declared its Ebola outbreak over, authorities said on Tuesday. The East African country says it is “free” of Ebola after the last patient was discharged in mid-June. It has always insisted that its cases were imported from Congo.

——

McMakin reported from Dakar, Senegal

Tuesday, July 28, 2026

Uganda Declares Itself Free of Ebola as Congo Continues to Struggle With It

By RODNEY MUHUMUZA

2:08 PM EDT, July 28, 2026

KAMPALA, Uganda (AP) — Authorities in Uganda declared the East Africa nation free of Ebola on Tuesday following the discharge of the country’s last patient in mid-June, a delicate milestone as the virus continues to plague neighboring Congo.

Uganda has maintained since the outset that its cases were linked to the larger outbreak in eastern Congo’s remote province of Ituri, which borders Uganda. The first cases in Uganda were Congolese who crossed the border to seek treatment for an unknown illness before it was known they had Ebola, health authorities have said.

After what health officials believe was weeks of transmission, Congo announced its outbreak on May 15, the same day that Uganda confirmed two Ebola cases — including a man who had already died.

While a total of 20 cases were reported in Uganda, health authorities say there is currently no indication of further spread within the country.

The last patient was released June 16, and Ugandan authorities have waited the World Health Organization-recommended 42 days – or two incubation cycles for Ebola – to declare the country free of the disease.

“Uganda’s 2026 Ebola outbreak arose from a fully documented importation event,” unlike previous outbreaks in the country, the Ugandan Health Ministry said in a statement Tuesday.

It was now possible to declare Uganda free of Ebola after “all identified contacts were institutionally quarantined and completed the mandatory 21-day follow-up without evidence of further transmission,” the statement said. “Enhanced surveillance has detected no unexplained community transmission.”

The Bundibugyo type of Ebola virus responsible for the outbreak has no approved vaccine or treatment. The region’s outbreak has been declared a global health emergency.

Ugandan health authorities have experience in acting quickly to address Ebola outbreaks. After the confirmation of Ebola cases in Uganda in May, the president urged Ugandans to “ stop shaking hands,” and ordered the postponement of an annual religious event that attracts thousands of pilgrims — from Congo and elsewhere — who converge around a Catholic shrine just outside the Ugandan capital, Kampala, in June.

Other measures included the suspension of all public transportation and flights between Uganda and Congo, where the outbreak remains worrisome.

Confirmed cases in Congo have reached 3,262, its Health Ministry said in an overnight update. Data by Congolese health authorities showed that 1,437 patients have died, in what officials have said is the fastest Ebola outbreak on record.

The Ebola case number in Congo is likely to top the previous highest toll in the country in the next few days. That outbreak lasted two years, while this one is only 10 weeks in.

Only the 2014-2016 outbreak in West Africa, considered the worst in history, has a higher toll, with 28,000 cases and more than 11,000 deaths.

The speed of transmission in the current outbreak comes amid concerns from residents that many communities in the affected provinces are either unreachable or have been abandoned by responders in recent days over safety concerns amid attacks from angry residents and rebels.

Tracing and isolating Ebola contacts is seen as key to stopping the spread of the disease, which usually manifests as hemorrhagic fever.

A People Under the Weight of the Siege and the Threat

From the White House, they want to force Cuba down a path of attrition, economic hardship, isolation, and systematic criminalization

Author: Raúl Antonio Capote | informacion@granmai.cu

July 28, 2026 11:07:46

Despite attempts to isolate Cuba, international solidarity has not abandoned the island. Photo: Ricardo López Hevia

In the jargon of U.S. prisons, the "last mile" is the stretch that separates the condemned from the gallows; it symbolizes the final step between life and death, the last moment of waiting before execution.

Observing the sequence of measures that the current Republican administration has deployed against Cuba in recent months, one could well say that the powers that be in Washington have decided to transfer this prison logic to the geopolitical arena.

Since July 16th, when the Secretary of State convened a ministerial meeting in Washington under the grandiose title of "Resurgence of Political Terrorism," the official U.S. narrative has escalated in virulence, something that seemed impossible to achieve.

There, the island was labeled "the world capital of radical left-wing terrorism." Four days later, on July 20th, 2026, the State Department published a report, Cuba: The Capital of 21st Century Subversion, in which Havana is accused of fostering extremism and weaving a network of espionage to "undermine U.S. interests."

Every Wednesday or Thursday, like a macabre advent calendar, a new battery of "sanctions" appears, each tightening a different screw: the oil embargo, secondary penalties against foreign companies, the list of state sponsors of terrorism—a fallacious stigma that weighs more than a conviction—the official declaration of Cuba as a "threat to national security."

But let's go beyond the statements, because behind each resolution, each list, and each report, there are nine million lives that are not mere pawns on a chessboard. The embargo, already six decades old, the perfect past of an undeclared war, is becoming absolute.

Some analysts, with their memories still fresh, fear that only one step remains: the false flag operation, the perfect pretext. And this is not a conspiracy theory; it is a lesson learned in other scenarios.

That Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks of "political terrorism" while preventing the rest of the world from trading with the island under threat of reprisals is an exercise in cynicism that hardly needs comment.

The "last mile" they want to force Cuba to travel is a path of attrition, economic hardship, isolation, and systematic criminalization. But there is something those in power often forget: on that mile, the condemned do not walk alone.

On this journey, we are accompanied by the international solidarity of social movements, of honest people around the world, of a few governments that refuse to bow down, while the daily resistance of Cubans themselves transforms that stretch into a space of vital affirmation.

No one can plead ignorance when the facts are dated, signed, and published. The July 20th report is public, the sanctions are verifiable; it is a matter of the survival of humanity, even though they now prefer to bury their heads in the sand.

The last mile is not just the journey of the condemned; It is also the distance that separates us from our own conscience; in that mile, we still have time to stop, or there will be no world possible but that of the law of the strongest.

Because if the stories of prisoners on death row teach us anything, it is that, even in the final act, hope is the only shackle they cannot tear from us. Cuba, despite everything, continues to dance its waltz—not the waltz of surrender, but the waltz of resistance—or rather, we dance to the rhythm of the José Mambí rumba.

Photo

We Cubans Today Are Also Conquerors of the Impossible

Speech delivered by Miguel Mario Díaz-Canel Bermúdez, First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba and President of the Republic, at the main ceremony marking the 73rd anniversary of the assault on the Moncada and Carlos Manuel de Céspedes barracks in the province of Pinar del Río, on July 26, 2026, "Year of the Centennial of Commander-in-Chief Fidel Castro Ruz"

Author: Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez | internet@granma.cu

July 28, 2026 11:07:09

(Shorthands Version – Presidency of the Republic)

Photo: José Manuel Correa

Comrades of the Presidency;

Dear people of Pinar del Río;

Friends of solidarity:

Early this morning, I received a call from Army General Raúl Castro Ruz, leader of our Revolution, who asked me to convey the following message to you:

"Dear people of Pinar del Río;"

"This July 26, please receive the affection and my recognition for having earned, through your effort, dedication to the revolutionary cause, and creative work, the great honor of hosting the main ceremony marking the 73rd anniversary of the assault on the Moncada and Carlos Manuel de Céspedes barracks, National Rebellion Day."

"A warm embrace to all,"

"Raúl Castro Ruz" (Applause).

Compatriots:

Cuba is fighting a historic battle today: A new Moncada! Just as the Centennial Generation charged with nothing but a few rifles against the walls of two barracks of the Batista dictatorship 73 years ago, we, the current generations, are charging against the walls of a genocidal policy that has set out to suffocate the entire people in order to take over the country. They will say that the assault on the Moncada and Carlos Manuel de Céspedes barracks in 1953 failed. We will remind them that that action ignited the small spark that set in motion the great engine of the Cuban Revolution.

These are the words of Fidel, who has taught us, ever since, to seek victory, even in the face of the greatest setbacks. And in his historic self-defense speech, he explained why, stating: "There is one reason that stands with us, more powerful than all the others: we are Cubans, and being Cuban implies a duty; failing to fulfill it is a crime and an act of treason."

For that reason, we are fighting fiercely and tenaciously in defense of our sovereignty and our right to freely choose how we are governed, with the same passion with which José Martí set out to achieve complete justice.

In memory of everyone, I would like to note that this is the first July 26 since the triumph of 1959 on which we are not joined by Commander of the Revolution Ramiro Valdés Menéndez (Applause), hero of that epic feat and of all those the Cuban people have waged since then.

Eternal glory to the Moncadista! 

Comrades:

We are celebrating National Rebellion Day in the Vueltabajo region because of the results that have already been highlighted and recognized, but I would say that, in times like these, these are not just achievements—they are examples of everyday heroism.

A single statistic would suffice to illustrate my point: an infant mortality rate of 4.8 per 1,000 live births and a maternal mortality rate of zero—amid power outages and shortages of every kind—that is what we call heroism!

As acknowledged by the Political Bureau, Pinar del Río is demonstrating results in fulfilling key tasks in the political, economic, and social spheres, with the leading role played by workers in production and services, farmers, intellectuals, young people, and other sectors of society.

The province prioritizes the implementation of the Government’s Economic and Social Program, the Economic Plan, and the State Budget, which have a positive impact on foreign exchange earnings from exports; it is a province with a budget surplus, and the number of companies operating at a loss is decreasing.

I would also highlight, as an example for other provinces, the consistent efforts that have enabled it to boost food production—in close collaboration with producers—and the efficiency in the process of granting land for usufruct, an issue of vital priority today.

Of course, it is essential to mention tobacco production—a symbol of the region and an export commodity of extraordinary value—as well as the food industry’s output, which is developing new linkages with non-state management models.

Through science and innovation, the Hermanos Saíz Montes de Oca University of Pinar del Río prioritizes regional development, serving as a model for the rest of the country.

Overcoming every imaginable adversity, in this region of rich literary and artistic traditions—the birthplace of Luis and Sergio Saíz Montes de Oca, Pedro Junco, and Nersys Felipe—the flame of culture has been kept alive and burning brightly.

The commendable work in heritage preservation, the sustained efforts in cultural outreach to communities, and the results achieved last academic year in arts education speak eloquently to the joint effort of Pinar del Río’s institutions and creators to defend their culture and identity and to maintain cultural services for the people.

The province, together with its municipalities and agencies, has established a system of work that has fostered closer ties between Party and government structures and the communities, especially those in the most vulnerable situations. We have observed this during our frequent visits to this noble land.

Congratulations, Pinar del Río, on your heroism and achievements! (Applause.)

We also salute Villa Clara and Matanzas, outstanding provinces, and recognize the achievements of Guantánamo and Sancti Spíritus.

We urge you to remain at the forefront and continue to serve as an example of everything that can indeed be done and changed to improve the current, very difficult living conditions. 

Compatriots:

The Cuban nation’s historic adversaries, intoxicated by the rise of the right and the far right in the region and blind believers in the power of money to buy consciences and subjugate wills, issue a threat against the Revolution every day and announce a new punishment every week for Cuban companies and officials—and even for those, whether Cuban or foreign, dare to send an oil tanker or invest in Cuba. 

The latest sanctions set a new low in infamy by targeting public health officials and Cuban medical services. I wonder under what absurd pretext professionals can be singled out—professionals whose work in remote areas, facing dangerous situations, natural disasters, and contagious diseases, is recognized as exemplary by governments of the most diverse political persuasions.

State Department officials—experts at drafting sanctions, compiling lists, and inventing pretexts—are a modern version of the drafters of military edicts and proclamations that were so widely feared and hated during the dark medieval times or the Nazi occupations of World War II. As if the rest of the world were their colony, they dictate how things must be done under threat of punishment or aggression.

They have declared a world war against the left and against Cuba as the capital of communism in the 21st century. Under the philosophy of this new mandate, in the country of supposed freedoms, it is forbidden to protest against state policies that impoverish the majority, while the ruling elites grow obscenely rich.

By accusing Cuba, they are not only seeking a scapegoat, an external agent; they are looking for someone to blame for the protests by the sectors hardest hit by an economy that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer to unsustainable extremes.

They are criminalizing protest without analyzing its causes and, opportunistically, are seeking a new excuse to sustain their genocidal policy against Cuba, which the world condemns.

Let Cuba live in peace! And let the noblest among the American people—who have historically fought for the human rights of other peoples, without expecting recognition and often facing persecution, imprisonment, and risks to their lives—live in peace as well.

Cuba is not a threat—neither to the United States nor to any other country on Earth! We are a noble people who save lives where others destroy, who send doctors and teachers where others send bombs, and who train highly qualified professionals from various nations in cooperation projects sustained amid the greatest hardships!

In these final days of the academic year—tense and difficult as only this people knows how to experience—Cuban universities have graduated 30,185 young professionals, 735 of whom come from 62 countries. And here is a fact we are proud to share: twenty-three new Palestinian doctors and five American doctors. Is this what they call terrorism? Is this what they call a threat?! (Applause.) 

Everything Cuba does, everything the Cuban Revolution can demonstrate through its programs and actions, is a solid 67-year history of tireless defense of its sovereignty, solidarity, and international cooperation in support of life, health, education, and science.

The only threat to security in the region—the true and real threat to world peace and to human life—is the policy of aggression that causes famines, impoverishment, disorderly migration, chaos, instability, and tens of thousands of deaths around the world.

Cuba is not the first nor will it be the last victim of this type of war that blocks, suffocates, and seeks to provoke social unrest with the sole purpose of imposing governments aligned with imperialist interests.

Therefore, from this podium, I denounce that Cuba is the victim of a coldly calculated genocide!

The U.S. government has consciously designed and implemented a policy of maximum economic suffocation against the Cuban people. It has intensified its six-decade-long blockade policy, imposing an energy and financial siege, causing a profound crisis in the system, power outages, which result in blackouts lasting more than a day, bring industries to a standstill, and affect tens of thousands of workers.

The immense suffering of Cuban families is confirmed by statistics: deaths caused by a lack of medicines that the country produced and distributed for decades—free of charge or at subsidized prices—but which it is now unable to guarantee; more than 100,000 surgeries that cannot be scheduled or performed because hospitals cannot be protected from unexpected power outages during the already frequent failures of the National Power System and due to a lack of fuel for backup generators; more than 118,000 cancer patients, including 1,200 children, who cannot receive first-line treatments and are forced to resort to second- and third-line alternative treatments; and what is just as painful—if not more so—the infant mortality rate has risen to 9.3 per 1,000 live births, compared to the 4 or 5 recorded in previous years. Behind those numbers are the faces of children who never got to experience life as a direct consequence of the blockade and its genocidal nature!

These unilateral coercive measures—which the United States, whose government believes it has the right to sanction the rest of the planet, calls "sanctions"—are condemned every year by the United Nations General Assembly as contrary to international law. It is illegal and criminal to torment a people solely to provoke them into rebelling against their government; it cannot even be called a tool of foreign policy. 

The blockade is a weapon of war and causes deaths. In the face of international condemnation and the honorable and growing solidarity we receive from peoples around the world, the new hawks at the helm of the U.S. State Department have released a slanderous report on Cuba’s alleged subversive influence against that country. As stated in the Declaration by our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, this is a mediocre propaganda pamphlet that seeks, through the fabrication of accusatory myths, to build consensus for a potential military aggression.

We denounce that those who designed this policy of suffocation—those who implement and sustain it—are responsible for the suffering of the Cuban people! They are responsible for the deaths caused by the lack of access to essential goods! They are responsible for the famine they seek to impose, and history will not forgive them!

We also denounce those who remain silent and tolerate the excesses of the emboldened U.S. fascist far right, which lies, steals, kills, and seeks to set itself up as the master of all destinies.

The U.S. blockade only works because of the complicity of those who fear Washington’s power more than the judgment of history. This is a new appeal to the world’s conscience: Do not become accomplices to another genocide. 

Every time a part of the world remains silent in the face of aggression against Cuba, international law is weakened. Every time a government accepts the United States’ illegitimate sanctions, the principle of non-intervention is eroded. Every time a company is pressured to abandon its investments in Cuba and others hesitate to make them out of fear of reprisals, the economic dictatorship of a single power is strengthened.

First it was Gaza, Lebanon, Iran; today it is Cuba. Tomorrow it could be any other nation.

Let us not forget that the solidarity that has finally emerged for Gaza around the world came too late for more than 70,000 Palestinians—including some 21,000 children—whose ashes are now part of the horrific mountains of rubble into which the Zionist perpetrators of genocide have turned that martyred strip of land.

That is why I say today that defending Cuba from the cruelty of its executioners is not something that can wait!

To defend Cuba with strength and urgency is to halt the advance of supremacist, racist, xenophobic, elitist, and exclusionary ideas—ideas that are the enemies of true freedom and human emancipation!

Defending Cuba means fighting against 21st-century colonialism, against hegemony, against the claim that a single country can decide the fate of all! There are no superior or inferior nations. The world divided between emperors and subjects was defeated after centuries of struggle and cannot return.

Forces and voices around the world are rising up against attempts to drag humanity back to the darkest days of its past.

Cuba knows, recognizes, and embraces the peoples and governments—including the representatives of the noblest elements of the American people—who risk everything to bring their message of solidarity and support to the island.

To the women and men like those on the Open Arms flotilla and the Our America convoy, and to the social movements of Latin America and the Caribbean that have maintained their solidarity with Cuba despite pressure from Washington.

To the human rights organizations that denounce the crimes of the blockade before international forums.

To the parliamentary groups and legislators from various countries who are working tirelessly to condemn the illegitimate sanctions.

To the European civil society organizations that have maintained ties with Cuba despite the threats.

To social, pacifist, and anti-imperialist movements around the world, who understand that the struggle against hegemony is the struggle for peace, and to the groups of countries in the Global South who share the conviction that sovereignty is non-negotiable. 

Special thanks to all the governments that voted in favor of the Cuban resolution against the blockade and the energy blockade at the United Nations General Assembly, despite the insulting pressure from the U.S. government.

Special thanks to the Cuba solidarity groups visiting us and present at this event: Pastors for Peace; Carlota’s Warriors from New York; the Australian Association for Solidarity with Cuba; the José Martí Cultural Association of Miami; and the Marcapasos project (Applause). Your presence is living proof that we are not alone.

Your presence here today is an act of courage, because defending Cuba in times of maximum pressure means taking risks, means facing criticism, and means exposing the hypocrisy of those who preach human rights but remain silent in the face of crimes of genocide.

We thank you for your solidarity! We thank you for your courage! We thank you for your commitment to justice!

Rest assured that we will not give up!

Just as on that early morning of July 26, every day we take on the harsh realities of daily life head-on to write the history of our time. 

Amid such great difficulties, what are we doing? We are working, we are creating, we are innovating. In all productive sectors—workers, farmers, scientists, intellectuals, artists, and students—people are innovating, contributing, and adapting technologies to keep producing and keeping the lights on, even if only minimally; while our adversaries surpass their own wickedness by trying to leave us without lights, without water, without energy, and without hope.

Our response to this suffocation is ingenuity, creativity, and—even if it bothers them—the joy of the Cuban people! (Applause).

The response to the blockade is intelligent and efficient effort. The response to the never-ending attempts to isolate and divide us is unity.

"Unity is our main strategic weapon," Army General Raúl Castro Ruz told us on the anniversary of the Revolution in January 2024, and he asked us to cherish it more than the apple of our eye.

Unity does not mean uniformity. It means that despite differences in style, dynamics, and ways of facing challenges, we all share the same goal: for Cuba to be a socialist, sovereign, independent, dignified, and ultimately prosperous country, leaving no one behind. Anything that undermines that purpose would strip the Revolution of its meaning, because every time unity has fractured in our long history of struggles as a people, the Revolution has lost its way.

Compatriots:

Creativity and effort alone—however heroic they may be—are not enough to dismantle the structures of the blockade. This conviction makes the implementation of the ongoing economic and social transformations a strategic priority. These are profound and necessary changes that have been proposed and debated for several years.

We have embarked on a process of macroeconomic restructuring and are strengthening all forms of management, motivating workers and farmers, and opening avenues for responsible investment—always guided by the sacred principle that change cannot be divorced from social justice. This is the economic and social battle of this generation.

The mission is highly complex and fraught with risks, which we have a responsibility to minimize for those facing vulnerable situations.

The boldness bequeathed to us by the Moncada demands that we not fear change; yet, in the name of the supreme ideal of those who fell then and of those who have given their all over the years, economic transformations must be guided by a fundamental principle: the highest degree of social justice.

We reaffirm that Cuba is and will remain a sovereign country; that no one, under any circumstances, has the right to decide for us; and that economic, political, and social decisions are and will remain ours!

The year 2026 holds special significance—and not only for Cubans—as the Year of the Centennial of Commander-in-Chief Fidel Castro Ruz has universal resonance.

Very soon, revolutionary friends from all five continents will begin to arrive. Using their own resources and willing to share in the complex and challenging realities we face, they have chosen to participate in the Colloquium and other events and activities celebrating Fidel’s 100th anniversary.

These will be days for analyzing and debating the ideas of his extraordinary legacy, for assessing the international and national situation, and the role and place of the Cuban Revolution at one of the most difficult moments in its history; and it will also be a time to test ourselves in the study and practice of the revolutionary principles bequeathed to us by the Commander-in-Chief.

In the year of his centennial, we Cubans are called upon to honor his memory not only with words but also with deeds: through work, unity, dignity, and with sufficient clarity and determination to implement, as quickly as possible, the transformations that the current moment and the nation demand of us. 

I would now like to address the young people of Cuba in particular. You are the present and the future. Consider yourselves the heirs to the courage of Abel Santamaría, Melba, Haydée, and that entire generation—the generation of Martí’s Centennial. You are the youth of Fidel’s Centennial! You are called upon to lead this moment from every neighborhood and every corner of this island. Get involved and bring about change for the good of all, just as it was once done with your best interests in mind (Applause).

José Martí, the intellectual architect of the actions we commemorate today, once said: "A people needs only one strength: not to doubt its own strength."

Compatriots:

The call now is to action—to not wait, to not lament, to not settle, to think as a nation, to seek alternatives with boldness and creativity, to care for every resource as if it were the last, to produce, to substitute imports, to develop our potential. Let us trust in our own strength! May every Cuban—at their workplace, in their fields, in their workshop, at their school, in their neighborhood—be and feel like a protagonist in the transformation we owe ourselves to overcome this moment.

Today’s call is one of hope!

Just as on that morning of Santa Ana, we face enormous challenges with the same fortitude, the same optimism, and the same unshakable conviction in victory.

We Cubans today are also conquerors of the impossible, and on this July 26th, we reaffirm our commitment to the homeland, to the Revolution, to the achievements of socialism, and to the task of rebuilding an economy mercilessly battered by four centuries of colonialism, six decades of neocolonialism, and another six decades of a blockade that has been reinforced to the point of becoming a genocidal plan.

May every dawn find us standing ready to fight!

Long live July 26th! (Shouts of: "Long live!")

Long live the National Rebellion! (Shouts of: "Long live!")

Long live Cuba, sovereign and independent! (Shouts of: "Long live!")

Long live international solidarity with Cuba! (Shouts of: "Long live!")

Socialism or Death!

Fatherland or Death!

We will prevail!

(Applause).

West Bank Annexation: Decades of Settlements, Control, and Expansion

By Hassan Fakih

Source: Al Mayadeen English

From the Allon Plan to Smotrich’s annexation push, the West Bank has been shaped by decades of settlement expansion, military control, and territorial consolidation.

The West Bank has long been the center of Israeli colonialist dreams, serving as both a geographic and political battleground between settler violence and Palestinian self-defense measures. 

Despite international opposition, successive Israeli governments expanded control through settler construction projects, military orders, and administrative measures that have reshaped the occupied Palestinian land. 

Israeli control of the West Bank developed into a system of permanent territorial control following its military occupation, with settlements and Israeli infrastructure splitting Palestinian communities from one another. 

This process accelerated under "Israel’s" current regime, with Finance Minister and former settlement administrator Bezalel Smotrich playing a key role in advancing policies aimed at annexing the occupied West Bank.

Smotrich openly called for the extension of Israeli sovereignty over the territory and oversaw the transfer of key administrative powers over settlements from military authorities to settler government bodies.

These measures are a move toward formal annexation, transforming what has long been considered de facto control into a permanent system of settler governance.

The roots of this ongoing process extend back to the aftermath of the 1967 war, when Israeli political and military planners began formulating strategies for maintaining long-term control over the occupied territory.

The decades-long annexation process

While the West Bank is officially under Palestinian rule, "Israel" has maintained de facto control over the plot of land since its military seizure in 1967. 

Following the 1967 war, Israeli politicians were faced with two options, the first being the Jordanian option, transferring control of most of the West Bank to Jordan under King Hussein bin Talal, or the Palestine option, which declared that the Palestinians would get autonomy or an independent state.

Israeli politicians opted for the latter.

"Israel" continued to invest resources into gaining more land in the Palestinian territories by establishing and expanding the settlements both by means of land grabbing and increasing the population of these sites, under the Allon Plan doctrine. 

The Allon Plan indicated that Israeli sovereignty over a major part of the occupied Palestinian territories was essential for "Israel's" defense and survival. 

Yigal Allon, of whom the doctrine was named, stated following the 1967 war that the last thing "Israel" should do is "return one inch of the West Bank" back to the Jordanians who ruled over the land until the war. 

"We must not view Hussein as existing forever – today it is Hussein, but tomorrow it is [Suleiman] Nabulsi, and the day after that some Syrian will take hold of them and following that they will make a defense pact with the Soviet Union and China and we'll find ourselves in a much more difficult position," Allon said. "We are talking about a matter that is not forever, and we are placing it on a phenomenon that is flesh and blood, and perhaps will remain for a maximum of 60 years, if he does not get shot before that."

He added that he was "taking the maximum possibility. Not a canton, not an autonomous region, but an independent Arab state agreed on between us and them in an enclave surrounded by Israeli territory – independent even in its foreign policy."

This has largely been the dynamic of the West Bank under occupied skies; Palestinian natives would be able to elect an administrative body, but the Israeli occupation remains in control of public order, meaning that Palestinians will continue to be treated as second-class citizens when compared with the Zionist settlers. 

Settlements, which the UN rightfully called colonies in a 1979 bulletin, quickly sprang up. The bulletin noted a plan formulated by the Jewish Agency and the Zionist Organization, which noted that its objectives over a 20-year period (1975-1995) were to inhabit the Jordan Rift with at least 8,000 "Israelis" by 1995 and to "exploit the natural resources of the area – mainly land, water and climatic conditions – for the benefit of the Israeli colonies."

"Israel" continues to use complex legal and bureaucratic procedures to take control of the land in the West Bank, seizing it by military needs or claiming allegedly undeclared land to belong to "Israel".

After the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, the Palestinian Authority was established as a transitional governing body tasked with managing areas of the West Bank and Gaza. 

However, instead of ending the Israeli occupation of the land, the West Bank was split into three administrative zones, Area A, B, and C.

When the Oslo II Accord was signed in 1995, Area A was placed under full Palestinian civil and security control, while Area B was placed under Palestinian civil administration with "Israel" maintaining overriding security authority. Area C, which comprises approximately 60% of the West Bank, remained under full Israeli civil and military control. This area included the majority of the territory's natural resources, open land, strategic areas, and all Israeli settlements outside occupied East Jerusalem.

Although the agreement described Area C as a temporary arrangement pending final status negotiations, control over the territory was never transferred. Instead, successive Israeli governments continued expanding settlements, developing infrastructure connecting them to "Israel," and restricting Palestinian construction through military orders and planning regulations.

The settlement movement continued to grow throughout the Oslo period despite the framework being presented internationally as a pathway toward Palestinian statehood. Per European Union figures, the settler population in the occupied West Bank more than doubled between the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993 and the mid-2010s.

The structure created by Oslo allowed the Palestinian Authority to administer population centers while leaving control over borders, airspace, security, movement, and most of the territory in the hands of the Israeli occupation.

This transformed the occupation from direct military administration over the entire population into a fragmented system where Palestinian authorities managed civilian affairs while "Israel" retained control over the wider territory.

This arrangement became increasingly evident through the expansion of Area C settlements, military zones, bypass roads, and restrictions on Palestinian development. Rather than serving as a transitional phase toward full Palestinian sovereignty, the division of the West Bank created a framework through which "Israel" could maintain control over the territory while allowing limited Palestinian self-administration.

The system accelerated in recent years, as Israeli politicians openly advocated for formal annexation and the extension of civilian authority over settlements.

"Israel" has been committed to officially annexing the Palestinian land in recent years, accelerating the already rapid settler movement there alongside the violence against Palestinians. 

Geographic importance of the West Bank

The West Bank is a landlocked plot of about 5,660 km², mainly comprised of a generally rugged mountainous terrain. Its elevation spans between the Dead Sea shoreline at -408 m and the highest point, Mount Nabi Yunis, at 1,030m above sea level.

Geographically, its hills and mountains give it strategic importance, as they allow whoever controls them to command the high ground of the coastal plain on the western ridge and the Jordan valley to the east. 

Israeli regime officials have long linked the need to take over the West Bank for the sake of security needs. Israeli War Minister Israel Katz said previously that, "The renewal of the land settlement in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) is an essential security-administrative move designed to ensure control, enforcement, and full freedom of action by the State of Israel in the territory."

"Regulating the land prevents the establishment of unilateral facts, reduces illegal takeover attempts, and harms terrorist infrastructures that undermine stability and security," the Israeli politician said. "This is a necessary step to create operational and legal certainty, allowing the IDF and the defense establishment to act with determination to protect Israeli citizens and safeguard national interests."

The Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs noted that despite its small size, the West Bank is situated adjacent to where a majority of the Israeli settlers and the occupation's industrial capacity are located. 

It notes that a military force located in commanding positions along the West Bank could show itself to pose a major military threat to "Israel," crippling or bringing the occupation's economic life to a standstill.  

The West Bank is relatively small, covering 2,123 square miles (5,500 square kilometers), but it is situated immediately adjacent to the Israeli coastal plain where more than 70 percent of Israel’s population and 80 percent of its industrial capacity are located.

"Incapacitating and overrunning the coastal plain would terminate Israel’s very existence," the institution wrote. "This is the primary factor affecting the strategic importance of the West Bank for Israel from a military perspective."

The annexation of the West Bank allows the Israelis the ability to overlook the western plain, making a potential Resistance movement harder, especially if a future operation seeks to link the West Bank with Gaza's resistance.

Actors behind the land grab 

The main force paving the way for Israeli annexation of the West Bank is the violent settlers who abuse and bully Palestinians. 

These settlers are often armed, work in packs, and have some member of the IOF guarding their movements in case a Palestinian dares to protect themselves or their families. 

Plans to take over the land for military means are being hidden behind the language of religious and historical rights, as is often the case when it comes to Israeli political decisions. Settlers see the abuse of Palestinians as a Divine right they have to let loose on whichever obstacle is in their way. 

The use of Israeli settlers rather than IOF personnel directly in the usurping of Palestinian land in the West Bank follows in line with "Israel's" war tactics. Tel Aviv, before launching an aggressive war on whoever they deem to be adversaries, conducts immense diplomatic, political, and armed pressure campaigns until the other party responds and takes that as justification for a full-blown military operation, which can be deemed to be carried out in self-defense. 

The West Bank is a fuse waiting to burn out, as Israeli politicians give settlers free rein to take over land violently stolen from Palestinians, living on their farms and taking their livestock as treasures of a successful colonial campaign. 

B'tselem, in a 2021 report, stated that "settlements for all intents and purposes, which were built without formal authorization by the government and without plans that enable construction in them – receive support from the Israeli authorities and remain standing. Israel has ordered the military to defend the outposts or paid for their security, as well as paved roads and laid down water and electricity infrastructure for most of them."

We can see this dynamic plainly throughout this month, as a surge in settler attacks intensified fears that violence is being used to accelerate the annexation process. 

The most recent of which comes from the Palestinian village of Tell, west of Nablus, wherein four Palestinians were martyred as they attempted to defend their land from the zionist colonizers. 

Settler attacks spread to nearby Palestinian communities shortly after, including assaults on villages and the burning of mosques, while Israeli forces launched widespread military operations and arrests across the West Bank.

The colonialist nature of these events can be summed up as such: settler violence creates instability on the ground, forcing Palestinians to defend their communities, and the resulting confrontation is then used to justify expanded military intervention and further restrictions on Palestinian movement by transferring their land into military outposts or security zones.

The United Nations documented that settler attacks in recent weeks have increasingly targeted not only individuals but also agricultural land, water systems, electricity infrastructure, and other resources essential to Palestinian livelihoods.

From the Allon Plan after the 1967 war to the present-day policies of Israeli actors like Smotrich, the West Bank has remained central to Israeli occupation plans. The land's geographic importance, settlement expansion, and political fragmentation made it a focal point of "Israel's" regional aggression campaign.

Diego Garcia: The British Base Built on Exile and War

By Al Mayadeen English

26 Jul 2026 18:48

Britain forcibly expelled the Chagossian people from their homeland to build Diego Garcia, a secretive US-UK military base later used to support wars and rendition operations, amid accusations of war crimes.

Britain transformed Diego Garcia into a military fortress by first erasing its people from official records and then physically removing them from their homeland.

Before the runways, bomber facilities, and warships, the remote Indian Ocean atoll formed part of a thriving Chagossian community whose families had lived across the Chagos Archipelago for generations.

A Times of India explainer published on July 25 has renewed attention on the human cost concealed beneath one of the most important US military installations outside American territory: the deliberate expulsion of an entire population to satisfy Washington’s strategic demands.

The displacement was not an accidental consequence of constructing the base. It was a calculated British-US policy. London removed the islanders, destroyed their ability to sustain themselves, and repeatedly denied them the right to return, creating what Human Rights Watch has described as “crimes against humanity that continue to the present.”

An island emptied for the United States

Diego Garcia is the largest island in the Chagos Archipelago, situated south of the Maldives and roughly midway between eastern Africa and Southeast Asia.

The archipelago had been administered by Britain as part of its colony of Mauritius. As Mauritius approached independence, however, the United States identified Diego Garcia as an ideal location for a military installation capable of supporting operations across Africa, West Asia, and Asia.

Washington approached London in 1964. Britain subsequently separated Chagos from Mauritius in 1965 and created a new colony under the name British Indian Ocean Territory.

The International Court of Justice later found that the separation was unlawful and that Mauritius had not been in a position to consent freely while still under British colonial rule. According to the court, the decolonization of Mauritius was therefore never lawfully completed.

Britain’s purpose in retaining the islands was explicit. Official documents showed that London wanted complete control so that Britain or the United States could clear any island of its population whenever land was required for military facilities.

The people living there were treated not as a community with rights, but as an obstacle standing between two imperial powers and a strategically valuable military outpost.

Britain made the Chagossians disappear on paper

Removing the population required Britain to conceal the fact that a permanent community existed.

The Chagossians were descendants primarily of enslaved Africans and people brought from Madagascar to work on coconut plantations under French and British colonial rule. Over generations, they developed their own Creole language, music, traditions, and collective identity.

Nevertheless, Britain informed the United Nations that the archipelago had no permanent inhabitants. Chagossians were recategorized as temporary plantation laborers despite families having been born, raised, and buried on the islands over several generations.

This deception allowed London to avoid acknowledging that it was creating a new colony and displacing a population entitled to international protection.

Declassified documents also exposed the racism behind the policy. One British memorandum envisioned islands with “no indigenous population except seagulls.” Another official referred to the inhabitants as “some few Tarzans or Man Fridays.”

The language was not incidental. It reflected the colonial calculation that a predominantly Black island population could be deprived of its home without meaningful political consequences.

Hunger, intimidation, and the destruction of community life

Britain removed the Chagossians gradually, making the operation less visible while ensuring that normal life on the islands became impossible.

Beginning in 1967, Chagossians who traveled to Mauritius or the Seychelles for medical treatment, holidays, or family visits were prevented from returning. Some learned only when attempting to board a ship home that they had permanently lost access to their houses, possessions, and relatives.

British authorities then reduced the ships delivering food, medicine, and other essential supplies.

Families remaining on Peros Banhos and Salomon watched basic provisions disappear. Milk eventually ran out, forcing women to feed children mixtures of coconut milk and sugar. Some residents were warned that no food would be available unless they agreed to leave.

On Diego Garcia, the authorities ordered the killing of the island’s dogs. More than 1,000 animals, including family pets, were reportedly poisoned, shot, or gassed using exhaust fumes from US military vehicles.

The killings terrorized residents and demonstrated what could happen to living beings considered inconvenient to the construction of the base. Some Chagossians understood the slaughter as a warning intended to drive them from the island.

The principal deportations from Diego Garcia occurred in July and September 1971. By 1973, Britain had removed the entire Chagossian population from the archipelago.

Around 1,500 to 1,750 people were affected, with approximately 1,360 living on the islands shortly before the operation began. They were transported mainly to Mauritius and the Seychelles, often without secure housing, employment, or adequate compensation.

Many arrived to find that promises of jobs and accommodation were false. Families who had previously produced food and relied on the sea were reduced to hunger, overcrowded housing, and extreme poverty.

Chagossians later described deaths, family breakdown, illness, and profound psychological suffering caused by the displacement. They used the term sagren to describe the grief and devastation of being torn from their homeland.

A launchpad for destructive US wars

Once the population had been removed, Diego Garcia was converted into an enormous air and naval installation operated jointly by Britain and the United States.

Its isolated position allowed Washington to deploy bombers, store weapons and supplies, monitor maritime routes, and conduct operations while remaining far from public scrutiny.

The US Navy has described Diego Garcia as the “tip of the spear” for American bombing missions against Iraq and Afghanistan. US Air Force records confirm that B-1, B-2, and B-52 bombers operated from or through the island during the war in Afghanistan, with millions of pounds of explosives dropped during the campaign.

The International Criminal Court subsequently authorized an investigation into claims of war crimes committed in Afghanistan, including torture, cruel treatment, outrages upon personal dignity, and sexual violence carried out by members of the US armed forces and the CIA.

Diego Garcia also supported US operations during the invasion and occupation of Iraq, another war associated with unlawful killings, torture, arbitrary detention, and other grave abuses.

The history of the base therefore cannot be separated from the wars it has enabled. A homeland emptied through colonial violence became a platform from which overwhelming military violence could be projected against populations thousands of kilometers away.

Diego Garcia’s role in the US rendition program

The island was also connected to the US “extraordinary rendition” system, through which detainees were secretly transferred between countries and facilities outside ordinary judicial procedures.

For years, British authorities repeated US assurances that Diego Garcia had not been used for rendition flights.

In 2008, London was forced to acknowledge that those assurances were false. Two US aircraft carrying detainees had stopped to refuel on Diego Garcia in 2002.

A British parliamentary committee later concluded that the disclosure damaged confidence in Britain’s control over its own territory and severely undermined the credibility of US assurances.

The identities and destinations of those transported through the base were not publicly disclosed. Rendition operations were widely associated with secret detention, torture and transfers to locations where prisoners faced serious risks of abuse.

Diego Garcia’s remoteness, secrecy, and restricted access made it especially valuable to a system designed to operate beyond public and legal scrutiny.

Britain fought for decades to keep the islanders out

The Chagossians never abandoned their demand to return.

In 2000, Britain’s High Court ruled that the ordinance used to expel them was unlawful. Rather than accept the judgment, the British government introduced new orders preventing permanent resettlement.

Further court victories were eventually overturned in 2008 by the House of Lords, then Britain’s highest court. London continued to insist that Chagossians could not return, citing military, financial, and environmental considerations.

The dispute later moved beyond British courts.

In February 2019, the International Court of Justice ruled by 13 votes to one that Britain’s separation of Chagos from Mauritius had been unlawful. It said the United Kingdom was obligated to end its administration of the archipelago as rapidly as possible.

The court also recorded that between 1967 and 1973, Britain prevented Chagossians who had left from returning and forcibly removed those who remained.

London initially dismissed the opinion as advisory and continued administering the territory. Formal negotiations with Mauritius began only in November 2022, after years of increasing international isolation over Britain’s claim.

A sovereignty treaty that again sidelined the victims

Britain and Mauritius signed a treaty on May 22, 2025, recognizing Mauritian sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago.

Under the agreement, Britain would retain authority over Diego Garcia for an initial 99-year period, with possible extensions. The UK would pay Mauritius approximately £3.4 billion in 2025–26 prices over the initial term.

Mauritius would be permitted to establish a resettlement program on other islands, but Diego Garcia—the birthplace and homeland of many Chagossian families—would remain closed to them.

Many Chagossians said they had not been adequately consulted. Once again, governments negotiated the future of their homeland while treating the displaced population as a secondary consideration.

Even the treaty has not yet completed the transfer of sovereignty. The British legislation required to implement it failed to pass before Parliament was prorogued on April 29, 2026, and can make no further progress in that parliamentary session. The agreement consequently remains in abeyance, although Britain has said it hopes negotiations can eventually be revived.

London’s own explanation exposed its priorities.

“Ensuring its long-term operational security is and will continue to be our priority — it is the entire reason for the deal,” the British government said after the legislation was suspended.

More than half a century after Britain starved, intimidated, and deported the Chagossians, the military installation created through their suffering remains protected above their right to return.

The flags over the territory may eventually change. The colonial logic governing it has not.

Sudanese Army Retakes Key North Kordofan Towns in Advance Against RSF

By Al Mayadeen English

Source: News websites

27 Jul 2026 16:00

The Sudanese Armed Forces announce the recapture of Bara, Umm Sayala and Jabra al-Sheikh in North Kordofan, disrupting RSF supply routes between Darfur and central Sudan.

The Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) have announced the recapture of the strategic towns of Bara, Umm Sayala and Jabra al-Sheikh in North Kordofan following a large-scale military operation against the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

The advance marks one of the army’s most significant gains in Kordofan this year and comes as both sides continue competing for control of key supply routes connecting central Sudan with Darfur.

The operation was carried out by the SAF with support from the Joint Force of allied armed groups and other pro-army formations, according to military sources.

The offensive followed weeks of clashes in northern North Kordofan, where the RSF had reinforced its positions north and west of El Obeid in an effort to secure logistical routes used to move fighters, weapons and supplies between Darfur and central Sudan.

Military sources said army forces advanced toward Bara after entering Umm Sayala, launching clearing operations against RSF positions in the area. The SAF later announced that it had secured Bara and surrounding areas while pursuing RSF fighters who withdrew westward.

Strategic corridor between Darfur and central Sudan

Bara holds strategic geographic importance along the road connecting El Obeid with northern North Kordofan and Darfur. Umm Sayala lies along the same route, which has served as a key corridor for RSF movements in recent months.

Military analysts said the army’s control of the two towns could reduce the threat of further RSF pressure on El Obeid, the SAF’s main stronghold in North Kordofan, which has faced repeated drone and artillery attacks.

The gains also strengthen the army’s ability to secure the Export Road and routes leading towards White Nile state and Khartoum, while providing a potential launch point for further operations towards Darfur.

The North Kordofan state government said the offensive followed an RSF attack in the Barbir area south of El Obeid, accusing the group of killing 15 civilians, injuring others and looting residents’ property.

Authorities said SAF forces pursued the attackers, forced their withdrawal and secured the area to prevent further incursions. Meanwhile, residents reported drone strikes targeting water stations in Rahid al-Nuba and Umm Nabaq, disrupting supplies relied upon by thousands of displaced people who fled Umm Sayala, Jabra al-Sheikh and eastern Bara.

North Kordofan emerges as major battlefield

North Kordofan has become one of the central fronts in Sudan’s war, which erupted in April 2023 between the army and the RSF.

The RSF had used Bara’s location to maintain links between its forces in Darfur and central Sudan, while El Obeid remained a key SAF military base in the region. The army has frequently sought to cut RSF supply lines from Darfur, while the paramilitary group has attempted to preserve its logistical corridors towards West Kordofan and western Sudan.

Umm Sayala has witnessed repeated clashes due to its position along a major military route connecting central Sudan with Darfur.

Despite the army’s latest gains, fighting continues along approaches to Darfur, with clashes reported along the Kordofan-Darfur boundary as the RSF attempts to reorganize its defensive positions and reinforce its forces in western Sudan.

Field sources said fighting has intensified along routes leading towards El Fasher and other western areas, with both sides deploying combat vehicles and drones.

The developments indicate that the battlefield focus is gradually shifting from the outskirts of El Obeid towards the wider front between Kordofan and Darfur. Analysts said the capture of Bara and Umm Sayala provides the SAF with an operational advantage by restricting RSF mobility in North Kordofan and disrupting one of its main overland supply routes.

The advance could allow the army to consolidate its position in North Kordofan before attempting further operations towards West Kordofan and Darfur, where the RSF maintains its main military and administrative strongholds.

However, fighting is expected to continue as both sides seek to strengthen their positions ahead of the next phase of the conflict, with Darfur increasingly emerging as a decisive battleground following major shifts in territorial control across Sudan.

Monday, July 27, 2026

Sudan Rejects US Truce Plan, Fears Libya-style Partition

By Al Mayadeen English

26 Jul 2026 21:01

A senior Sudanese official affirms that Khartoum will not accept a US-backed truce that risks legitimizing RSF control or partitioning the country.

Sudan's political leadership has rejected a US-backed proposal for a 90-day ceasefire, warning that any deal built around freezing the current front lines risks entrenching Rapid Support Forces control over Sudanese territory and setting the stage for the country's partition.

"We cannot hand over our people to the political ambitions of the RSF. At the same time, we cannot accept partition like the Libya scenario," Amgad Fareid Eltayeb, political and foreign affairs adviser to the chairman of Sudan's Sovereignty Council, told Anadolu Agency.

What Washington is proposing

The plan, presented by Massad Boulos, the US president's senior advisor for Arab and African affairs, calls for an immediate 90-day humanitarian truce accompanied by a UN-led mechanism for limited withdrawals by the Rapid Support Forces, prioritized in North Darfur and North Kordofan.

Broader military arrangements, including a full RSF pullback and disarmament, would be negotiated later as part of a permanent ceasefire. The proposal also envisions a civilian-led political transition toward elections and a unified national military.

Khartoum has consistently rejected that sequencing. The Sudanese government insists any truce must begin with a complete RSF withdrawal from all cities and areas under its control, along with enforceable guarantees, before political or security arrangements are even discussed.

Officials view the alternative, RSF forces relocating into defined zones during a truce, as a step toward legitimizing the group's territorial gains rather than a step toward ending the war.

El Obeid, the new flashpoint

Eltayeb pointed to El Obeid, the capital of North Kordofan state, as the current center of gravity in the conflict, three times the size of El Fasher, the North Darfur capital the RSF seized in October 2025 amid mass killings that, according to the United Nations, amounted to acts of genocide. He accused the RSF of attempting a similar campaign against El Obeid and said government forces had repelled the group's attacks and retained control of the city.

He rejected framing the war as a civil conflict between two equal parties, describing it instead as an assault by "fascist militias" on the Sudanese state, its government, and its people. He also accused the RSF of using drones supplied by unnamed regional backers to target civilians and called on the international community to designate the group a "terrorist organization".

Why 'freezing' the lines is the real dispute

For Khartoum, the core objection to the US proposal is not the idea of a truce itself but what would happen during it. Eltayeb said Sudan would not accept proposals that "freeze" the current military situation, arguing that doing so would effectively legitimize RSF control over civilian areas and leave the Sudanese people hostage to the group.

That concern echoes what has driven the government's position throughout the negotiations. If the RSF retains control over large parts of Darfur and Kordofan during a truce period, officials fear, today's battle lines could evolve into tomorrow's political boundaries, producing a Sudan that resembles other conflict states where an internationally recognized government coexists with a de facto authority controlling its own territory.

The absence of a binding timetable for ending any redeployment and restoring full state authority only deepens that fear.

Washington, for its part, has framed the proposal around three narrower goals: halting hostilities, enabling humanitarian access, and creating conditions to restart a political process. Analysts tracking the talks acknowledge that both sides suspect a ceasefire would simply let their opponent regroup, and that any credible agreement would need enforceable monitoring mechanisms that remain, at this stage, poorly defined.

Tensions between Khartoum, Washington

The dispute is unfolding against a backdrop of wider friction between Khartoum and Washington. The United States imposed a new round of sanctions on Sudan in July over allegations that government forces used chemical weapons during the war, a charge Khartoum has repeatedly denied as baseless and politically timed to coincide with battlefield setbacks for the RSF.

At the same time, Sudan has been deepening ties elsewhere, with Khartoum and Saudi Arabia moving to activate a Supreme Council for Strategic Cooperation and Coordination, part of a broader reassessment of foreign relations based on how other countries have positioned themselves during the conflict.

An unresolved initiative

Analysts following the negotiations read the latest US proposal as a recognition in Washington that neither side is likely to achieve a decisive military victory, pushing the mediation effort from seeking an outright end to the war toward managing it through phased arrangements. But that approach carries its own risk. An agreement that lets both sides hold stable territorial zones could turn a temporary military reality into a lasting political one, the very outcome Khartoum says it will not accept.

Whether the initiative survives will depend on whether mediators can offer credible guarantees on the duration of any redeployment, a workable monitoring mechanism, and a clear path back to full state authority. Absent that, Eltayeb's own framing suggests Khartoum sees only one outcome on offer, a ceasefire that quietly draws a new map of the country rather than ending the war that produced it.

Europe’s Approaching Dangerous Point, Sanctions, New Ideas of Ukraine: Russian Diplomat

According to Maria Zakharova, Russia will soon announce its response to the 21st package of the European Union’s sanctions

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova Sofya Sandurskaya/TASS

© Sofya Sandurskaya/TASS

RZHEV /Tver Region/, July 27. /TASS/. Europe’s militarization is bringing the world to a dangerous point, while people are becoming more and more aware of how fragile peace is, the Russian foreign ministry’s official spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, said.

She stressed that attempts to use sanctions to undermine Russia's energy cooperation with its partners amid the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz will destabilize global markets. According to the diplomat, Russia will soon announce its response to the 21st package of the European Union’s sanctions. She also called on Washington to clarify the situation surrounding the Anchorage agreements before proposing new

Revival of Nazism in the West

Eighty years after being liberated from Nazism, Europe is again trying to turn itself into a "neo-Nazi militarized monster."

The West justifies barbaric acts against civilians, "they hush up acts of terror, they whitewash the neo-Nazi nature of those responsible."

Ukrainian settlement

Moscow calls on Washington to clarify the situation surrounding the Anchorage agreements before proposing new ideas: "Before discussing something new, something that has not yet been voiced or articulated, it would probably be risght to clarify the old issues first, particularly the discussions that have already taken place regarding these ideas."

"A logical question arises, one that, for some reason, has not been addressed by the State Department or anywhere else, namely, who exactly was to blame for the failure of the so-called Anchorage formula, which truly had the potential to bring peace."

Russia is ready to discuss ideas on how to settle the conflict in Ukraine diplomatically: "We once again reaffirm our readiness for potential discussions, proposals, ideas we will be ready to consider. We have never refused from this."

Anti-Russian sanctions

The ineffectiveness of the sanction pressure on Russia is clearly seen. "As for our response, retaliatory measures to the 21st anti-Russian sanctions package will be announced soon."

The EU's decision to impose sanctions against Russian presidential aide Vladimir Medinsky is vile and cowardly, driven in part by his efforts to restore the memory of the Great Patriotic War.

The European Union's actions regarding the Russian oil price cap "can only be described as a farce."

Attempts to use sanctions to undermine Russia's energy cooperation with its partners amid the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz "will inevitably lead to further market destabilization, fragmentation of global trade, inflation, a decline in welfare, and worsening growth prospects in most nations, hitting hardest the poorest countries that depend on energy, fertilizer, and food imports."

US President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans are doing him a disservice by pushing for sanctions against Russia. The United States will shoot itself in the foot if it passes Republican Senator Lindsey Graham’s sanctions bill, which is intended to rein in the White House.

Mirotvorets extremist site

For some reason, the Kiev regime’s extremist website Mirotvorets has never been the subject of discussion among Western human rights organizations "as something utterly reprehensible and shameful for all of humanity." It operates openly, "without any criticism from the West."

The extremist website cynically publishes information about children, "accusing them - and I quote - of attempting to undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and of deliberately violating Ukraine’s state border."

More than 100 children were put on the Mirotvorets database in 2025, with the entire list numbering "dozens and hundreds of names."

The United Kingdom’s anti-Russian policy

The destructive anti-Russian course of London will not change with the change of the cabinet of ministers in the country: "Whoever may be in power in Britain, its desire to inflict maximum damage on Russia and provoke a confrontation dangerous for Europe, regardless of any costs, including for its own country, apparently is not subject to revision, based on what we have heard."

Relations between Moscow and London have been wrecked due to the anti-Russian steps by the British authorities: "All of this has happened solely at the British side’s initiative."

All of London's actions aimed at damaging relations with Moscow "were accompanied by steps to turn Ukraine into an ‘anti-Russia’."

Fragility of peace

Europe’s militarization is bringing the world to a dangerous point while "ordinary people are becoming more and more aware of how fragile peace is."

The real threat to Khersones Tavrichesky "comes precisely from the Kiev regime," which regularly carries out attacks on Crimean monuments: "Crimea’s unique monuments are regularly subjected to Ukrainian terrorist attacks and the threat of drone strikes; debris from missiles and drones, which the Kiev regime receives from its Western sponsors, is regularly found in the protected area."

Ukraine’s attacks on civilians

Russia strongly condemns the brutal attacks committed by the armed forces of Ukraine against targets in the southern Russian Rostov Region and calls on "all responsible governments, related international organizations and independent media to publicly and unequivocally condemn Kiev’s atrocities in the Rostov Region," she said. "Remaining silent will imply complicity in terrorist activities of Ukrainian neo-Nazis, and will encourage them to commit new crimes."

Western countries have been turning a blind eye to the Kiev regime’s deliberate attacks targeting children, encouraging such behavior by all means: "Not only do they turn a blind eye, they encourage it in different forms - by sending more and more diverse weapons, and by providing them with political and informational support."

Russia’s army and law enforcement agencies will punish the Kiev regime for its terrorist attacks against civilians: "They are targeting civilians. Punishment will follow for that. Both through the efforts of the Russian Armed Forces and through the work of law enforcement agencies that continue to gather evidence to bring Kiev regime officials, Ukrainian military commanders, and foreign mercenaries to criminal liability for war crimes and terrorism."

The anti-Russian remarks made by the new commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian Armed Forces, Mikhail Drapaty, are a manifestation of Nazism: "Perhaps this (the anti-Russian remarks - TASS) has convinced even the greatest skeptics of who we are up against. They are Nazis."

Betrayal of Ukraine’s interests by the Kiev authorities

Ukrainian statehood would be thriving if it weren’t for all "these Western European politicians": "Of course, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen was given her own segment. How Ukrainian statehood could have survived without her? But I can tell you this: it would be thriving if it weren’t for all these Western European politicians."

The President of the European Commission has ties to financial groups: "The point is that Ursula von der Leyen has nothing to do with her homeland, Germany, or the European Union, but rather with those financial groups to which she is directly connected, groups that couldn’t care little about the fate of Europe, whether Western, Central, or Europe as a whole. All they care about is lining their own pockets."

Denmark and Germany’s anti-Russian actions

Denmark’s groundless allegations about Russia’s malicious activity in cyberspace "are utterly absurd."

Copenhagen is fueling Russophobia: "The true motive behind such propaganda campaigns is to whip up Russophobia and panic in society in order to justify the hostile anti-Russian policy, expand the powers and budgets of relevant agencies, and, naturally, justify exorbitant spending on the militarization of Denmark."

Ukrainian hackers use Danish infrastructure to stage cyberattacks against Russia and carry out fraudulent activities against Russians: "Copenhagen is providing practical assistance in the digital sphere to the Kiev regime and has helped turn Ukraine into a launching pad for cyberattacks."

Moscow intends to urge international sports organizations to take appropriate measures against Germany, which barred children from Russia from participating in the European Deaf Youth Games: "We will continue to uphold our country’s principled approach, oppose politicization and discrimination in sports, and ensure unimpeded access and full participation of athletes in international competitions."

Kiev’s policy against the Russian language

The Kiev regime is failing on the language front and, in desperation, is resorting to "blatant repression" against Ukrainians who use the Russian language: "They're resorting to real repression, you know, blatant repression, in the worst sense of the word."

"Despite the unprecedented pressure, Russian-speaking residents of Ukraine, and they constitute the majority, continue to speak and think in their native language, Russian, the language of their ancestors, their childhood, their parents, and their schools."

Japan’s militarization

Moscow "keeps a close eye" on Tokyo’s statements on nuclear weapons.

Russian calls on Japan "to remember the lessons of history it is trying so hard to forget, I mean the history of World War II, and get back on the peaceful path."

Japan should organize an open discussion on preserving the memory of who used nuclear weapons against the country: "You just quoted Japan’s defense minister, who stated that Japan needs an open discussion on nuclear weapons. I just want to clarify: doesn’t Japan need the same kind of an open discussion to preserve the memory of who and how used these nuclear weapons against Japanese citizens back then, 80 years ago?"

Russia sees the revival of the spirit of Japanese militarism in an environment when "no one threatens" its sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Japan poses potential threats to Russia’s security because of its intentions to add a nuclear component to the "already accelerating process."

Japan will inevitably be faced with "tough response from a range of regional countries" if it deploys nuclear weapons.