In response to widespread protests and escalating public discontent, Kenyan President William Ruto announced significant cuts to the federal budget and other governmental reforms. The move is seen as a major concession following violent demonstrations sparked by a controversial tax bill.

The protests, which have reportedly resulted in dozens of deaths, forced Ruto to retract a finance bill aimed at raising $2.7 billion through increased taxes to pay off national debt. Instead, he proposed cutting $1.39 billion from the budget and covering the shortfall through borrowing. This compromise includes eliminating 47 redundant state corporations, halving the number of government advisors, and suspending the appointment of chief administrative secretaries.

Ruto also announced the immediate retirement of public servants aged 60 and above, a 12-month suspension on government vehicle purchases (excluding security agencies), and a halt to nonessential travel for state officials. Furthermore, operations of the offices of the first lady, the spouse of the deputy president, and the prime cabinet secretary will no longer be funded by government resources.

These measures address several demands made by protesters. Additionally, Ruto has commissioned an independent task force to conduct a comprehensive, forensic audit of Kenya’s public debt. This audit aims to provide transparency on the extent of the debt and how public funds have been utilized, as well as to offer recommendations for sustainable debt management.

The protests have resulted in nearly 40 deaths and 360 injuries nationwide, according to Kenya’s National Commission on Human Rights.

Strengthening alliances with Somalia amidst regional instability and global concerns

The Horn of Africa is witnessing a significant geopolitical shift as Iran extends its influence beyond traditional proxies like the Houthi rebels, reaching into states with fragile governance structures such as Somalia. This evolving relationship was exemplified in October 2023, when Iraq’s President Judicial Council leader Faiq Zidan, recognized as an Iranian asset, met with Somalia’s Justice Minister. The meeting, which involved the brother of Somalia’s National Security Advisor, aimed to forge direct connections between Iran and Somalia.

Further developments in May 2024 saw Iraq’s National Security Advisor Qasim Alaraji consolidating ties with Houthi leaders in Yemen. A month later, Alaraji invited Somalia’s National Security Advisor Hussein Moalim to discuss concerns about Houthi support for Al-Shabaab and potential financial aid for Somalia’s National Security Agency (NISA).

The intricate web of alliances continued to unfold with Somalia’s Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre’s covert meeting with leaders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) during a visit to Iraq. Hamza’s government, in dire need of financial support, was offered $50 million by Iran to restore diplomatic relations. This deal included assurances from Iran to curb the Houthis’ weapon supplies to Al-Shabaab in exchange for Iranian military support and training for Somalia’s army.

In addition to the economic aid, the IRGC pledged budget support for NISA, which had recently failed to secure financial assistance from the UAE. This new alliance poses challenges for Somalia’s coordination with Western and Gulf allies, many of whom are wary of Iran’s increasing involvement.

Qatar appears to be indirectly supporting this move, while Turkey remains cautious about Iran’s direct role in Somalia’s security. The Houthis, who have historically benefitted from their relationship with Al-Shabaab, might resist severing ties unless Somalia provides logistical support to their operations.

The growing entanglement of Iran in the Horn of Africa, specifically through its relationship with Somalia, signals a strategic shift that could have far-reaching implications for regional stability and international relations. As these alliances deepen, the geopolitical landscape of the Horn of Africa is set to become even more complex and volatile.

Ethiopian PM Abiy Ahmed advocates for direct dialogue with Somalia over Red Sea access, emphasizing regional cooperation and efficient use of resources.

Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed of Ethiopia addressed lawmakers today, emphasizing the need for direct dialogue with Somalia to resolve disputes concerning Ethiopia’s pursuit of direct access to the Red Sea. Abiy criticized the Somali government for seeking international support to accuse Ethiopia instead of engaging in straightforward discussions, which he believes could be settled with a brief meeting in Addis Ababa.

“My advice is don’t waste money; we spend money when we go around countries,” Abiy said, suggesting that resources would be better spent on local development projects such as building schools or infrastructure in Mogadishu. He reiterated that Ethiopia has no conflicts with the Somali government and expressed readiness for open discussions.

Abiy highlighted Ethiopia’s neighbor-centered and friendly foreign policy, noting the sacrifices Ethiopia has made for peace in Somalia. He affirmed Ethiopia’s respect for Somalia’s unity and dismissed accusations that Ethiopia seeks to dismantle Somalia, citing Ethiopia’s historical support and empowerment of the Somali nation.

Addressing a recent Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed with Somaliland, Abiy clarified that the agreement was pursued after receiving no responses from neighboring countries. He emphasized that Ethiopia’s request for sea access is a legitimate and peaceful question, intended to be resolved through dialogue and mutual benefit.

Abiy also pointed out that despite having better resources, Ethiopia is landlocked, while neighboring countries with sea access do not produce as much. He stressed the potential for regional cooperation, trade, and shared prosperity. “It is good to cooperate and march together, both for the region and the future of our children,” Abiy stated.

Reiterating Ethiopia’s commitment to peace, Abiy addressed the people of Eritrea, Djibouti, Kenya, Sudan, and Somalia, underscoring Ethiopia’s role as a protector rather than a destructive force. He emphasized the national interest in securing sea access and called for a win-win approach that avoids conflict and maximizes regional cooperation.

The Prime Minister also referenced ongoing discussions facilitated by Türkiye, with foreign ministers of Ethiopia and Somalia holding talks in Ankara to address their differences. This dialogue reflects Ethiopia’s willingness to explore practical agreements and secure port access through mutual understanding and negotiation.

In January, the ruling Prosperity Party (PP) resolved to bring the MoU to a practical agreement, while seeking additional port access options with neighboring countries. This resolution underscores Ethiopia’s strategic and diplomatic efforts to address its landlocked status and enhance regional connectivity.

Abiy concluded by reaffirming Ethiopia’s readiness for collaboration and peaceful resolution of disputes, advocating for direct engagement over international accusations to achieve common regional benefits.

Ethics Complaint Filed Against Ilhan Omar Over Ex-Somali PM’s Campaign Involvement

A conservative watchdog group, the American Accountability Foundation (AAF), has filed an ethics complaint against Rep. Ilhan Omar, alleging that her participation in an event featuring former Somali Prime Minister Hassan Ali Khaire violated the Federal Elections Campaign Act. The complaint claims that Khaire’s involvement in stumping for Omar and encouraging voter turnout may constitute illegal campaign activity by a foreign national.

Khaire, who served as Somalia’s Prime Minister from 2017 to 2020, attended the event to support Omar’s re-election campaign. According to the AAF, this involvement went beyond permissible volunteer activities and involved prohibited decision-making. The foundation is urging the Office of Congressional Ethics to investigate the incident, citing concerns that Omar knowingly accepted Khaire’s services in her campaign.

The AAF’s complaint references a translation of Khaire’s remarks during the event, where he urged attendees to vote for Omar and mobilize their community in her support. This call to action, the foundation argues, is a form of campaign service that foreign nationals are prohibited from providing under U.S. election laws.

In response, Omar’s campaign counsel, David Mitrani, dismissed the complaint as a smear attempt by far-right groups. Mitrani asserted that Omar’s campaign had no involvement in coordinating Khaire’s appearance or remarks, and therefore, no laws were violated.

Additionally, the AAF alleged that Khaire’s travel and lodging expenses might have been sponsored by a nonprofit organization, which could further violate campaign finance laws. They cited a report suggesting that the nonprofit group Ka Joog might have facilitated Khaire’s trip to the U.S. However, this claim has not been confirmed, and The Post was unable to reach Khaire or Ka Joog for comment.

This complaint comes as Omar faces a challenging primary race against former Minneapolis City Council member Don Samuels. The primary is set against a backdrop of broader tensions within the Democratic Party, particularly over the Israel-Hamas conflict, where Omar has been a vocal critic of Israel’s actions, occasionally drawing accusations of antisemitism.

Born in Mogadishu, Somalia, and granted asylum in the U.S. as a teenager, Omar represents a district with a significant Somali population. She is one of the first two female Muslim-Americans elected to the U.S. House of Representatives and has been a prominent member of the progressive “Squad” in Congress.

The Office of Congressional Ethics, which oversees conduct in the House, will review the complaint and determine if it warrants a referral to the House Ethics Committee for further investigation.

Leaders of China and Russia Strengthen Ties Amid Growing Influence in Central Asia

In a bid to counter what they see as U.S.-led dominance on the global stage, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin held pivotal talks at a security summit in Kazakhstan. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit, which aims to address Eurasian security concerns, saw both leaders reaffirming their partnership and discussing strategies to enhance their influence in the region.

Established in 2001 by China and Russia, the SCO serves as a forum for these two powerhouses to project their influence across Eurasia. Kremlin aide Yury Ushakov highlighted the significance of this gathering, emphasizing that the SCO, along with BRICS, represents “the main pillars of the new world order,” advocating for genuine multilateralism in global affairs.

The BRICS coalition, which includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, recently extended invitations to six more countries: Argentina, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Mao Ning, underscored the importance of the SCO summit, stating it would “build more consensus among all parties and promote security, stability, and development of member countries.”

This summit also provided Kazakhstan and other Central Asian nations an opportunity to bolster their ties with these influential neighbors. Notably, the timing of this summit is crucial as China and Russia continue to deepen their relationship. In 2022, China declared a “no limits” partnership with Russia, and since then, Beijing has portrayed itself as a neutral actor in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine.

Xi and Putin last met in May when Putin visited Beijing. Since then, China has extended diplomatic support to Russia and emerged as a primary market for Russian oil and gas. Despite their burgeoning ties, Central Asia remains a contested space for both countries. For Russia, the region comprises five former Soviet republics with deep-rooted cultural and economic ties. For China, Central Asia is crucial for its Belt and Road initiative, raising concerns over potential threats to Russia’s influence.

Analysts suggest that the summit’s discussions may have underlying implications, as both nations need to balance their competing interests in Central Asia while pursuing closer cooperation.

Eoin Micheál McNamara, a research fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs, noted that the SCO allows China and Russia to engage in collective dialogue with Central Asian states, helping manage mutual suspicions about each other’s intentions in the region.

“The SCO is therefore useful to keep the China-Russia alliance together as a force in wider great power politics,” McNamara explained. Carol Saivetz, a senior fellow at MIT’s Security Studies Program, anticipated that participants would discuss security in abstract terms and focus on economic projects. Historically, there was an implicit understanding that China would handle economic issues while Russia acted as the region’s security guarantor. However, with the ongoing war in Ukraine, China might exploit the instability to expand its influence.

Saivetz highlighted Xi’s early arrival to meet with Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev and his subsequent visit to Tajikistan’s capital, Dushanbe, as indicators that China is not limiting its options to multilateral formats or Moscow. Despite the war in Ukraine overshadowing the summit, public discussion on the topic is unlikely due to differing opinions among Central Asian states.

Tina Dolbaia, a research associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, echoed this sentiment, suggesting that discussions about the Ukraine war would probably occur behind closed doors. She emphasized the relevance of the Ukraine conflict to the power struggle between China and Russia in Central Asia. “Putin is currently willing to underestimate and overlook China’s rising role in Russia’s ‘backyard’ due to the importance of countering the West in Ukraine and establishing a multi-polar world order,” Dolbaia explained.

Despite the significant influence wielded by China and Russia in the region, Central Asia’s loyalties are not firmly aligned with either. Dolbaia noted that Central Asian countries understand the need to navigate their relationships with both powers carefully. As the SCO summit concludes, the delicate balance of power in Central Asia remains a focal point for both Beijing and Moscow, highlighting the intricate dynamics of their partnership amid growing global tensions.

After Interviewing Putin, Carlson Pursues Conversation with Ukraine’s President

In a surprising move, conservative pundit Tucker Carlson hinted on Wednesday at a potential interview with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. This revelation comes on the heels of Carlson’s February trip to Moscow, where he conducted a notable interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin, marking him as the first Western journalist to do so since the conflict began in February 2022.

“Looks like we’ve got the Zelensky interview. We’ve been trying for two years, and with particular intensity after interviewing Putin in February,” Carlson announced on X, formerly known as Twitter. This potential sit-down with Zelensky follows Carlson’s departure from Fox News last year, where he was known for his controversial takes, including his criticism of Zelensky and the Ukraine war, views that had garnered approval from Kremlin propagandists.

Carlson, who hosted “Tucker Carlson Tonight” from 2016 to 2023 before his sudden firing last April with no official explanation, stated his goal is to “bring Americans much-needed information about the conflict that’s completely reshaping their country’s position in the world.” The announcement of the possible interview with Zelensky has yet to elicit a response from Ukraine, and Newsweek has reached out to Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry and the Tucker Carlson Network for comment.

Following Carlson’s two-hour interview with Putin, the Russian president expressed his surprise over the lack of aggressive questioning. “To be honest, I thought that he would behave aggressively and ask so-called sharp questions. I was not just prepared for this, I wanted it, because it would give me the opportunity to respond in the same way,” Putin remarked to Russian journalist Pavel Aleksandrovich Zarubin on state television channel Russia-1. He added that he did not “feel full satisfaction from this interview.” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov later stated that Putin agreed to the interview because Carlson’s perspective “differs” from other Western media.

Carlson’s announcement about the Zelensky interview received mixed reactions on social media. Ukrainian journalist Illia Ponomarenko endorsed the idea, saying on X, “I think Zelensky sitting down for an interview with Tucker is a good idea because there is no question Ukraine can’t give a fair answer to.” Ponomarenko further distinguished Zelensky’s candidacy for the interview by noting that, unlike Putin, Zelensky “has no need to crack freakishly weird mumbo-jumbo pseudo-historical freak Viking era theories to explain why Ukraine fights for survival in the largest European war of aggression since Hitler and why it is so important to help Ukraine win.”

However, skepticism abounds, with many voicing concerns about potential manipulation of the interview’s content. “Zelensky needs someone to video the whole interview because you can bet it will be a trap… they’ll change it and use for propaganda purposes,” one X user warned. Another echoed this sentiment, writing, “I’m more concerned about how they will doctor his answers in the final edit.”

Despite the buzz, Carlson has not provided a specific timeline for when this interview might occur, leaving followers in suspense with a tantalizing “Coming soon we hope.”

As the world watches and waits, Carlson’s potential interview with Zelensky promises to be another controversial chapter in the ongoing narrative of the Ukraine conflict. Whether it will bring new insights or further polarize opinions remains to be seen, but one thing is clear: the anticipation is building, and the stakes are high.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has unveiled a new Cabinet for his government of national unity. This comes after weeks of intense political deal-making, as Ramaphosa strives to bridge the gap between a fractured electorate and a parliament now teeming with a colorful mix of characters — from a former armed robber to a white Afrikaner nationalist.

The need for this unprecedented coalition arose after the African National Congress (ANC), which has ruled South Africa since the end of apartheid, suffered a stunning blow in the May elections, losing its majority. Ramaphosa’s solution was to form an inclusive government, bringing together 10 opposition parties, each with its own agenda and history of animosity towards the others.

To appease these factions, Ramaphosa has created a somewhat unwieldy Cabinet, now bloated to 32 ministers and 43 deputy ministers. “The establishment of the government of national unity in its current form is unprecedented in the history of our democracy,” Ramaphosa declared, emphasizing the necessity of this approach to advance national interests and reflect the election results.

Despite the noble rhetoric, this government must confront serious internal contradictions. The ANC secured 20 of the 32 Cabinet posts, while the Democratic Alliance (DA), long a thorn in the ANC’s side, took six. The remaining posts went to smaller parties, resulting in a diverse yet potentially discordant mix.

John Steenhuisen, DA leader and the new agriculture minister, acknowledged the challenges ahead. “The road ahead will be difficult,” he conceded, yet he pledged to work towards making this coalition successful. “It is now up to all of us — including the voters who created this multi-party government — to ensure that it delivers on its promise.”

This coalition is born from necessity. The ANC’s plummeting popularity, down to 40% of the vote, reflects widespread dissatisfaction with economic mismanagement, soaring unemployment, and rampant corruption. Conversely, the DA, which garnered 22% of the vote, is tasked with revitalizing key economic sectors, including agriculture and public works and infrastructure.

However, not everyone is on board with this unity government. The uMkhonto weSizwe party, led by the corruption-tainted former President Jacob Zuma, and the radical Marxist Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), both refused to join, citing objections to the DA’s involvement. These parties, now relegated to the opposition benches, will undoubtedly continue to challenge the coalition’s initiatives.

Other smaller parties, however, have joined the government, bringing their own controversies. The anti-immigrant Patriotic Alliance, led by ex-gangster Gayton McKenzie, has seen its leader appointed as minister for sports, arts, and culture. Meanwhile, the right-wing, white nationalist Freedom Front Plus has its leader, Pieter Groenewald, taking the helm at correctional services.

The irony of the DA, a party that has long criticized the ANC for bloated governance and cronyism, now participating in a government with 75 ministers and deputies, is not lost on observers. David Everatt, a politics professor at the University of the Witwatersrand, highlighted this paradox, noting that the DA now finds itself in the very position it once lambasted.

This government of national unity faces a monumental task. It must not only navigate its own internal contradictions but also address the critical issues that led to the ANC’s electoral decline. High unemployment, economic instability, and systemic corruption are just the tip of the iceberg.

Moreover, Ramaphosa must balance the demands of his coalition partners while delivering tangible results to a skeptical and impatient public. The success or failure of this bold political experiment will shape South Africa’s future and possibly redefine its political landscape.

As South Africa watches this diverse coalition attempt to govern, one can’t help but wonder: Can such a disparate group set aside their differences for the common good? Or will the internal strife prove too great, leading to another chapter of political turmoil in a country already weary from decades of struggle?

This bloated Cabinet may be South Africa’s best hope for stability and progress, or it could be a recipe for disaster. Either way, it’s a political gamble with high stakes for all involved.

How Moscow’s Support for Yemen’s Rebels and Attacks on Submarine Cables Could Destabilize the Red Sea and Somaliland

In a provocative and highly controversial move, Russia’s potential provision of weapons to the Houthi rebels in Yemen threatens to escalate tensions in the already volatile Red Sea region. This development, coupled with the looming threat to submarine internet cables critical to global communications, could have far-reaching consequences for the Gulf of Aden, Somaliland, and the broader international community.

Russian state media figure Vladimir Solovyov recently suggested that Moscow should arm the Houthis to retaliate against Western support for Ukraine. This statement comes amid ongoing clashes between Iran-aligned Houthi rebels and Western forces in the Red Sea. The Houthis have been targeting ships, including a recent missile attack on the British-registered Rubymar vessel, escalating the conflict in a crucial maritime corridor.

If Russia follows through on Solovyov’s suggestion, it could transform the balance of power in the Red Sea. The Houthis, already emboldened by Iranian support, would gain access to more sophisticated weaponry, potentially including semi-submersible unmanned boats and advanced firearms. This could significantly increase the threat to international shipping and military assets in the region, leading to a broader conflict involving the Gulf states and their allies.

Adding another layer of complexity is the potential disruption of submarine cables, which are the backbone of global internet connectivity. These cables, spanning over 1.4 million kilometers of ocean floor, carry a significant portion of the world’s internet traffic. The Red Sea alone hosts around 16 cable systems that connect Europe to Asia, transporting data for up to 2.3 billion people.

The Houthi rebels have been accused of planning attacks on these crucial communication links. An incident in February 2024 saw the interruption of four internet cables in the Red Sea, impacting 25% of internet traffic between Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. While the Houthis denied involvement, suspicions remain high, given their history of targeting infrastructure in the region.

The deliberate targeting of submarine cables by the Houthis, potentially with Russian backing, could disrupt global communications, affecting everything from financial transactions to military operations. Such an attack would be a clear act of cyber warfare, with profound implications for international security and economic stability.

For Somaliland, the geopolitical stakes are particularly high. The unrecognized state has been seeking greater international legitimacy and support, notably offering the strategic port of Berbera as a military base to the United States. However, U.S. policy has been ambivalent, failing to capitalize on this opportunity while opposing Somaliland’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Ethiopia.

As Russia and China expand their influence in the region, Somaliland’s strategic importance grows. If the U.S. continues to neglect Somaliland, it risks losing a critical ally in the Red Sea to its rivals. Recognizing Somaliland and strengthening military and economic ties could counterbalance the influence of Russia and China, ensuring that the Red Sea remains a stable and secure maritime corridor.

The Gulf states, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE, also have a vested interest in the stability of the Red Sea. The disruption of submarine cables and the arming of the Houthis could threaten their economic and security interests, given their reliance on secure maritime routes for oil exports and other trade. Increased Houthi capabilities could lead to more frequent and severe attacks on shipping, potentially closing critical chokepoints like the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

The current U.S. administration faces a critical decision point. The neglect of Somaliland and the failure to adequately address the threats posed by Russian and Iranian activities in the Red Sea could have dire consequences. It is imperative for the U.S. and its allies to reassess their strategies in the region, taking decisive steps to support Somaliland’s quest for recognition and stability.

Strengthening military and intelligence cooperation with Somaliland could serve as a deterrent to Russian and Iranian ambitions. Additionally, enhancing the protection of submarine cables through international collaboration and advanced surveillance technologies is crucial to safeguarding global internet infrastructure.

The convergence of Russian support for the Houthis and the threat to submarine cables represents a significant and growing challenge for the international community. The potential for increased conflict in the Red Sea, coupled with the risk of major disruptions to global communications, demands urgent and coordinated action from Western governments.

Ignoring these threats could lead to a destabilized region, with far-reaching impacts on global security and economic stability. It is time for the West to recognize the strategic importance of Somaliland and the need for robust responses to the emerging threats in the Red Sea. Only through proactive and concerted efforts can the balance of power be maintained and the interests of the international community safeguarded.