Tulsi Gabbard isn’t playing by Washington’s rules. Standing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Trump’s pick for Director of National Intelligence came out swinging—calling out intelligence failures, political weaponization, and what she sees as a corrupt system determined to protect itself at all costs. The hearing wasn’t just about confirming her—it was a battleground for a much larger war over who controls the truth in Washington.

Gabbard’s nomination has stunned both parties. A former Democrat who broke ranks, a combat veteran without deep intelligence credentials, and a fierce critic of U.S. foreign policy blunders, she’s everything the intelligence establishment despises. But Trump loves outsiders, and Gabbard fits his mold—a disruptor who isn’t afraid to call out the system’s “costly failures”.

Her testimony was a direct attack on the “weaponization of intelligence”, which she claims has been used to undermine Trump since 2016. She framed her mission clearly: restore credibility to an intelligence community that the American people no longer trust. The hearing quickly turned into a firestorm. Critics hammered her on past comments about Snowden, Ukraine, and her controversial meeting with Syria’s Bashar al-Assad. But Gabbard stood her ground.

She dodged calls to label Edward Snowden a traitor, arguing that his leaks exposed illegal government actions. When pressed on Ukraine, she reversed her 2022 claim that NATO provoked Russia’s invasion, now calling Putin an aggressor. As for Assad, she defended her trip, insisting it was about seeking the truth—an explanation that did little to appease her skeptics.

The intelligence world is watching with unease. Her past criticisms of surveillance programs, her skepticism of interventionist wars, and her willingness to challenge conventional narratives make her an unpredictable force. The Deep State accusations aren’t just coming from conspiracy theorists—Trump’s allies, including Elon Musk, are openly backing her, seeing her as a rare chance to dismantle the intelligence-industrial complex from within.

The Senate is divided. Some see Gabbard as a much-needed disruptor in a broken system. Others fear she is too much of a wildcard, too willing to question the U.S. security establishment in an era of global threats. But one thing is clear: if confirmed, Gabbard won’t be a quiet administrator. She’ll be a wrecking ball aimed straight at the intelligence community’s most protected secrets.

Iran’s once-formidable regional network is unraveling after a series of crushing setbacks. Assad’s fall has fractured Tehran’s grip on Syria, Hezbollah has been forced into retreat, and Iraq’s government is pushing back against Iranian influence. The Shiite proxy network that once surrounded Israel is now weakened, but Iran is far from giving up. Instead, it is adapting, rebuilding, and expanding into new territories.

Pro-Iranian militias in Iraq, once at the forefront of attacks on Israel, have gone silent. The fall of Syria’s dictator left Iranian forces and their local allies scrambling for safe ground.

Militias that once operated with impunity have lost their welcome, while Iraq’s leadership is pushing to integrate Iran-backed groups into its military, potentially diluting Tehran’s influence. The Islamic Republic is fighting to maintain its grip, knowing that losing Iraq would be a strategic disaster.

Iran’s problems extend beyond Iraq and Syria. Hezbollah, its most powerful proxy, has taken a major hit. Recent Israeli strikes and political shifts in Lebanon have left the group vulnerable.

Weapons smuggling routes through Syria have been disrupted, and Hezbollah leaders are scrambling to justify their costly involvement in the conflict. Despite its rhetoric, the group is unlikely to risk further escalation, knowing it could lead to an existential fight it is not prepared to win.

The Houthis remain active, continuing to threaten Israel-linked shipping in the Red Sea. Their growing arsenal of missiles and drones poses a persistent challenge. Iran’s support has emboldened them, but the Islamic Republic is facing pressure on multiple fronts, limiting its ability to sustain a prolonged conflict.

Despite these setbacks, Iran is already looking for new battlegrounds. Intelligence reports suggest that Tehran is expanding its reach into Africa, particularly in the Horn of Africa and Sudan, where it seeks to open new fronts against Israel.

Iran is also investing in destabilizing Jordan and increasing its presence in the West Bank, setting the stage for future conflicts.

There is a narrow window of opportunity for Israel and its allies to act decisively. Iran’s network is at its weakest point in years, but it is not defeated. Left unchecked, Tehran will rebuild, adapt, and find new ways to threaten regional stability.

The question is whether the West will seize this moment or allow Iran’s tentacles to regrow.

A new U.S. plan emphasizes Saudi-led regional influence and Palestinian relocation, while Israel’s role remains uncertain.

President Donald Trump’s evolving Middle East strategy centers on strengthening ties with Saudi Arabia and restructuring the region’s dynamics. At the heart of this approach is a plan to evacuate at least half of Gaza’s population, funded by Saudi Arabia and Gulf states, to facilitate reconstruction. Gaza residents are already preparing for potential relocations to Algeria and Tunisia, while Egypt and Jordan are under pressure to accept Palestinians.

The proposed overhaul includes modernizing Gaza with new ports, hospitals, schools, and commercial facilities, all managed by a multinational force and Palestinian Authority representatives. Surprisingly, Israel is expected to play only a peripheral role in this reconstruction effort. Trump’s team, led by envoy Steve Witkoff, views Saudi Arabia as the linchpin in this ambitious project.

Key to Trump’s Middle East agenda is Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who has proposed significant investments in the U.S., with Trump pushing for up to $1 trillion. Saudi normalization with Israel, once a cornerstone of U.S. strategy, has been deprioritized due to concerns over public backlash in the kingdom and the Crown Prince’s safety. Instead, discussions have shifted to economic and security cooperation, sidelining Israel’s involvement in broader regional plans.

Qatar also features prominently in Trump’s strategy. U.S. officials are urging Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani to increase American investments, but further normalization with Israel is contingent on contentious demands, including the establishment of a Palestinian state and the evacuation of settlers from the West Bank.

Revisiting the 2002 Saudi Peace Initiative, Trump appears to be exploring avenues for broader Arab-Israeli normalization, albeit with significant caveats. The initiative’s conditions, such as East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital and the return of refugees, remain sticking points that complicate its revival.

Trump’s strategy reflects a shift from Israel-centric policies to broader regional dynamics led by Saudi Arabia, with an eye on countering China’s influence and cementing the U.S.-Saudi partnership. This approach, however, raises questions about its feasibility, given the complexities of Palestinian relocation, regional tensions, and the potential sidelining of Israel in key negotiations.

Rubio’s no-show at EU foreign ministers’ meeting fuels fears of Trump administration sidelining Brussels in favor of bilateral diplomacy.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s absence at the EU foreign ministers’ meeting has amplified concerns in Brussels about a potential shift in Washington’s approach to Europe. Rubio declined an invitation extended by EU High Representative Kaja Kallas, leaving EU diplomats uneasy over what appears to be a deliberate strategy of sidelining Brussels.

Rubio’s no-show is more than a scheduling issue; it reflects a broader pattern in President Donald Trump’s administration. Since taking office, Trump has bypassed EU institutions, favoring bilateral engagements with member states. For instance, Trump’s direct dealings with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen over Greenland—reportedly laced with sanctions threats—highlight this approach.

EU officials worry that bypassing Brussels will erode the bloc’s unity, especially on critical issues like trade and defense. Trump’s team has already leveraged bilateral ties, such as prioritizing Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni over EU leaders at his inauguration. Meanwhile, Rubio’s outreach to select European capitals, while ignoring EU representatives, underscores the divide-and-conquer approach.

This strategy marks a stark departure from the Biden administration’s cooperative engagement with the EU. Under Biden, the U.S. and Brussels coordinated closely on sanctions, vaccine rollouts, and geopolitical challenges. Trump’s administration appears to prefer a fractured Europe, possibly to exert more influence over individual states.

While some EU member states, like Italy, remain optimistic about relations with Washington, top EU officials urge unity. Irish Foreign Minister Simon Harris emphasized the importance of maintaining strong transatlantic ties. Yet, with Trump’s administration favoring bilateralism, the EU faces the challenge of preserving cohesion while managing growing pressure from Washington.

As Rubio avoids Brussels, the EU must navigate an uncertain relationship with Washington, balancing optimism for dialogue with caution against fragmentation. Another opportunity for engagement looms on February 24, but whether Rubio prioritizes the EU remains to be seen.

Mukhtar Mohamed Shariff receives one of the harshest sentences in the largest COVID-19 pandemic fraud scheme in U.S. history.

Mukhtar Mohamed Shariff, a Somali-American leader and key player in the $250 million Feeding Our Future fraud, was sentenced to 17 and a half years in prison on Friday. The scheme, the largest pandemic-related fraud in U.S. history, siphoned federal funds intended to feed underprivileged children and redirected them toward luxury items, properties, and overseas investments.

The Fraudulent Scheme
Shariff, 34, served as CEO of Afrique Hospitality Group, a business used to funnel stolen funds from the Federal Child Nutrition Program. Prosecutors revealed that he submitted fraudulent claims for feeding up to 3,500 children daily at nonexistent sites, pocketing more than $1.3 million. Fake meal counts, invoices, and attendance records were submitted to claim reimbursements, while shell companies were used to launder the stolen money.

The fraud exploited emergency changes in the Federal Child Nutrition Program during the pandemic, which temporarily relaxed oversight to ensure children could access meals during school closures. Feeding Our Future, a nonprofit that sponsored sites like Shariff’s, facilitated the scheme in exchange for kickbacks.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Joe Thompson described the operation as “brazen,” stating, “Their scheme involved fake meals, fake kids, fake invoices—but very real money.”

Sentencing
Shariff was found guilty in June 2024 on charges of conspiracy to commit wire fraud, wire fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and money laundering. U.S. District Judge Nancy E. Brasel handed down a 210-month sentence, which includes three years of supervised release and $48 million in restitution.

“When the world was at its most vulnerable, you were not a helper; you were a thief,” Judge Brasel said during the sentencing. She criticized Shariff’s “staggering lack of respect for the law” and cited his obstruction of justice, which included deleting communications on the Signal app and recording witness testimony during the trial.

Shariff apologized in court, tearfully acknowledging the damage his actions had done to his community, but his words did little to sway the judge. Supporters in the packed courtroom reacted emotionally, with one individual shouting, “No justice,” before being silenced.

Community Impact
The fraud case has tarnished public trust and damaged the reputation of Minnesota’s Somali-American community. Acting U.S. Attorney Lisa Kirkpatrick called the scheme a “brazen theft” of taxpayer funds intended to feed children, adding that it exploited both public generosity and pandemic-related vulnerabilities.

Community leaders worry that the scandal will exacerbate negative stereotypes about Somali-Americans. The case involves a total of 70 defendants, with investigations revealing systemic abuse of the Federal Child Nutrition Program.

Conclusion
Shariff’s sentencing sends a strong message about accountability in pandemic-era fraud cases. However, it also highlights broader concerns about the misuse of public funds and the reputational damage inflicted on vulnerable communities. As federal authorities continue to prosecute others involved in the scheme, the case serves as a cautionary tale of greed exploiting a global crisis.

Despite significant losses, Hamas leveraged tunnels, civilian shields, and strategic regrouping to survive Israel’s military campaign.

The year-long Israel-Hamas war, ignited by the October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, has demonstrated Hamas’s resilience despite facing the most extensive Israeli military campaign in decades. Israel’s intense ground operations, airstrikes, and precision targeting dealt significant blows to Hamas’s leadership and infrastructure, but the group adapted its strategy, regrouped, and exploited the complex urban and civilian landscape of Gaza to survive.

The Anatomy of Survival

From the outset, Hamas relied heavily on its intricate tunnel network and urban warfare tactics. The group initially sent thousands of fighters into Israel, suffering heavy casualties but leaving behind enough operatives to fortify its positions in Gaza. Hamas utilized Gaza’s dense population centers, moving command structures into schools and hospitals, effectively embedding itself within civilian infrastructure to complicate Israeli operations.

Israel’s delay in launching a ground campaign after October 7 allowed Hamas time to prepare, recover, and adapt. While Israeli forces inflicted heavy losses during their northern Gaza campaign, they did not fully clear key neighborhoods such as Gaza City, Jabalya, or Beit Hanun. This enabled Hamas to relocate, preserve its leadership, and maintain control over significant portions of Gaza.

Strategic Missteps and Regrouping

Israel’s focus on southern Gaza in early 2024 created opportunities for Hamas to regroup in the north. The group capitalized on temporary ceasefires and redeployments of Israeli forces to rebuild its command structure, recruit new fighters, and replenish its ranks. Despite losing thousands of fighters and key leaders, Hamas drew from Gaza’s young population, many of whom have grown up under its rule and see no alternative amidst ongoing conflict and destruction.

Hamas’s survival also relied on its ability to exploit humanitarian aid and project influence through control of key areas like the Al-Mawasi humanitarian zone. By the end of 2024, even as Israel’s renewed northern offensive intensified, Hamas demonstrated its capacity to regroup and mount resistance, particularly in strongholds like Jabalya.

Lessons and Implications

Hamas’s resilience underscores the challenges Israel faces in eradicating the group. Despite the IDF’s advanced military capabilities and successful elimination of key Hamas leaders, the group’s decentralized structure and deep integration within Gaza’s civilian population provide it with a strategic edge. Each time Hamas suffers losses, it rebuilds, exploiting both the misery of Gaza’s population and the lack of viable alternatives.

For Israel, the war has highlighted the difficulty of achieving a decisive military victory in such a complex and densely populated theater. As Hamas survives and adapts, the broader question remains: how can lasting peace be achieved in a region where successive generations have grown up knowing only conflict?

Returning to the White House, Trump’s second term sparks contentious debates on immigration, trade, and social policy.

Donald Trump, the polarizing political figure and former 45th president, is set to return to the White House as the 47th president of the United States. His inauguration comes four years after his defeat in the 2020 election, marking him as the second U.S. president to serve nonconsecutive terms since Grover Cleveland in the 1890s. This event, historically significant in its own right, carries with it a storm of controversy and anticipation surrounding Trump’s ambitious, and often divisive, policy agenda.

Trump’s return is overshadowed by his legal and political baggage. As the first U.S. president with a felony conviction—stemming from falsified business records tied to hush money payments—Trump has defied precedent. His victory in the 2024 election, which ousted President Joe Biden after a single term, underscores his ability to rally a fervent voter base despite controversies. Critics and supporters alike are bracing for sweeping executive actions that could upend domestic and international policy landscapes.

Immigration dominates Trump’s early agenda. He has vowed to deport millions of undocumented migrants, starting with those convicted of crimes, and plans to reinstate policies that force asylum seekers to remain in Mexico. These moves are expected to provoke legal challenges, delaying their implementation and igniting fierce public debate. Trump’s plan to end birthright citizenship—a constitutional guarantee—has also drawn widespread skepticism regarding its feasibility.

In addition to immigration, Trump aims to escalate trade tensions with key partners, promising tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China. These measures risk destabilizing economic relations but appeal to his base as a push for economic nationalism. Trump has also signaled an abrupt shift in U.S. foreign policy, vowing to mediate an end to Russia’s war in Ukraine within his first 100 days. However, his aides have tempered these claims, suggesting a truce is more realistic than a resolution.

Social issues remain a cornerstone of Trump’s platform, with sharp rhetoric against transgender rights and gender-affirming care. He has pledged to restrict transgender women from participating in women’s sports and to overturn policies supporting gender-affirming medical treatments. These stances have intensified the cultural divide in America, galvanizing both conservative and progressive factions.

Trump’s return to power signals a tumultuous chapter in American politics. His policies, unyielding and controversial, will undoubtedly face resistance from courts, Congress, and civil society. As Trump’s second term begins, the nation stands at a crossroads, with the implications of his presidency likely to shape the country for years to come.

Violence erupts in South Sudan after alleged ethnic killings in Sudan spark revenge attacks, leaving three dead and businesses destroyed.

South Sudan is reeling from a wave of violent retaliation against Sudanese nationals, spurred by viral footage of alleged ethnic killings in Sudan’s Gezira State. The escalating situation highlights the fragility of South Sudan’s internal stability and the deep-seated animosities between the two nations since their separation in 2011.

The Trigger: Viral Footage and Ethnic Tensions

The violence erupted following the circulation of harrowing footage reportedly showing Sudanese soldiers killing South Sudanese civilians in Wad Madani, Gezira State. These acts, described by South Sudanese President Salva Kiir as “heinous” and “unacceptable,” reignited longstanding grievances over racial and ethnic discrimination in Sudan.

In Sudan, darker-skinned ethnic groups, including those of South Sudanese origin, have long faced systemic racism and violent persecution by lighter-skinned Arab fighters. This animosity has reached a boiling point, with the current conflict exacerbating tensions. Rights groups confirm at least 13 ethnic South Sudanese, including children, were killed in the Wad Madani incident, fueling outrage in South Sudan.

Revenge Attacks and Economic Fallout

The viral footage triggered spontaneous revenge attacks on Sudanese nationals and their businesses across South Sudan. In Juba, Aweil, and Wau, Sudanese-owned shops and homes were set on fire or looted. Bread prices surged by 17% in Juba as fear prompted shopkeepers to shutter their businesses, including the bustling Konyo Konyo market.

The violence claimed three lives and injured seven, with South Sudanese security forces firing live rounds into the air to disperse rioters. A dusk-to-dawn curfew has been imposed nationwide, and dozens of Sudanese nationals have been placed under police protection.

The chaos illustrates how deeply intertwined the two nations remain, not just geographically but economically. Sudanese traders have become an essential part of South Sudan’s economy, making their targeting a double-edged sword that exacerbates both humanitarian and economic crises.

Underlying Humanitarian Crisis

The revenge attacks come as Sudan faces what the UN has labeled the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis.” The ongoing conflict between Sudan’s rival military factions has displaced millions, with many Sudanese fleeing to South Sudan in search of safety. However, this influx has strained South Sudan’s fragile economy and rekindled old resentments.

South Sudan, already grappling with its own post-independence instability, finds itself at a crossroads. The government’s inability to swiftly quell retaliatory violence exposes a weak security apparatus and raises questions about its capacity to manage inflamed ethnic tensions.

President Salva Kiir’s Response

President Kiir has called for calm, urging South Sudanese to avoid taking the law into their own hands. He demanded that Sudan investigate the Wad Madani killings and protect South Sudanese citizens within its borders. However, his calls for restraint may ring hollow for many citizens, who see the violence as long-overdue justice for systemic discrimination and violence in Sudan.

While Kiir’s administration has implemented a curfew and deployed police to protect Sudanese nationals, the measures appear reactive and insufficient to address the deeper issues at play.

Regional and International Implications

The violence risks destabilizing relations between South Sudan and Sudan at a time when cooperation is critical to managing shared border conflicts and the humanitarian crisis. If unchecked, the violence could further isolate South Sudan diplomatically, complicating its ability to attract international support.

Moreover, the viral footage and subsequent attacks underscore the role of social media in accelerating and amplifying ethnic tensions. As South Sudan grapples with this crisis, managing misinformation and online incitement will be critical to preventing further violence.

A Nation on Edge

The revenge attacks in South Sudan illustrate the volatile interplay of ethnic grievances, economic dependency, and weak governance. While curfews and police interventions may temporarily contain the violence, they do little to address the underlying resentments that continue to fester.

President Kiir’s government faces a delicate balancing act: protecting Sudanese nationals while addressing the legitimate anger of its citizens over systemic discrimination and violence. Without meaningful efforts to foster reconciliation and address economic strains, South Sudan risks plunging further into instability, with devastating consequences for both nations.