Top Trump officials reportedly used unsecured Gmail accounts and Signal to coordinate US military strikes, sparking national security outcry.

In a scandal that could dwarf Hillary Clinton’s infamous email saga, members of Donald Trump’s national security team—including his top adviser Mike Waltz—have reportedly used personal Gmail accounts to discuss sensitive military operations and national security matters, according to the Washington Post.

The revelation comes hot on the heels of the so-called “Signal-Gate”, when a journalist was accidentally added to a Signal group chat where senior White House officials—including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Vice President J.D. Vance—were actively discussing real-time plans for US airstrikes in Yemen.

Now it gets worse.

The Post alleges that a senior aide to Waltz engaged in “highly technical conversations” via Gmail, including information on weapons systems and battlefield movements—content that experts warn could be “potentially exploitable” if intercepted.

This isn’t a minor protocol breach. It’s a massive operational security risk, and it flies in the face of government regulations that strictly require secure, government-issued communication platforms for such matters.

Waltz, now under fire, claims that he “didn’t and wouldn’t send classified information” through these accounts—but evidence suggests otherwise. His team allegedly coordinated meetings and posted fragments of his classified schedule into Signal messages, raising serious concerns among cybersecurity experts and Democrats alike.

The NSC attempted to downplay the leak, stating that Waltz copied messages to his government email “to ensure compliance,” while refusing to acknowledge whether sensitive intel was shared outside secure systems.

But that’s not washing with critics.

“The hypocrisy is staggering,” one Hill staffer told the media. “They spent years attacking Hillary over emails—and now Trump’s war council is texting about drone strikes like it’s a football group chat.”

Despite growing pressure, Trump is standing by his embattled team. “I don’t fire people because of fake news and because of witch hunts,” he said defiantly to NBC News.

But make no mistake: this is not just about emails. It’s about the chain of command being compromised, unauthorized communication during active military campaigns, and the alarming normalization of recklessness in U.S. national security.

And in an era of rising global tensions and cyber espionage, that’s not just dangerous—it’s damning.

The African Union’s new peace mission in Somalia—AUSSOM—faces early collapse from financing woes, geopolitical rivalries, and internal Somali divisions. Without unified support, another war-torn era may be inevitable. 

As the African Union launches AUSSOM in Somalia, funding delays, fractured alliances, and donor fatigue threaten peace in a nation on the brink of renewed conflict.

The African Union’s latest intervention in Somalia, the African Union Support and Stabilization Mission in Somalia (AUSSOM), was meant to be a beacon of hope. Instead, it risks becoming the graveyard of yet another multilateral peace effort in a country that has bled through every alphabet soup of international missions: UNOSOM, AMISOM, ATMIS—and now AUSSOM.

This isn’t just about peacekeeping. AUSSOM is a geopolitical tug-of-war, with Somalia as the unwilling prize.

Despite being greenlit by the UN Security Council in January 2025, AUSSOM’s launch has already been kneecapped by financial chaos. The US—under its new Trump-era administration—has slammed the brakes on predictable UN financing, undermining Resolution 2719 and pushing for transitional mechanisms. Meanwhile, the EU, long the financial engine of African peace missions, is showing signs of donor fatigue, wary of throwing billions into what increasingly looks like a strategic black hole.

And while Western donors hesitate, regional powers like Turkey and Egypt are moving in aggressively—not to stabilize Somalia, but to carve it up into zones of influence. Each supports different militias and trains rival security units. Somalia, which should be focused on constitutional reform and integrating security forces, is now juggling a dozen foreign agendas and arming for the next round of internal warfare.

The Somali government’s own dysfunction only deepens the mess. From the federal feud with Puntland and Jubaland to the rising tensions with Somaliland, the country is imploding under the weight of conflicting visions and external meddling. Arrest warrants, firefights, and disputed elections define Somalia’s 2024-2025 political calendar. And into this minefield, AUSSOM has walked—underfunded, divided, and running out of time.

Without serious, coordinated multilateral support—especially financial—the AU mission could implode, leaving Somalia wide open to warlords, terrorists, and proxy powers. Gulf states and Turkey may hold the purse strings now, but the only thing they’re buying is fragmentation.

Qatar’s upcoming donor conference in April could be the last lifeline. But if the international community fails to unite around AUSSOM, Somalia may not survive another shattered peace mission. What comes next won’t be another transition—it will be a collapse.

The European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) is the EU’s foreign and security policy think tank.

As Sudan marks two years of brutal civil war, foreign powers fuel the bloodshed while peace talks stall and civilians suffer in silence.

Two years into Sudan’s devastating civil war, the death toll mounts, millions are displaced, and outside powers pour in weapons. With no peace in sight, this forgotten conflict risks exploding across the Horn of Africa. 

It began on April 15, 2023 — a power struggle between two armed men that has now devolved into one of the deadliest and most neglected wars on earth. But Sudan’s war is no longer about two generals. It’s about a nation on fire, a people abandoned, and a global community complicit in silence.

Khartoum, once the beating heart of Sudan, has become a battleground of smoke, starvation, and shattered lives. In just two years, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have turned the country into a graveyard. Over 60,000 are believed dead. Over 14 million have fled their homes. More than 30 million are in urgent need of aid. And yet, the world shrugs.

Sudan’s War Is Not a Crisis — It’s a Catastrophe Ignored

What makes Sudan’s descent so uniquely tragic is the cynical choreography behind it. This isn’t just a civil war — it’s a proxy war. Foreign governments have chosen their warlords and are feeding them weapons: Saudi Arabia backing SAF’s al-Burhan, the UAE reportedly arming the RSF’s Hemedti through Chad. Egypt, Libya, Iran, and Russia each have stakes in the chaos. Sudan isn’t just bleeding — it’s being bled for influence.

Even worse, Sudan has become the battlefield for Middle East rivalries playing out thousands of miles away. The power vacuum left by Omar al-Bashir’s fall in 2019 became fertile ground for regional kingmakers and shadow donors. Civilians now pay the price for alliances they never asked for and battles they never started.

Meanwhile, peace talks are little more than political theatre. Jeddah, Switzerland, Addis — all have hosted failed negotiations, stifled by foreign interests and lack of neutrality. The UN left in 2024. There is no peacekeeping force, no humanitarian corridors, no international protection. Calls for “green zones” have gone unanswered. Children are dying in bombed-out hospitals. Entire towns are wiped off the map. Aid workers are targeted. And the African Union stands paralyzed.

The Sudanese war isn’t just a human tragedy. It’s a geopolitical warning shot. As the RSF creeps westward and SAF targets airports in Chad, the risk of regional spillover grows dangerously real. Eritrea, Ethiopia, South Sudan — all sit on the edge of a firestorm.

Sudan is the canary in the coal mine of Africa’s security. And right now, the canary is dying.

The world may be watching Gaza, Ukraine, and the Red Sea — but in Sudan, a slow-motion genocide is unfolding in the dark. If nothing changes, it won’t be long before Sudan’s war becomes the Horn of Africa’s collapse.

The time to act was yesterday. The price of inaction will be catastrophic tomorrow.

Study Reveals Sudan’s Civil War Death Toll Far Higher Than Previously Reported

Sudan’s Man-Made Famine: A Humanitarian Crisis in a Conflict-Ravaged Nation

Sexual Violence Used as Weapon of War Throughout Conflict in Sudan

Humanitarian Crisis in Sudan Escalates Amid Looming Famine

Why El Fasher’s Battle Is Crucial to Sudan’s Future

Ethnic Cleansing Unleashed in Darfur: Sudanese Paramilitary Forces Accused of Horrific Atrocities

People eating ‘grass and peanut shells’ in Darfur, UN says, as hunger crisis engulfs war-ravaged Sudan

Sudan’s Military Repels Assault by Paramilitary Forces in el-Fasher

What’s Sudan like after 15 months of war, displacement, and inhumanity?

At Least 85 Killed in Sudan Village Attack by Paramilitary Forces

Sudan’s Al-Burhan Rejects Peace Talks, Promises to Fight for a Century

Human Rights Watch Accuses Sudan’s RSF of War Crimes in South Kordofan

Understanding the Urgency: Why the World Must Pay Closer Attention to Sudan

Sudan’s Power Shift: Army Captures Presidential Palace Amidst National Crisis

A Deep Dive into the Roots of Sudan’s Civil War and Its Impact on Regional Stability

US Sanctions Sudan Army Leader, Citing Atrocities

How Militia Groups Capture States and Ruin Countries: The Case of Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces

More Than 120 Killed in Paramilitary Rampage in Sudan

Nile Waters Divide Widens as Egypt and Sudan Reject New Basin Agreement

World Bank Cuts 2024 Growth Forecast for sub-Saharan Africa Over Sudan

South Sudan — The Specter of Civil War Looms Again

Sudan Punishes Kenya for Hosting RSF Group by Suspending all Imports

Sudan: U.S. Withdraws Nonessential Staff Amid Escalating Tensions

Sudanese Opposition Leader Detained in Kenya on Interpol Warrant

How a Key Ingredient in Coca-Cola, M&M’s is Smuggled From War-torn Sudan

Russia’s Red Sea Base in Sudan: A Geopolitical Time Bomb

Sudanese Warlords Likely To Be No-Shows at Geneva Peace Talks

Israeli Officials Warn of “Intolerable” Egyptian Violations as Cairo Expands Forces, Ports, and Airfields in Defiance of Camp David Accords.

Tensions rise as Egypt quietly escalates military presence in Sinai. Israeli security officials warn that Cairo’s moves violate the peace agreement—calling on the U.S. to intervene before it’s too late.

Egypt is expanding its military footprint in the Sinai Peninsula, pushing beyond the force limits established in the 1979 Camp David peace accords. And while tanks can retreat, trust doesn’t reverse as easily.

According to a high-level Israeli security source, Egypt has quietly deployed forces in excess of the permitted quota, constructed new port facilities, and extended runways at key airbases—turning Sinai into a potential launchpad rather than a demilitarized buffer.

The implications? Explosive.

For decades, the Israeli-Egyptian peace deal—backed by billions in U.S. military aid—stood as a rare pillar of stability in the region. Now, that fragile architecture is under strain. “Israel will not accept the situation and will not tolerate violations from Cairo,” the security source told reporters, bluntly.

Let’s be clear: this is not just about tanks or jets—it’s about intent. Cairo’s incremental militarization of Sinai looks more strategic than reactive. Is Egypt posturing for regional leverage? Or is it laying groundwork for a future showdown, possibly against Israel or to support proxy operations in Gaza?

What’s worse is Washington’s relative silence. As the broker and guarantor of the Camp David agreement, the U.S. is legally and diplomatically obligated to enforce the terms. Yet as Egypt redraws the lines in the sand, American influence appears paralyzed.

Back in February, Israel’s Ambassador to the U.S., Yechiel Leiter, called Cairo’s buildup “intolerable” and warned that Jerusalem would soon raise the issue “very firmly.” Now, with Egypt doubling down, the question is whether Israel will act—diplomatically or otherwise.

This isn’t a drill. When peace agreements become optional, war becomes inevitable. If the U.S. fails to hold Egypt accountable, Israel may be forced to consider options no one wants on the table.

Sinai is no longer quiet. And the peace is no longer guaranteed.

US Africa Command (AFRICOM) has executed targeted strikes against ISIS positions in Somalia’s Puntland region, southeast of Bosaso. Conducted in coordination with Somalia’s government, this operation highlights the escalating threat ISIS poses to American forces and broader regional stability.

The March 29 strikes, as detailed in AFRICOM’s official statement, targeted militant positions deemed threatening to US military personnel and interests in the strategically critical Horn of Africa. While the US provided limited operational details, the timing and location underscore significant geopolitical maneuvers unfolding in the region.

Notably, these airstrikes occur just one day after a controversial diplomatic offer from Somalia’s President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud to President Donald Trump was leaked. Mohamud proposed granting the US “exclusive operational control” over strategic assets—including Bosaso port and airbase and Somaliland’s Berbera port—in a desperate bid to bolster US involvement and counteract regional instability.

However, this diplomatic overture sparked immediate controversy, especially since these assets remain outside Mogadishu’s control. The recent US military actions, striking precisely near these contested sites, signify a robust American posture in response to ISIS threats while simultaneously underscoring the complex interplay between US strategic interests and Somalia’s fragile sovereignty.

Washington’s strikes and Somalia’s provocative diplomatic offers reveal the growing urgency in controlling critical Horn of Africa maritime routes against terrorist threats and international rivals.

Will intensified US military actions stabilize Somalia, or could they further inflame regional tensions, reshaping the strategic balance in this geopolitically sensitive corridor?

Hundreds of thousands of furious protesters poured into the streets of Istanbul on Saturday, escalating a wave of demonstrations triggered by the arrest and imprisonment of the city’s charismatic former mayor, Ekrem Imamoglu. The dramatic protests, among the largest seen in Turkiye in recent years, underline growing tensions over the state of democracy and judicial independence under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Imamoglu, considered Erdogan’s most formidable political rival, was arrested on corruption charges on March 23 after initial accusations of terrorism were dismissed by the courts. His imprisonment sparked immediate nationwide outrage, with protesters branding his arrest as politically motivated.

In a powerful message read aloud during the massive rally, Imamoglu declared defiantly: “I have no fear because the nation is united against the oppressor. They can jail me, they can put me on trial, but the people will crush their plots.”

The government continues to deny claims of political manipulation, insisting the judiciary remains independent. Erdogan has fiercely condemned the protests, branding demonstrators as threats to national stability. “Those who spread terror have nowhere to go,” Erdogan warned, calling the demonstrations a “dead end.”

Protesters passionately disagree, with many voicing fears about the erosion of freedoms and the future of democracy. One demonstrator told reporters, “I’m 25 and I’ve only ever known one government—I want change.” Another stated bluntly, “The judiciary is not independent.”

Ozgur Ozel, leader of the opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), criticized the aggressive police response that has seen nearly 1,900 people detained since Imamoglu’s arrest. “They’ve detained hundreds, arrested thousands—trying to intimidate and terrify us into silence.”

Despite severe crackdowns, the scale of these protests sends a strong message: many Turks are unwilling to accept the suppression of political rivals and the erosion of their democratic rights.

Turkiye stands at a crossroads, facing a crucial test of its democratic resilience.

Poland has made an explosive declaration, announcing a dramatic military buildup amid mounting fears of a Russian invasion. Prime Minister Donald Tusk’s ambitious plan aims to prepare every adult male in the country for potential conflict, transforming Polish society into a battle-ready state virtually overnight.

In a provocative move, Tusk has declared that Poland will more than double its military force to an astonishing half-million troops and rapidly train millions of reservists. “We must be ready,” he warned, highlighting Poland’s vulnerable geographic position, sandwiched between Russia and its close ally Belarus.

The urgency behind Poland’s militarization underscores its deep historical distrust of Moscow—a sentiment intensified by Russia’s brutal invasion of Ukraine. With Warsaw already spending 4.7% of its GDP—the highest defense budget within NATO—and rapidly acquiring advanced weaponry, the message is crystal clear: Poland is preparing to defend itself aggressively.

The ambitious training program seeks to rapidly equip civilians with combat skills, offering everything from short-term crash courses in basic military tactics and civil defense to comprehensive month-long training programs. Polish authorities plan to train at least 100,000 people by 2026, prioritizing younger, physically capable reservists.

But critics warn Poland’s preparation might still be insufficient, arguing that 100,000 reservists per year isn’t nearly enough. Retired military generals suggest bringing back compulsory conscription immediately, pointing to Russia’s substantial military build-up near NATO borders as evidence of imminent danger.

Simultaneously, Polish citizens’ reactions are fiercely divided. While many express readiness and eagerness to defend their homeland against perceived Russian aggression, fueled by visceral hatred towards Russian President Vladimir Putin, others question whether the country truly deserves their sacrifice, citing socio-economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and steep mortgage rates.

Meanwhile, Tusk’s administration is rolling out incentives to attract citizens into military training programs, offering practical civilian benefits such as cybersecurity and medical training, alongside financial incentives and tax breaks.

With Poland firmly stepping onto a war footing, waryatv.com readers must ask: Is this rapid militarization a prudent precaution or a dangerous provocation? Only time—and Russia’s next move—will tell.

UN Takes Over: James Swan Becomes De Facto President as Somalia’s Government Collapses Amid Turkish Expansion.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has officially appointed James Swan—the seasoned American diplomat—as the new, unofficial president of Somalia, assuming full control through the United Nations Interim Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNTMIS).

This dramatic appointment underscores a historic failure of Somalia’s government under President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, who now effectively becomes the “former failed president.” Despite billions of dollars poured into Somalia by the international community over the past three decades, Mogadishu’s regime remains mired in corruption, incompetence, and a growing threat from insurgents like Al-Shabab.

James Swan’s return isn’t merely diplomatic—it is a direct intervention, a bold UN-led takeover designed to rescue Somalia from spiraling into total chaos. Swan, experienced in navigating Africa’s toughest diplomatic challenges, steps into the role amidst rising panic from Western powers over Turkey’s aggressive expansion in Somalia.

Western nations, especially the United States and European Union, fear losing Somalia entirely to Turkish President Erdogan, whose government already controls Mogadishu’s critical infrastructure, including ports and airports. Erdogan’s recent pledge of increased military support to Somalia has triggered alarm bells in Washington and Brussels, signaling Turkey’s broader ambition to dominate strategic points in the Horn of Africa.

Swan’s appointment is thus a strategic countermove, positioning him as Somalia’s actual leader while the international community scrambles for a long-term solution. Officially labeled as a UN envoy, Swan’s influence now eclipses Somalia’s formal government, marking an unprecedented shift in governance.

Waryatv.com readers are witnessing history: the UN has effectively assumed governance of a failed state, with Swan at its helm as the West desperately counters Turkey’s geopolitical ambitions. The coming months will be pivotal: Can Swan stabilize Somalia, or is the region set to become a battleground between the West and Turkey?

Stay tuned—Somalia’s future, and perhaps the Horn of Africa’s stability, hangs by a thread as James Swan takes charge.