Security forces in Puntland have captured Abdirahman Shirwac Aw-Saciid, the leader of the group’s assassination squad and a key operative in its extortion network. The arrest comes just two days after U.S. airstrikes targeted senior ISIS leadership, intensifying pressure on the group amid a growing Puntland offensive against both ISIS and Al-Shabaab.

A Crumbling Jihadist Network

Once seen as a fringe element compared to Al-Shabaab, ISIS-Somalia has rapidly expanded in recent years, fueled by foreign fighters and an enhanced financial system. The group has increasingly used sophisticated tactics, including booby-trapped vehicles, signaling an evolution in their operational capabilities.

Shirwac, also known as “Laahoor”, was captured in the Cal Miskaad mountains, a key hideout in Puntland’s Bari region, where the group has been entrenched. His role in assassination operations and extortion made him one of the most dangerous figures within Somalia’s ISIS faction.

Puntland’s Offensive and U.S. Military Support

The Puntland state government launched a full-scale offensive in December, targeting both ISIS and its longtime rival, Al-Shabaab. The Somali government, still struggling with decades of instability, sees Puntland’s campaign as a critical front in the battle against terrorism.

Meanwhile, U.S. airstrikes on Saturday in the Golis Mountains dealt another devastating blow to ISIS-Somalia, reportedly killing multiple high-ranking operatives. U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth emphasized that these strikes were part of a broader strategy to dismantle ISIS’ global network.

The Bigger Picture: Somalia’s Security Crisis

While Al-Shabaab still remains the dominant jihadist force in Somalia, ISIS-Somalia has carved out a deadly foothold in Puntland and the northeast, leveraging extortion, smuggling, and foreign funding. The Somali government, backed by regional forces and U.S. military support, is racing against time to prevent ISIS from becoming an even greater threat.

The capture of Laahoor represents a significant victory for Puntland security forces. However, whether this momentum can be sustained—and whether Somalia can prevent an ISIS resurgence—remains the ultimate test. The war is far from over, but the tides may be turning against ISIS in Somalia.

Somaliland’s markets are burning—and with them, the livelihoods of thousands. The Gobonnimo Market fire is just the latest in a series of catastrophic blazes that have devastated Hargeisa’s commercial hubs. Waaheen Market (2022), Wajaale Market (2023), and now Gobonnimo Market (2025)—all tell the same story of poor infrastructure, inadequate fire response, and a lack of preventive measures.

President Abdirahman Mohamed Abdullahi Cirro, alongside senior government officials, visited the scene, expressing sorrow and pledging government support. His call for national unity and fundraising reflects Somaliland’s resilience, yet the larger question remains unanswered—why do these fires keep happening?

The Waaheen Market inferno of 2022—the worst in decades—took 16 hours to control, destroying 2,000 shops, 100 buildings, and displacing countless families. In 2023, the Wajaale Market fire caused losses worth $5.3 million, once again proving Somaliland’s economic hubs are high-risk zones without adequate fire protection.

The repeated devastation has sparked public frustration, with demands for transparent investigations into causes, accountability, and prevention. The formation of a technical committee to assess damages is a delayed reaction, not a preventive solution. Somaliland’s economy relies on trade, yet its commercial centers remain vulnerable to fires that could be avoided with better urban planning and safety protocols.

Without modernized fire safety regulations, clear urban zoning, and rapid response infrastructure, Somaliland will continue to relive this nightmare—again and again. The government’s next step must not be just compensation and damage control; it must be prevention.

Hargeisa Market Blaze Exposes Infrastructure Failures

The European Union is making a calculated move to appease President Donald Trump by offering a united front on China, hoping to salvage strained transatlantic relations. With Trump staking an audacious territorial claim on Greenland—a protectorate of Denmark—and threatening devastating 20% tariffs on European goods, Brussels is scrambling to find common ground before the relationship implodes.

EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič has laid out a proposal to strengthen economic security in partnership with Washington, emphasizing the shared challenge of China’s state-subsidized economic model. This echoes Trump’s first-term collaboration between the U.S., EU, and Japan to counter Beijing’s trade practices, which Brussels now sees as a crucial bargaining chip to keep Trump engaged.

The EU is not just talking trade—it’s offering cash flow. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has already floated the purchase of more U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) to reduce reliance on Russian gas, a move designed to win favor with Trump while securing energy independence.

But will this gamble work? Trump thrives on disruption, and his territorial ambitions over Greenland signal a willingness to bulldoze alliances to reshape global power dynamics. While Brussels tries to pivot toward a mutually beneficial economic security pact, Trump’s instinct for unilateral action remains the wild card. With an EU-China showdown looming in May, the next few months could determine the fate of Europe’s precarious balancing act between Washington and Beijing. Trump holds the cards—will Brussels play the right hand?

M23 rebels, emboldened by Rwandan military support, have taken control of Goma, eastern Congo’s largest city, and are threatening to advance on Kinshasa, escalating one of Africa’s most dangerous conflicts. With 4,000 Rwandan troops reportedly backing them, the rebels have far more firepower than in 2012, when they briefly seized Goma before withdrawing under international pressure.

Congo’s President Félix Tshisekedi has rejected any negotiations, calling for a nationwide military mobilization while ordering his defense minister to burn any proposals for talks. The fear of a full-scale regional war is growing, as tensions between Rwanda and South Africa escalate after 13 South African peacekeepers were killed in the violence. Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame has issued a veiled warning, stating that “if South Africa prefers confrontation, Rwanda will deal with the matter in that context any day.”

Goma has fallen into chaos, with dead bodies in the streets, widespread looting, and thousands of government troops surrendering or fleeing. Residents describe soldiers shedding their uniforms, dropping their weapons, and either escaping to Rwanda or seeking refuge at U.N. bases. Meanwhile, in South Kivu, where the rebels are advancing, fear grips the population as gunfire and explosions draw closer to Bukavu.

The U.S. and U.N. have called for a ceasefire, but Congo’s government remains defiant, seeing Rwanda’s aggression as an existential threat. With $24 trillion in untapped minerals at stake, the battle for Congo’s east is no longer just about rebel groups—it is a geopolitical proxy war with massive consequences for Africa and the global economy.

The clock is ticking, and the risk of all-out war is closer than ever.

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.