Read the daily news to learn English

picture of article

Venezuelan opposition leader questions US oil deal with ‘illegitimate regime’

The Venezuelan opposition leader, María Corina Machado, has questioned Donald Trump’s oil deal with Venezuela’s interim government, declaring that the country’s natural resources do not belong to “an illegitimate regime”. In her first public comments since Trump announced what he called “the biggest oil deal in world history” with Venezuela last Friday, Machado walked a diplomatic tightrope between challenging the controversial agreement and trying not to rile the White House. In a video posted on social media, the Nobel peace prize winner said: “Of course the United States is the principal partner Venezuela needs to fully develop its strategic potential. This is what the majority of Venezuelans believe … and it is something I’ve spent my whole life defending.” However, Machado said the current occupants of the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas were “enemies of the US” and claimed they did not have the right or the democratic mandate to negotiate Venezuela’s natural resources. “The wealth of our subsoil does not belong to an illegitimate regime – it belongs to the Venezuelan people,” said Machado, recognising that supporters felt “sadness and anger” at being excluded from the decision-making process. Venezuela has the world’s largest proven crude oil reserves with an estimated 303bn barrels – more than 65bn barrels of which are involved in the agreement. Trump’s deal was struck with the un-elected interim president, Delcy Rodríguez, who took power in January after her strongman predecessor, Nicolás Maduro, was abducted by US special forces. Many observers expected Trump to replace Maduro with Machado, a conservative democracy activist who later gave the US president her Nobel prize award. But Trump instead backed Rodríguez, warning: “If she doesn’t do what’s right, she is going to pay a very big price – probably bigger than Maduro.” Machado has been sidelined. The White House claims the oil deal will help secure US “energy dominance for the next century” as well as “purging foreign malign influence from our back yard” by excluding China and Russia from oilfields in the country with the world’s largest proven oil reserves. Speaking outside the Miraflores palace on Wednesday, the US energy secretary, Chris Wright, said the aim was “to massively grow production and economic opportunities in Venezuela”. “President Trump has a clear mission in Venezuela. The mission is to bring peace, freedom, opportunity, and prosperity to everyone in Venezuela,” Wright told reporters. But there has been widespread condemnation of what critics have called a predatory and colonial-style land grab. Machado’s supporters fear the deal makes Washington far less inclined to push for fresh presidential elections. Machado’s movement is widely believed to have beaten Maduro by a landslide in the last such vote, in 2024, but he refused to accept the result and clung to power until his dramatic rendition on 3 January 2026. On Wednesday, both Trump and Rodríguez brushed off questions about when an election might be held. “You had a very powerful, very nasty dictatorship in Venezuela – and they’re just not going to be ready for it yet,” Trump told reporters, before adding vaguely: “But soon.” Asked when an election would be held, Rodríguez said: “There will be an electoral process, but when Venezuela is ready.” “I don’t set dates,” she added.

picture of article

Gloria Steinem obituary

Gloria Steinem, who has died aged 92, was a writer, community organiser, political campaigner and a charismatic feminist activist who called herself “an entrepreneur of social change”. She spent much of her life on the road, often accompanied by equally committed fellow campaigners. Steinem loathed public speaking, but during two years travelling in India in her 20s, she moved from village to village, with “a sari, a cup and a comb” in a group countering religious intolerance. She said she learned then, as Gandhi taught, that a message was all the more powerful delivered “eye to eye”. Steinem, unlike some of her contemporaries, never recanted or modified her many causes, which included civil rights, violence against women, and the struggle for equality. She continued to argue that every economics course ought to start not with production but with reproduction, and an understanding of the patriarchal instinct to restrict a woman’s right to contraception and abortion. She was one of Donald Trump’s most outspoken critics throughout his rise to power. She labelled him “harasser in chief”, a man whose rhetoric and conduct ran counter to the values she had dedicated her life to advocating. Like many of her generation, Steinem came to feminism at the end of the 1960s. In the early days of the women’s movement, as separatists, socialists, radicals and essentialists deifying the feminine made their arguments, Steinem initially described herself as a humanist. She had had a “vagabond childhood”, living in poverty for several years as the sole carer of her mentally ill and sometimes violent mother, Ruth. Her mother’s indifferent treatment by the male medical profession, Steinem wrote later, fuelled her sense of injustice and put her on the side of the underdog. Steinem lived with the fear that she too might experience mental illness, ending up like her mother “wandering the streets in a night dress”. In 1963, when Betty Friedan published The Feminine Mystique – describing the frustration of affluent, well-educated, middle-class white women trapped in domesticity – Steinem was “a girl reporter” living in New York, working on The Beach Book, a compendium of extracts from literature about beaches and tips on what to do in the sun. A rising media star who was later described, to her annoyance, as “the world’s most beautiful byline”, she had already begun to make connections: she asked the economist JK Galbraith to write the foreword, and he agreed. For another journalistic assignment that year, she spent three weeks undercover as a Playboy bunny for Show magazine, detailing the poor conditions and humiliations of wearing satin rabbit ears and a fluffy tail. The resulting article, A Bunny’s Tale, made her name. Steinem became a highly paid writer for magazines including McCall’s and Glamour, and interviewed, among others, Gore Vidal, James Baldwin and Paul Newman, as well as taking on “girl writer” tasks such as analysing textured stockings for the New York Times. Concurrently she was politically active, campaigning and fundraising for, among other causes, the anti-Vietnam war movement, the Democrat George McGovern’s campaign for the presidency, and Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta’s battle for fair wages for migrant farm workers. As Steinem later wrote, she was “working on one thing and caring about another”. In 1968, the millionaire Clay Felker launched New York magazine, and hired Steinem to write a political column, The City Politic. A year later, she attended a “speak out”, organised by the radical feminist group the Redstockings, at which women spoke about their illegal abortions. As Steinem later put it, she felt “a big click”. Women were not to blame, but a sexist and misogynistic system that forced them to have dangerous terminations. The humanist had become a feminist. “Once the light began to dawn I couldn’t understand why I hadn’t figured out any of this before,” she said. Later that year, in New York magazine, she wrote the landmark article After Black Power, Women’s Liberation. Steinem was born in Toledo, Ohio, a second daughter for Ruth (nee Nuneviller) and Leo Steinem. Leo owned a summer resort in Clark Lake, Michigan, where swing bands would play. In the winter, the family took to the road in a trailer. Leo bought and sold antiques and used the children to charm away the debt collectors. In My Life on the Road (2015), Steinem said it was the equal relationship she had had with her father – for all his irresponsibility towards his family – that provided the foundation for the strong friendships and love affairs she later had with men including the film director Mike Nichols and the jazz musician Paul Desmond. Gloria’s mother had been a reporter on the Toledo Blade, sometimes writing under the name Duncan Mackenzie. When her first daughter, Susanne, was six, and a few years before Gloria’s birth, Ruth had a nervous breakdown and never worked again. She spent time in a series of psychiatric hospitals, and became addicted to a sedative called chloral hydrate. When Gloria was 10 her parents separated, her sister went to college, and she was left alone with her mother, occasionally receiving $50 from her nomadic father. In Ruth’s Song (Because She Could Not Sing It), one of the essays in her 1983 collection Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions, Steinem described the woman who had “lived too little”, but who had encouraged her daughters to get an education and learn the meaning of choice. Steinem laid no blame. “I knew my mother loved me, but she couldn’t take care of me.” Steinem majored in government at Smith College, Massachusetts, and in 1956, a year after Sylvia Plath, she graduated with distinction. In a stopover in Britain on the way to India and an academic scholarship, she had an illegal abortion aged 22. On her return to the US in the 1960s, she began to build a reputation as a journalist. In 1962, the year Helen Gurley Brown published Sex and the Single Girl, encouraging women to become financially independent and not wait for a wedding ring to take lovers, Steinem wrote an article for Esquire titled The Moral Disarmament of Betty Coed. Still not identifying with women’s liberation, she wrote perceptively: “The problem is that many girls … who depend on the roles of wife and mother for their total identity are being pressured into affairs they can’t handle and jobs they pretend to like.” By 1970, at Vassar College, New York, at the first of what were to be many commencement speeches given to graduating students, she showed an acute understanding of the depth of conditioning: “Our first problem is not to learn … but to unlearn,” she said, and “woman means submission, black means inferior … preconceptions embedded so deeply in our thinking we may not know they are there.” The women’s movement advocated no leaders, so some fellow activists were incensed when the media appointed Steinem as chief spokesperson. Her streaked blond hair, aviator glasses, wit, soft-voiced calm and miniskirts appealed. In 1975, the Redstockings claimed that Steinem had been “meteorically installed” as the leader of the movement by the CIA. Steinem had briefly co-founded a CIA-financed organisation, Independent Research Service, in the late 50s when, she said, the CIA was among the good guys. Unlike contemporaries such as Germaine Greer, Shulamith Firestone and Kate Millett, Steinem never wrote a seminal work, but she was a powerful polemicist, funny and had a way with words that her critics found too pat. “The human race is like a bird with two wings,” she said, in one of thousands of lectures. “If one wing is broken, the bird can’t fly.” Steinem fretted all her life that the media opted for trivialisation when it came to reporting what she saw as one of the greatest social changes in history, the rise of second-wave feminism, which led to changes, as the New York Times put it, from the boardroom to the courtroom to the bedroom. (The first wave was in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.) In 1971, Steinem helped to found the National Women’s Political Caucus, which encouraged women to run for political office. In the same year, Esquire published The Awesome Power of Gloria Steinem, largely an analysis of her impact on men. In a comment that was emblematic of the casual sexism of the time, the talkshow host David Susskind said: “What Gloria needs is a man.” In 1971, Steinem co-founded Ms, the first magazine owned and run by women. Critics predicted it would sell fewer than 20,000 copies. The first issue, published that December as part of New York magazine, sold 300,000 copies, sold out in eight days and attracted tens of thousands of subscriptions. Steinem said she would stay for two years, but in fact did not leave until the magazine was sold to Fairfax in 1987 – later she was part of the Liberty Media group that took it back into independent ownership. Ms had numerous internal battles about how radical it should be and funding was a constant struggle, since advertisers wary of articles such as If Men Could Menstruate shunned it. Later it went ad-free. When Steinem turned 50, in 1984, a birthday gala was held at the Waldorf Astoria in New York. Dinner was $250 a head – it was yet another fundraiser for her causes – and among Steinem’s friends in attendance were Jackie Kennedy Onassis and Betty Ford. Two years later Steinem was diagnosed with breast cancer. She subsequently suggested she had “burned out”. She went into therapy to discover why she had spent a lifetime as, she said, “Ms Fix-it”, avoiding confrontation, resistant to introspection, constantly on the move, battling a fear of overeating. Her next book was Revolution from Within: A Book of Self-Esteem (1992), for which she received a $700,000 advance. Critics worried that the book’s references to Steinem’s inner child meant the personal had become more important than the political; that psychobabble had taken over from protest. But her activism, apparently reinforced by meditation and visualisation, continued robustly. She went on supporting the Ms Foundation for Women and in 2005 co-founded the Women’s Media Center, to improve women’s representation in the media. As she said: “If you can’t see it, you can’t be it.” As Steinem’s official biographer, Carolyn G Heilbrun, said in The Education of a Woman (1995), Steinem was a woman of contradictions: the feminist photographed in a bubble bath; the loner who was always in the spotlight; the compassionate listener who seemed accessible to no one; the person who hated to offend – but who still offended many, including full-time housewives, anti-abortionists and Friedan. Friedan accused Steinem of attracting what she called “the lavender menace”, lesbians, to the cause. She said Steinem was from the “bra-burning, anti-men, ‘politics of orgasm’” school of feminism. In turn, Steinem lightly mocked the plight of rich, white, middle-class women suffering from “the problem that has no name”. It might be painful, Steinem said, but you didn’t die of it. Ironically, several decades later, during the 2008 race for the Democratic presidential candidacy, Steinem controversially gave her support not to the black outsider Barack Obama, but to Hillary Clinton, the ultimate example of the white, privileged woman. In 1998 in a newspaper column, she also defended Bill Clinton against sexual allegations, to the confusion of many of her supporters. In 2000, Steinem married David Bale, an entrepreneur and animal-rights activist. She said they married because he was South African and needed a visa. Later she wrote: “He … loved me out of old ruts and patterns and choices.” He died in 2003. Steinem’s sister, Susanne, died in 2007. In 2013, Obama presented Steinem with the Presidential Medal of Freedom, one of many awards she received during her life. A year later, Rutgers University established a chair in her name to fund teaching and research into equal representation in the media. Until her death, she continued to travel, lecture and organise with a family of female friends. She gave the New York home that was her sanctuary to Gloria’s Foundation as a place for women to meet, speak out and organise. The latest of her books, An Unexpected Life, is due to be published later this month. In an interview with the New York Times in 2022, she was asked her view on women’s progress towards equality. “I feel proud,” she said. “And I feel mad as hell we are still dealing with the same old issues.” • Gloria Marie Steinem, feminist, writer and civil rights campaigner, born 25 March 1934; died 2 September 2026

picture of article

EU’s ability to defend against invasion remains in doubt, finds official report

The EU’s ability to respond to a foreign invasion by 2030 remains in doubt due to a continuing reliance on the US and fragmented national defence systems, according to a report from its official auditor. The European court of auditors (ECA) said the EU was much better prepared than before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine of 2022, but achieving its goal of defence readiness by the end of the decade would be difficult. “Achieving defence preparedness in the EU by 2030 remains challenging,” said Marek Opioła, an ECA member who led the review of the EU’s defence policy published on Thursday. “There are still major difficulties such as fragmented national systems or industrial bottlenecks. We also still rely on the United States.” Speaking to the Guardian, he stressed the EU could “still make major progress” if it sharply increased defence spending and rapidly expanded ammunition production. Between 2020 and 2025, EU member states increased defence spending by 79%, a response to the Russian threat and a belated effort to meet Nato spending targets. In November 2024, the EU met its pledge of providing 1 million rounds of ammunition to Ukraine – eight months behind schedule. The EU set the goal of defence readiness by 2030 last year, after intelligence services warned that Russia could be ready to wage a large-scale war in Europe around that time. The bloc’s financial watchdog said major difficulties had to be overcome to reach this target, defined by a senior auditor as “having strategic autonomy” and “the ability to independently sustain high-intensity warfare”. The senior auditor said the EU was better prepared than 2019 when a similar review was conducted, but warned that fragmented national defence industries and “insufficient cooperation” between EU governments contributed to a risk of duplication in spending or persistent gaps in military capabilities. Emblematic of the dysfunction – although not mentioned in the report – is France and Germany’s decision to abandon a €100bn project to build a joint fighter jet, because the lead companies were unable to resolve disputes over leadership and control. The report highlighted a possible tension between short-term battlefield needs and a “Buy European” policy that aims to reduce dependencies on foreign suppliers. Between February 2022 and June 2023, 78% of EU governments’ defence acquisitions were sourced outside the bloc, with the US alone representing 63%, according to one study cited by the ECA. The senior auditor said purchases from the US went up after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine “which was understandable because the EU needed to find capabilities that were available quickly”. The official added that “early signs of improvement in that situation” were visible, although the auditors did not have complete data to draw conclusions. The EU has set requirements that common defence spending should benefit domestic defence industries or those of closely-associated countries, such as Ukraine and Norway. But some flexibilities have been allowed where Europe is unable to produce critical supplies in time. After a brutal summer of deadly Russian missile and drone attacks, this week Ukraine asked for an exemption from Buy European procurement rules to acquire US-made Patriot interceptors using the EU’s €90bn support loan. The European Commission president, Ursula von der Leyen, said on Wednesday that Ukraine had requested funding “worth several billion euros” for air defences, including Patriot air-defence systems. A commission spokesperson said Ukraine’s request for Patriot interceptor missiles “would require a derogation” from rules requiring majority European content in military purchases under the loan. “The final say is with the member states and of course our hope would be that this would soon be granted,” the spokesperson said. The senior auditor said sometimes “it may make sense” to buy outside “when you have a short-term urgent need”. The person added: “Even if you buy something that you don’t have in-house, you [should] always have a plan how to develop that critical capacity in the long-term within the European Union.”

picture of article

Two cousins hired a 4WD to find their missing Australian family in Nepal. Then ‘there was no more road’

As the hot sun beats down in Kathmandu, Santosh Swaminathan and his cousin Nathan Subramanian take a break from searching for their missing loved ones to stop at a temple and pray. After they lost contact with Swaminathan’s sister and her husband following the devastating flood last week, they flew from India to Nepal. But as they wait for the army to rebuild roads and bridges into the areas where their loved ones were, they’re getting desperate. Like other families of missing Australians, they’re now taking matters into their own hands. They’re hiring four-wheel drives and heading into the flood zones to search. Swaminathan’s sister Chitra Venkatraman, 46, and her husband, Venkatraman Balakrishnan, 52, were among 15 Australians travelling to Mount Kailash, on a spiritual trip with the Himalayan Glacier Adventures tour group. In total, more than 5,000 people have been reported missing in Nepal and a further 546 in the Tibet region of China after the flooding, which has killed more than 1,200 people. Thirty-eight Australians remain unaccounted for. “They are just fun-loving people,” Swaminathan, 42, says of the missing New South Wales couple. “My sister, she is so funny … They are a very loving family. We miss them very badly right now.” On the weekend, the pair hired a 4WD in the capital, Kathmandu, and headed up the valley. The conditions are dangerous: roads collapse under cars, landslides are common and near-constant rain makes it hard to see. There are long delays, and when parts of the road slide away, travellers jump out of their cars to fill holes back in with rocks. Parts of the valley don’t have power, and there is no clean water or food. But Subramanian, 45, says they had to try. They managed to get to Trishuli, a town roughly 40km from Kathmandu but still another 20km from where the Australians would have been in Syabru Besi. “We took a car, food, everything,” Subramanian says. “The conditions are very bad. It’s been really bad – after Trishuli, there was no more road. “It was a risk, a very high risk. But that is all we can do. As family members, we need to do whatever we can do.” The day after their attempt, there was a huge mudslide on the road just down from Trishuli, leaving army personnel, aid workers and journalists stranded overnight. Other families sent another search car up on Wednesday to look for the missing group, which is made up of Canadians, Americans, Singaporeans, British citizens and Australians. They are hoping they can get all the way to the area where the group was staying. “We are just trying whatever we can,” Swaminathan says. There’s two pieces of information buoying the families from the group. First, the group was around a 45-minute drive from the area of the border with Tibet which was decimated by the wall of water and rock that ran down the valley. Second, the phones of other members of the group pinged last Wednesday – one as late as 2.30pm, hours after the flood hit. In Kathmandu, the family have visited the Australian and Indian embassies. They’ve spoken to Nepali politicians. They’ve been handing over any leads to police, and visiting the hospitals as the injured and dead start to arrive from Rasuwa, where the worst of the flooding hit. Swaminathan is in contact with the couple’s son, Akash Venkatraman, 22, who lives in Sydney with his younger brother. He says they’re being supported by family there. On Tuesday, the Australian ambassador to Nepal, Simon Ernst, warned families against heading into the flood zone. “We do understand for those with missing loved ones what an incredibly difficult time this must be,” he said. “Please do be assured we are working around the clock … to locate loved ones. “And a reminder, please, avoid travel to the impacted area. We remain in the monsoon season; the risk of further flooding is very real and furthermore, access to flood-damaged areas is very difficult, if not impossible.” Sign up for the Breaking News Australia email A lack of technology available to the Nepali army has hampered the search efforts. On Thursday, the Australian government announced it was deploying a team of specialist drone operators to contribute to the search efforts. But families are questioning why Nepal didn’t ask for technical help sooner. Subramanian says he knows the army is doing its best and trusts their capabilities, but acknowledges the technology they have access to is limited. “Ideally on the first day, they should have actually taken support from other governments,” he says. “Things could have been different.” In the heat and chaos of Kathmandu, the pair are trying everything they can. Running on anxiety and adrenaline, they are determined to bring their family members home. “Today we are in a situation where we don’t know what to do tomorrow,” Subramanian says. “We don’t know what’s next. We are just trying to turn over every stone that we can as civilians. We believe they are still alive, and now we are begging for a miracle.”

picture of article

Spain’s Sánchez defends Morocco over Ceuta crisis as opponents call for his removal – as it happened

And, on that note, we will be closing the blog for today. Spain has seen no evidence “whatsoever” that Morocco planned or facilitated a mass border breach into its north African territory of Ceuta, the Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, has told parliament (9:34, 9:50, 9:57, 10:13, 10:17). Sánchez addressed the parliament during a tense debate in which his political rivals demanded his resignation and early elections for what they believe was mishandling of the migration crisis (10:29, 10:53). In other news, Russia is “actively” preparing sabotage operations against Denmark, particularly its defence industry, Danish intelligence agency PET warned (10:59). French, German and Polish foreign ministers projected a united front as they spoke about Europe’s response to alleged acts of Russian sabotage (11:16), with the EU looking at tightening visa requirements for Russians looking to enter the bloc (12:41). The UK has joined a growing list of countries summoning top Russian diplomats over the recent attempted drone attack on Leipzig (12:56). If you have any tips, comments or suggestions, email me at jakub.krupa@theguardian.com. I am also on Bluesky at @jakubkrupa.bsky.social and on X at @jakubkrupa.

picture of article

US commerce secretary erroneously said no Americans have died in Iran war, Trump claims

Donald Trump has claimed his commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, erroneously stated that no Americans had been killed in the war with Iran because he was thinking about a previous US operation, in Venezuela. The claim, at odds with the Pentagon’s count of 18 US service members dead in the US-Israel war on Iran, sparked a swift backlash as Trump struggles to end the conflict after six months. In a post on his Truth Social platform on Thursday, the US president wrote: “Sec. Lutnick had Venezuela on his mind when he said nobody was killed. 18 people were killed in Iran!” The rebuke came a day after Lutnick appeared on CNBC’s Squawk Box and framed the Trump administration’s approach to Iran as primarily economic. Describing the strategy as an “economic choke-out”, he erroneously told the network there had not been American deaths in the conflict, adding that he was optimistic bond markets would respond well to the approach. Lutnick this morning acknowledged the mistake, posting on X that he had misspoken and also claiming he had been thinking of the US operation in Venezuela, where US forces captured Nicolás Maduro in January with minimal US casualties. The Pentagon said seven US troops were injured and none were killed in that operation, while Venezuelan officials put their overall death toll at 47, and Cuba said 32 of its military and police personnel were killed. Trump’s post landed as Iranian authorities detailed heavy casualties from the latest US strikes. Iran’s health ministry said Tuesday night’s strikes killed 18 people and wounded 108, while the country’s Red Crescent identified that four people were killed and 67 wounded when a US strike hit a wedding ceremony near the coast of the strait of Hormuz, which also killed a child. Reuters said it was able to verify the location of the damaged building using satellite imagery. A US Central Command spokesperson, Capt Tim Hawkins, said the US military does not target civilians and that the reports, which originated with Iranian state media, were being reviewed. The strikes were part of a broader operation that Central Command said hit Iranian air defense systems, radar installations, maritime assets, mine-laying equipment and communications sites near the strait of Hormuz, a strategic waterway through which a large share of the world’s oil passes. The Pentagon’s capacity to independently verify such claims has been sharply reduced. Its Civilian Protection Center of Excellence has been cut from 40 staff to nine since the start of last year, according to the Pentagon’s own inspector general, while the department has also stopped developing a database meant to track civilian harm from US operations. The episode has exposed a wider tension in how the White House is presenting the conflict. Officials have sought to characterize the campaign (estimated to have cost at least $37.5bn as of July) against Iran in economic terms even as it continues to produce US military deaths, mounting Iranian civilian casualties and rising oil prices. Polling from UMass-Amherst in late August found that 54% of Americans disapprove of the war initiated by the US and Israel, and one in six Trump voters would go back and change their vote in 2024. The current round of fighting began after the US struck rocket launchers on Larak Island that officials said were being prepared to mine the strait, prompting Iranian missile and drone attacks on US and allied positions in Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait and Iraq. Jordanian authorities said 13 ballistic missiles were fired at the country, of which 10 were intercepted. Trump described Iran’s retaliation as a “love tap”, but warned that further strikes remained an option. “It was a very heavy attack last night, and we’re prepared to do another one anytime we want,” he said earlier this week.

picture of article

Rise of far-right leader Roberto Vannacci challenges Meloni as she celebrates Italian milestone

Giorgia Meloni’s government has become the longest-running in Italy since the second world war – a milestone the prime minister is determined not to let pass unnoticed. In the port area of Bari, the capital of the southern Italian region of Puglia, where Meloni hosted the G7 in 2024 and where she spends her summer holiday, preparations are well under way for a festival-style showcase of her rightwing administration. On Friday, there will be food trucks, water stations and traditional Puglian light shows as part of celebrations to entertain an expected crowd of 10,000 people bussed in from across Italy. Militants from the youth wing of Meloni’s far-right Brothers of Italy party have fanned the city’s squares and beaches for days, handing out flyers promoting the celebrations while wearing T-shirts featuring the official slogan: Il Governo più stabile, l’Italia più forte (the most stable government, the strongest Italy). Meloni, who just a few weeks ago was booed at the opening ceremony of the Mediterranean Games in Taranto, farther south in Puglia, will address the audience in the evening, surrounded by her coalition allies – Matteo Salvini, the leader of the far-right League, and the conservative Forza Italia’s Antonio Tajani. “This moment will be written in the history books,” said Michele Picaro, a Brothers of Italy MEP and former Bari councillor. “We are the longest government in the history of the Italian Republic and this must be celebrated.” Beneath the triumph, however, the outlook for Meloni is less settled. True, she has enjoyed a political stability that eluded her predecessors. Brothers of Italy is still the country’s biggest party. But in recent months, the political landscape has shifted with the emergence of a challenger – not from the left or the centre, but from someone who is even further to the right than Meloni. Since its launch in February, Roberto Vannacci, a former army general, has seen his far-right party, Futuro Nazionale, rise to about 8% in the polls, surpassing his former compatriots in the League months ago and this week eclipsing Forza Italia, too. Vannacci first entered the public eye in 2023 after self-publishing a book filled with racism, homophobia, Islamophobia and antisemitism. The subsequent backlash cost him his army job, but propelled him to the top of the bestsellers list. Helped along by ample coverage in the Italian press, he capitalised on the notoriety and in 2024 was elected as an MEP for the League, later leaving Salvini’s party to set up his own. “I read his book because I always think you need to know the enemy,” said Giulia Pastorella, an MP and vice-president of the small centrist party Azione (Action). “And I thought, this is exactly the kind of thing you might hear people talking about in the bar. Here’s a military man, who is really a mirror of the worst impulses of people. The scary thing is, I think he’s genuine and not a PR construct.” Vannacci’s policies, such as they are, are extreme. Futuro Nazionale’s recently published manifesto says that “abortion is not a right” and calls for gay people to be banned from TV between 6am and 11pm so children aren’t exposed to what it describes as “homosexualist” content. It also proposes introducing military education in high schools and a “remigration” plan to remove irregular immigrants and foreign nationals who commit crimes. On foreign policy, Vannacci has campaigned to stop weapons and financial aid to Ukraine, saying if he could choose between Vladimir Putin or the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, he would choose Putin. In July, he organised a “Futuristic Triathlon” in the northern seaside town of Sanremo, billed as an event to “temper the mind and body” in an echo of the fascist aesthetics and themes of the Mussolini era. Far from being a treated as a pariah, however, Vannacci’s party has proved moderately successful, luring defectors from the three main ruling coalition parties. It is also actively courting disillusioned voters from the Five Star Movement, a key ally in a broad but perennially fractious leftwing coalition led by the Democratic party. For the government, he represents a dilemma. Meloni, whose Brothers of Italy has neofascist roots, has governed more moderately than many had expected, cultivating a pragmatic and, crucially, pro-Ukraine image abroad while still deploying hardline rhetoric on choice occasions for domestic audiences. That positioning, however, has left a vacuum on the far right that Vannacci has exploited. The question now is: how will Meloni respond? Until now her ruling coalition had mostly coasted along, propped up by a strong parliamentary majority. Her government is largely regarded to have been fiscally prudent, but has steered clear of major structural reforms. Instead, it has heavily focused on security and continues to vigorously expand legislation on law and order. “This government has wasted the huge occasion that stability gave them,” said Lia Quartapelle, an MP with the Democratic party. “None of the core issues have been addressed – we have stagnant productivity and growth, salaries that have lagged behind for many years and an education system that is not up to the pace.” Pastorella said a focus on foreign policy had also contributed to Vannacci’s success. “Meloni hasn’t really done much at home but has been very present abroad,” she added. “The Italian electorate is tired of talking about foreign policy and would rather discuss national politics – this is precisely what Vannacci has understood.” Picaro batted away questions about recent polls. “This is a government that is more used to working than looking at percentages,” he said, citing lower unemployment, reduced irregular immigration, cutting taxes for the self-employed and an initiative in the south to boost entrepreneurial investment. Pastorella said that, far from being strong and stable, Meloni had struggled to keep her coalition united while dealing with various scandals, including ones that led to a tourism and a culture minister being forced to resign. With the possibility of an election as early as April, time is now of the essence for the prime minister. In recent weeks she has pivoted back to hardline rhetoric, most notably in her reaction to the influx of migrants from Morocco into the Spanish north African enclave of Ceuta. She is also trying to push through a highly contentious electoral law that would give a majority bonus to any alliance winning more than 42% of the vote, which critics say is aimed at increasing her group’s chance of victory. If Vannacci continues to strengthen, Meloni might be tempted to accommodate him before the vote, a move that would risk repelling moderate supporters. Or she could clinch a post-election pact to maintain power, resulting in what many both inside and outside Italy would see as a frightening shift to the extreme right. As government supporters head to Bari, Alessandro Cattaneo, an MP with Forza Italia, thinks it won’t come to that. “We in Forza Italia believe that Vannacci is too far removed from our political culture,” he said. “It would not be possible to govern with him … the coalition needs to continue to work seriously for the remainder of this administration and explain better to people what we have done. The best antidote to the extreme right is to show our seriousness.”

picture of article

Iran targets US bases as Israel warns sanctions could drive Tehran to ‘desperate steps’

Iran has continued to demonstrate an ability to target bases in the Gulf used by the US despite six months of war and a new sanctions regime described by the Trump administration as an “economic D-day”. As Iran’s military targeted US bases in the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, despite threats of further strikes by the US president, Israel’s defence chief warned that economic pressures from the sanctions could lead Tehran to escalate to more “extreme measures”. “This morning, the army hit the satellite communication systems, equipment depots and fighter aircraft hangars of the terrorist US army at the Ahmad al-Jaber air base in Kuwait with missiles and drones,” the Iranian military said on Thursday in a statement carried by state television. The “location of forces and radar systems of the child-killing US army at the Al Minhad air base in the UAE were also attacked by missiles and drones of the army”, it added. In a post on X, Kuwait’s ministry of defence said its air defences had intercepted missile and drone attacks during a “blatant Iranian aggression”. The Kuwaiti statement came after the US allies Bahrain and Jordan said their air defence systems intercepted several Iranian air attacks on Wednesday. Fighting between the US and Iran has increased this week after the US hit Iranian rocket launchers on an island in the strait of Hormuz on Sunday, claiming that Iran was planning to use them to shoot mines into the waterway. The latest flare-up in the conflict comes amid little evidence that the Trump administration is succeeding in advancing its nebulous war aims either on the battlefield or via mediation, despite the US president’s repeated claims to have opened the strait of Hormuz to oil traffic. Instead, traffic through the key maritime passageway remains far below prewar levels, with oil prices remaining stubbornly elevated ahead of US midterm elections. Oil prices jumped again on Thursday after the Iranian strikes. Among the weapons Iran has used this week is its Kheibar Shekan medium-range ballistic missile system. The cheap and accurate missile can be launched within minutes and has become a staple of Iranian strikes. The rocket’s solid fuel motor means it does not require lengthy fuelling. It can be deployed very quickly to avoid detection and can be armed with a powered and steerable final stage to help beat anti-missile systems. Despite claims by the Trump administration that Tehran is running out of rockets, Iran continues to fire missiles that are considerably cheaper to produce than the US interceptors used to shoot them down. Iran has claimed as recently as the end of August that it maintained both missiles stockpiles and the ability to manufacture them. “Initially, some believed that Iran had only a limited number of missiles and that its stockpiles would eventually be depleted as the war continued,” the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesperson Brig Gen Hossein Mohebbi said. “However, that assumption proved incorrect, as Iran’s missile capability has remained sustained and its missile production has continued.” Mohebbi’s characterisation of Iranian missile stockpiles could not be verified. The continued strikes came as Israel’s defence minister, Israel Katz, said that while the new US economic sanctions appeared to be effective, the increased pressure could lead Tehran into extreme measures. “We see signs indicating that the heavy economic pressure they are under, and the fear of an uprising and the collapse of the regime, may push them to desperate steps,” Katz said at a ceremony for defence ministry employees. The hawkish minister reiterated the threats against the Islamic Republic that he has made in recent months. “An Iranian attack on Israel will free Israel from any existing constraint,” he said. “We will strike all of Iran’s national military and civilian infrastructure – including energy infrastructure – and push Iran deep back into the stone age.”