Read the daily news to learn English

Macron says Europe facing ‘profound geopolitical rapture’ amid changes in world order – Europe live

The French president, Emmanuel Macron, has urged Europe to reassert its position in the world, as the continent faces rapidally changing landscape in politics and trade. In an interview with a group of European media outlets, Macron warned that the strategy of bowing down to the US and other geopolitical powers doesn’t work and urged Europe to urgently step up its integration to get ready to face “permanent instability” ahead. “It is time for Europe to wake up … If we do not decide for ourselves, we will be swept away,” he told El País (€) and others, including Süddeutsche Zeitung (€), Financial Times (£), and Le Monde (€). Macron said Europe was facing “a profound geopolitical rapture” with “a profound shock” on trade and defence as its relations with China and the US change. “I think the best way is to reduce risk, reduce dependencies, and make decisions for ourselves instead of waiting for the next crisis,” he said. “If we choose to be spectators, we will be vassals,” he said, calling it “the Greenland moment,” saying the US interest in a territory of its Nato ally should be a wake-up call for European leaders. Macron said that Europeans “stand firm, but react too slowly,” and need to assert their position as a global superpower, with more “common leadership” on the continent. He argued that the Franco-British-led Coalition of the Willing for Ukraine was an example of an initiative that allowed Europe to build a strong, international alliance to defend its interests, also in defence and security. But in comments likely to raise some eyebrows, Macron also once again suggested that Europe should reopen diplomatic channels with Moscow, so to “not delegate this discussion” to others, including the US. He said Europe should engage with Russia “without being naive or pressuring the Ukrainians, but also without having to depend on a third party” to conduct these talks. “We have European interests to defend and I’m not going to delegate them to anyone, not even the US.” Macron also spoke about what he saw as a real risk of tensions with the US flaring up again over the European push to regulate social media platforms or Greenland.

Israeli court blocks life-saving cancer care for boy, 5, due to his Gaza address

An Israeli court has rejected an appeal to allow a five-year-old Palestinian boy with an aggressive form of cancer to enter Israel for life-saving treatment, citing a government policy that bars residents registered in Gaza from crossing the border, even when they no longer live there. In a ruling issued on Sunday, the Jerusalem district court dismissed a petition seeking permission to transfer the child from Ramallah to Tel HaShomer hospital near Tel Aviv for a bone marrow transplant – a procedure unavailable in either Gaza or the occupied West Bank. The boy has been in the West Bank since 2022 where he was receiving medical care unavailable in the Gaza Strip. His doctors have determined that he urgently requires antibody immunotherapy. The decision reflects Israel’s sweeping ban on the entry of people living in Gaza after the Hamas attacks of 7 October 2023, including cancer patients who, before the war, had routinely been granted access to life-saving treatment in Jerusalem. “I have lost my last hope,” the child’s mother told Haaretz, describing the ruling as a death sentence for her son. She said the boy’s father died of cancer three years ago. In his judgment, the Israeli judge Ram Winograd characterised the petition as an indirect challenge to the security establishment’s post-7 October restrictions, which have prevented Gaza residents from entering Israel for medical treatment. While acknowledging that thousands of children in Gaza are in urgent need of care, the judge argued there was no meaningful distinction between the boy’s case and those of other patients barred by the policy. “The petitioners failed to demonstrate a real and relevant difference,” Winograd wrote, noting that the child’s presence in Ramallah did not, in his view, justify an exemption from the blanket ban. Gisha, an Israeli human rights organisation, has been engaged in legal proceedings regarding the boy’s case since November 2025, arguing that the child’s situation exposed the cruelty of a rigid bureaucratic system that prioritises registry data over medical urgency. “This case once again illustrates the devastating consequences of a sweeping policy that denies Palestinians access to life-saving medical care solely on the basis of their registered address in Gaza, even when they are not residing there and no security allegations are raised against them,” Gisha said in statement. “The significance of this ruling is that the court is providing backing for an unlawful policy that effectively condemns children to death, even when life-saving treatment is in reach.” About 11,000 Palestinian cancer patients are still trapped in Gaza despite the reopening of the Rafah crossing last week. Doctors say cancer-related deaths have tripled in the territory since the war began, as Israel continues to hinder patients from leaving and restricts the entry of chemotherapy drugs. While some patients have left, they are far outnumbered by those deemed in medical need who have not. According to health officials in Gaza, there are about 4,000 people with official referrals for treatment to third countries who are unable to cross the border. The World Health Organization says 900 people, including children and cancer patients, have already died while waiting for evacuation.

State-sponsored hackers targeting defence sector employees, Google says

Defence companies, their hiring processes and their employees have become a key target of state-sponsored cyber-espionage campaigns, according to a report from Google released before the Munich Security Conference. The report catalogues a “relentless barrage of cyber operations”, most by state-sponsored groups, against EU and US industrial supply chains. It suggests the range of targets for these hackers has grown to encompass the broader industrial base of the US and Europe –from German aerospace firms to UK carmakers. State-linked hackers have long targeted the global defence industry, but Luke McNamara, an analyst for Google’s threat intelligence group, said they had seen more “personalised” and “direct to individual” targeting of employees. “It’s harder to detect these threats when it’s happening on an employee’s personal system, right? It’s outside a corporate network,” he said. “The whole personnel piece has become one of the major themes.” Google had also noticed more extortion attacks targeting smaller players not directly in the defence supply chain, he said, such as companies making cars or ball bearings. A recent attack by a group linked to Russian intelligence indicates how broad the net has become. Hackers appeared to try to steal information by spoofing the websites of hundreds of leading defence contractors from the UK, the US, Germany, France, Sweden, Norway, Ukraine, Turkey, and South Korea. Russia has also developed specific hacks to compromise the Signal and Telegram accounts of Ukrainian military personnel, as well as journalists and public officials, using methods and vulnerabilities that Google says other attackers could adopt. Hackers have also mounted extremely targeted attacks against Ukraine’s frontline drone units by impersonating Ukrainian drone builders or drone training courses. Dr Ilona Khmeleva, the secretary of the Economic Security Council of Ukraine, said that many cyber-attacks against Ukrainian military personnel were individualised, with some potential targets monitored for weeks before an attack. Ukrainian authorities have recorded a 37% increase in cyber incidents from 2024 to 2025, she said. Beyond Europe, other groups are using similar tactics to target defence suppliers. More and more, these efforts focus on people who are trying to get jobs in defence, or vulnerabilities in the hiring processes of large companies. North Korean hackers have impersonated corporate recruiters in campaigns against leading defence contractors, using AI to extensively profile employees, their roles and their potential salaries to “identify potential targets for initial compromise”. Many of these campaigns have been extremely successful. Last summer, the US justice department found that North Koreans had managed to obtain jobs as “remote IT workers” for more than 100 US companies. US authorities alleged they were doing this to fund the North Korean government by collecting salaries and, in some cases, stealing cryptocurrency. Iranian state-sponsored groups have created spoof job portals and sent out fake job offers to obtain the credentials of defence firms and drone companies. A group called APT5, linked to China, has targeted employees of aerospace and defence companies with emails and messaging tailored to their geographical location, personal life and professional roles. For example, parents of young children received fake communications from the Boy Scouts of America, or from a nearby secondary school; residents of certain US states received fake information about the 2024 election. Employees of important companies were also sent fake invitations to events including Red Cross training courses and a national security conference in Canada. Khmeleva said: “As western technologies and investments are integrated into Ukraine – including through military aid and joint industrial projects – the pool of potential victims expands beyond Ukrainian citizens. “Employees of foreign companies, contractors, engineers, and consultants involved in Ukraine-related projects may also become targets, making this a transnational security issue, not a purely national one.”

Tuesday briefing: Is Keir Starmer in office, but out of staff?

Good morning. One of the most powerful jobs in British politics is also one of the least well defined. The Downing Street chief of staff sits at the centre of power, acting as a prime minister’s most senior political adviser, gatekeeper and internal enforcer – and when the job goes wrong, it tends to go wrong very publicly. That happened at the weekend, when Morgan McSweeney resigned as Keir Starmer’s chief of staff after revelations about Peter Mandelson contained in the Epstein files. In his resignation statement, McSweeney said that “in public life responsibility must be owned when it matters most”, adding that he took full accountability for advising Starmer on the appointment of Mandelson as US ambassador. McSweeney’s departure was swiftly followed by that of Tim Allan, Starmer’s director of communications. Then yesterday, the party’s leader in Scotland, Anas Sarwar, became the most senior Labour figure to date to call for the prime minister to go. Starmer’s Cabinet, including the chancellor, home secretary and foreign secretary, came out in a coordinated vocal show of support for him in response. In today’s newsletter, we look at why the departure of a chief of staff so weakens a prime minister, who Starmer might turn to next, and whether they will have time to turn things around. First, the headlines. Five big stories UK politics | Keir Starmer has seen off an immediate challenge to his position from Labour’s leader in Scotland, telling his MPs he was “not prepared to walk away” from power and plunge the country into chaos. Iran | The country’s architecture of internet control is built on technologies from China, according to an analysis published by a British human rights organisation. Education | Children with special needs will not lose their places at special schools or current levels of assistance, an education minister has told parents anxious that the government would strip away their child’s support. Australia | New South Wales police have pepper sprayed protesters at a Sydney rally opposing Israeli president Isaac Herzog’s visit, with a state Labor MP claiming their actions were “totally over-the-top” and a Greens MP alleging she was assaulted. Monarchy | Police are assessing claims that Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor passed on confidential information about overseas trips to the child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. In depth: The most powerful job you’ve never voted for To lose one chief of staff might be considered unfortunate; to lose two looks careless. That is where Keir Starmer finds himself, with Morgan McSweeney’s exit on Sunday following the messy departure of Sue Gray just months after Labour won the 2024 general election. The Downing Street chief of staff is one of the most influential unelected roles in British politics, and with the prime minister losing his closest aide in No 10, not just opposition leaders but senior figures in his own party have stepped up to call on Starmer to quit. *** What is the chief of staff role – and why was McSweeney so important? While the prime minister’s principal private secretary, a senior civil servant, runs the day-to-day operation of No 10, the chief of staff is responsible for the political direction of the building. The first person to hold the title was David Wolfson in 1979, when Margaret Thatcher took office. The precise role varies depending on the prime minister’s leadership style, but in broad terms the chief of staff sits at the centre of No 10’s political operation. They advise the prime minister on strategy, party management and political risk, oversee the work of special advisers across government, and help ensure that policy, communications and parliamentary tactics are aligned. Chiefs of staff also act as internal brokers, smoothing relations between ministers, advisers and the wider machinery of government. But one of the most important – and least visible – parts of the job is gatekeeping. The chief of staff controls access to the prime minister, shapes what information reaches them, and often decides which problems are dealt with immediately and which are left to wait. Depending on which side of Labour’s factional fence you sit – as this Kiran Stacey analysis piece explained – McSweeney either helped engineer the party’s strategic shift towards the centre ground, masterminding its 2024 election landslide, or was simply the man in the chair when the Conservative vote imploded. His critics also say he has been instrumental in purging senior figures on the party’s left, to the detriment of its long-term electoral prospects. *** Who Starmer might appoint next Nothing quite says “we are resetting government” like senior aides being forced out of Downing Street. As the saying goes, deputy heads must roll. The vacuum left by McSweeney’s exit is now being filled by five people. Vidhya Alakeson and Jill Cuthbertson, who were McSweeney’s deputies, are now acting jointly in the role – Alakeson bringing policy expertise and business outreach, and Cuthbertson trusted operational and organisational experience from years in Labour politics. The other significant figures are MP Darren Jones, who, as chief secretary to the prime minister, has become a central figure in driving Starmer’s priorities. Amy Richards, the political director, is tasked with strengthening communication with Labour MPs. And there is Harvey Redgrave, head of the No 10 policy unit, who represents the policy-technocrat strand of the operation. It all makes for a very complicated org chart. Media outlets have also been throwing the name of Louise Casey into the ring for a potential permanent appointment. She has a reputation as a Whitehall “troubleshooter” and was trusted with carrying out a report into grooming gangs early on in the Starmer administration. Jonathan Powell, who held the job under Tony Blair and is Starmer’s national security adviser, might be another experienced option. *** Will Starmer even have the time? Yesterday, the Conservative opposition leader, Kemi Badenoch, the Green party leader, Zach Polanski, and the SNP’s Westminster leader, Stephen Flynn, all called on the prime minister to step down. Badenoch said Starmer was “in office, but not in power”, adding that he was “blowing around like a plastic bag in the wind”. Starmer appears determined to stay in place until the end of his term, regardless of the results from May’s local, Senedd and Holyrood elections – yesterday’s newsletter explored Labour’s struggles in Wales – and Downing Street said on Monday that he was “upbeat”, “confident” and “concentrating on the job in hand”. But his party may yet have other ideas. In the most damaging development of recent days, Labour’s leader in Scotland, Anas Sarwar, called for Starmer to stand down as prime minister. (The Guardian’s Scotland editor, Severin Carroll, has this analysis.) Sarwar said there had been “too many mistakes” in Downing Street, adding: “I have to be honest about failure wherever I see it.” It will have offered little comfort to Starmer that Sarwar described him as a “friend” before saying: “My first priority and my first loyalty has to be to my country, Scotland.” Sources close to Labour’s first minister in Wales, Eluned Morgan, said she was not planning to comment on Starmer’s leadership on Monday – something immediately seized on by Plaid Cymru’s leader, Rhun ap Iorwerth, who said yesterday: “Starmer has to go. He’s lost all moral authority and the self-awareness to do the right thing. Wales’ Labour first minister remains silent on Starmer’s lack of judgment … seemingly happy for the chaos to continue.” There are also plenty of other elephant traps between now and May. In this explainer, Matthew Weaver identified several key moments of risk for the prime minister in the coming weeks: the Gorton and Denton byelection on 26 February; the politically fraught white paper on special educational needs (Send) in England’s schools, expected in late February; and Rachel Reeves’s spring statement on 3 March. The government has also lost control of the timing of the release of documents relating to Mandelson’s appointment as British ambassador to the US, expected to include embarrassing personal messages between ministers, advisers and the disgraced peer. *** How could the endgame play out for Starmer? If Keir Starmer steps down as Labour leader while prime minister, the party would move quickly into a holding pattern. Under Labour’s rules, the cabinet, in consultation with the party’s national executive committee, would appoint an interim leader from among its members to run the party and government while a full leadership contest was organised. A full election would then follow in two stages. Candidates – who must be Labour MPs – would need nominations from at least 20% of their colleagues, plus support from constituency parties or affiliated organisations such as trade unions. Those who clear that hurdle would go to a one-member-one-vote ballot of party members and affiliates, using a preferential system until a candidate secures more than 50%. The process can take weeks, leaving the interim leader in place until a successor is chosen. There may be a route that suits almost everyone except Starmer: appointing an interim leader and prime minister with no long-term ambitions, prepared to shoulder responsibility for poor May election results, before a permanent leadership contest later in the year. That would also allow time for figures outside parliament – Andy Burnham, for example – to attempt to secure a Commons seat in time to be in play. For now, Starmer remains in Downing Street, insisting he can steady the ship. But the loss of a chief of staff is never about just one individual. It is a sign that authority is fraying at the centre – and that the prime minister’s grip on events is being questioned not just by his opponents, but also by those closest to him. What else we’ve been reading Emerald Fennell’s take on Wuthering Heights has landed like a lead balloon with fans and critics alike. Peter Bradshaw’s review is a gloriously sharp read. Aamna “Eventually, she didn’t mind, but in the beginning she did bite him” is exactly the kind of quote you want to read in a discussion of a beloved but surly raccoon, the pet that Gill Waters can’t forget. Martin Economic growth and rising carbon emissions still go hand in hand. This fascinating interactive asks whether that link can be broken. Aamna The Atavist has this story of three mothers whose children who were diagnosed in late adolescence or early adulthood with schizophrenia. And as a parent myself, I couldn’t help feel what a hard journey it had been for everybody involved. Martin The Epstein files suggest powerful men’s ties to the convicted paedophile went beyond indifference, Moira Donegan compellingly argues, with some actively seeking him out as an ally in pushing back against the #MeToo movement. Aamna Sport Winter Olympics | Jutta Leerdam delivered the defining race of her career on Monday night, roaring to Olympic gold in the women’s 1000m and setting a new Olympic record of 1min 12.31sec to lead a Dutch one-two and deliver the Netherlands’ first medals of the Games. Winter Olympics | The British freestyle skier Gus Kenworthy has received death threats and messages hoping that he breaks his neck after posting an image apparently showing him urinating the words “fuck ICE” in the snow last week. Football | Erling Haaland says Manchester City’s dramatic 2-1 win at Liverpool on Sunday meant more than just the points and represented a statement from the club in terms of the Premier League title race. The front pages “‘I’m not prepared to walk away,’ embattled Starmer tells MPs,” is the splash on the Guardian on Tuesday, as the PM comes under increasing pressure to step down. “PM comes out fighting as cabinet falls in line,” says the Times. “Streeting accused of No10 coup,” has the Telegraph. “Resign now! PM on brink as calls to go mount,” is the lead headline at the Express. The FT runs with “Starmer defies calls to stand down as allies accuse Streeting of fuelling crisis,” as the Mail opts for “Cabinet bounced into giving PM stay of execution.” Meanwhile the Metro asks simply: “How long?” The Sun draws attention to the latest on Andrew, saying: “King: We’ll help cops on Andy.” The Star has similar with: “King: We’ll help police.” Today in Focus Starmer survives – but for how long? Just before midday, news broke that Tim Allen, Keir Starmer’s director of communications, had resigned. By lunchtime, it emerged that Anas Sarwar, Labour’s leader in Scotland, was preparing to hold a press conference calling on Starmer to stand down. Helen Pidd recounts a whirlwind 24 hours in which the prime minister fought to save his career. Cartoon of the day | Ben Jennings The Upside A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad In south Antananarivo, capital and largest city of Madagascar, over 4,000 rickshaws provide the cheapest transport for an estimated 265,000 residents. Unlike most drivers, Haja Nirina owns his rickshaw, avoiding daily rental fees thanks to a microcredit programme run by his local athletic club, Crown Athletics Club. Crown’s roots began in 1997 with Antsirabe’s first rickshaw race, organised by Tsiry Rakotomalala. The race led to the formation of Crown, which gained momentum in 2017 under president Yann Mayette. Convinced of Malagasy athletes’ potential, Mayette offered microcredit through the club, enabling runners like Nirina to buy their rickshaw cycles. As an owner, Nirina only pays 500 ariary for overnight storage, allowing him to focus more on his athletic training and races. Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday Bored at work? And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow. Quick crossword Cryptic crossword Wordiply

UK and US sink to new lows in global index of corruption

The UK and US have sunk to new lows in a global index of corruption, amid a “worrying trend” of democratic institutions being eroded by political donations, cash for access and state targeting of campaigners and journalists. Experts and businesspeople rated 182 countries based on their perception of corruption levels in the public sector to compile a league table that was bookended by Denmark at the top with the lowest levels of corruption and South Sudan at the bottom. The Corruption Perceptions Index, organised by the campaign group Transparency International, identified an overall global deterioration, as 31 countries improved their score, while 50 declined. In particular, the report identified backsliding in established democracies, warning that events during Donald Trump’s presidency and the revelations contained in the Epstein files could fuel further deterioration. Britain has been gradually slipping down the rankings since 2015, falling from the seventh-placed country to 20th in 2025, with a score of 70 out of 100, down from 71 in last year’s report. Explaining the slight decline, Transparency International highlighted concerns linked to the two major political parties that contested the 2024 general election. It said record spending on election campaigning had “supercharged” a reliance on wealthy backers, with the Conservatives accepting £15m from a single donor in less than 12 months. This is understood to be a reference to contributions from the businessman Frank Hester, which prompted calls for the Tories to give the money back after the Guardian revealed that the party’s largest donor had made racist and sexist remarks. It also pointed to reports the world’s richest person, Elon Musk, had considered making a $100m (£73m) donation to Reform UK. Labour also came under the spotlight, after it emerged that its largest donor, Waheed Alli, had received a privileged pass to No 10. The report also highlighted criticism of political appointments for party donors. The UK is likely to remain “mired in scandal” this year, Transparency International warned, because of revelations about the relationship between the Labour grandee and former ambassador to the US, Peter Mandelson, and the convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. “This persistent decline is not a temporary blip – it risks becoming a defining feature of our political culture,” said Daniel Bruce, the chief executive of Transparency International UK. “The UK government must demonstrate that it is serious about restoring integrity. That means taking bold action to remove big money from politics, delivering genuinely open government, and ending the cronyism that undermines public trust in our institutions.” The government has announced plans to strengthen standards in public life, including a mechanism to remove disgraced peers and a review of the existing framework governing lobbying. The US fell from 28th place to 29th, overtaken by Lithuania, recording its lowest ever score of 64. The US could be in line for further decline, judging by the report’s assessment of recent events. Transparency International said that while the surveys from which the data for the report was taken were performed during 2025, they did not factor in all of the events that had taken place during that year, the first of Trump’s second presidency. It pointed to “the use of public office to target and restrict independent voices such as NGOs and journalists, the normalisation of conflicted and transactional politics, the politicisation of prosecutorial decision-making, and actions that undermine judicial independence”. Only seven countries scored 80 or higher, with Denmark taking top spot for the eighth year in a row, followed by Finland, Singapore, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. South Sudan ranked joint lowest alongside Somalia, just below Venezuela, Yemen and Libya. Transparency International lamented the “worrying trend” of declining scores, particularly in democracies where institutions have previously been stronger. “The global order is under strain from rivalry between major powers, and dangerous disregard for international norms,” it said. “Armed conflicts and the climate crisis are having a deadly impact. Societies are also becoming more polarised. “To meet these challenges, the world needs principled leaders and strong, independent institutions that act with integrity to protect the public interest. Yet, too often, we are seeing a failure of good governance and accountable leadership.” Transparency International launched its Corruption Perception Index in 1995 but historical placings are dates from 2012, when it changed the methodology. A government spokesperson said: “This government is committed to tackling corruption and protecting working people’s hard-earned money. “Our anti-corruption strategy targets corrupt actors directly, cutting off their influence and strengthening the systems that protect our democracy. “This strategy brings more corrupt individuals in the UK to justice and includes £15m of new funding for an expanded domestic corruption unit.”

Trump White House voices opposition after Israel unveils plan to increase control over West Bank

A White House official has reiterated Donald Trump’s opposition towards Israel annexing the West Bank, after Israeli plans were announced that would pave the way for more settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory. The measures, announced on Sunday, included allowing Jewish Israelis to buy West Bank land directly, and extending greater Israeli control over areas where the Palestinian Authority exercises power. It was unclear when the new rules, approved by Israel’s security cabinet, would take effect but they do not require further approval. As regional states and others condemned the plan, a White House official on Monday said that “a stable West Bank keeps Israel secure and is in line with this administration’s goal to achieve peace in the region.” More than 500,000 Israelis live in settlements and outposts in the West Bank, which are illegal under international law. Around three million Palestinians live there. Earlier, the UK called on Israel to reverse its decision, saying: “The UK strongly condemns the Israeli security cabinet’s decision yesterday to expand Israeli control over the West Bank. “Any unilateral attempt to alter the geographic or demographic make-up of Palestine is wholly unacceptable and would be inconsistent with international law. We call on Israel to reverse these decisions immediately,” the statement added. Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is scheduled to meet Trump in the US on Wednesday. The UN secretary-general, António Guterres, said he was “gravely concerned” by the changes, and warned they were “eroding the prospects for the two-state solution”, his spokesperson said in a statement. The West Bank, which Israel has occupied since 1967, would form the largest part of any future Palestinian state but is regarded by many on the religious right as Israeli land. Israel’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, said on Sunday that the changes were aimed at “deepening our roots in all regions of the Land of Israel and burying the idea of a Palestinian state”. Guterres called Israel’s actions “destabilising” and pointed to an international court of justice finding that Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory was illegal. A Saudi statement, which included the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Qatar, Indonesia, Pakistan, Egypt and Turkey, “condemned in the strongest terms the illegal Israeli decisions and measures aimed at imposing unlawful Israeli sovereignty”. The Israeli defence minister, Israel Katz, and Smotrich issued a joint statement explaining the decisions of the five-member security cabinet, which were not published in full. The security cabinet decided to repeal a law dating from Jordan’s control of the West Bank before 1967 to make land registries public rather than confidential, and to remove a requirement for a permit from a civil administration office. They said these moves would make it easier for Jews to purchase land in the West Bank. The Israeli measures also envisage transferring authority over building permits for settlements in the Palestinian city of Hebron – the West Bank’s largest – from the Palestinian Authority to Israel. In addition, the reform increases Israeli control over two major religious sites in the southern West Bank: Rachel’s Tomb near Bethlehem and the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron. The Palestinian presidency in Ramallah, which exercises limited control over some areas of the West Bank, said the move was aimed at “deepening attempts to annex the occupied West Bank”. With Reuters and Agence France-Presse

South Korean crypto exchange races to recover $40bn of bitcoin sent to customers by mistake

South Korea’s second-largest cryptocurrency exchange is scrambling to recover more than $40bn of cryptocurrency after accidentally crediting customers with 620,000 bitcoins during a promotional event last week. Bithumb said it had corrected most of the mistaken credits, but that about 13bn won ($9m) remained unrecovered after some recipients sold or withdrew the funds before the error was detected. The mistake occurred on 6 February, when an employee entered prize amounts in bitcoin rather than Korean won during a “random box” promotional event. The plan had been to send a total of 620,000 won ($423) in prizes to 695 qualifying customers, but the employee instead sent 620,000 bitcoins ($42bn). Of those eligible, 249 opened their prize boxes and received their reward, equivalent to roughly 14 times more bitcoin than the exchange owns. Lee Chan-jin, governor of South Korea’s Financial Supervisory Service (FSS), called it “catastrophic” for those who sold the bitcoin they received. Bitcoin prices have risen since Friday, meaning any customers required to return cryptocurrency could face losses. Lee added that the incident exposed “structural problems” in how exchanges operate internal ledger systems. Separately, legal experts are divided on whether recipients who sold what they received could face criminal prosecution, given a 2021 supreme court ruling that cryptocurrency does not constitute “property” under Korean criminal law. Bithumb said it corrected 99.7% of the erroneous credits by reversing internal ledger entries and issued an apology. However, 86 customers sold about 1,788 bitcoins in the 35 minutes before the exchange froze the affected accounts, financial authorities said, triggering a brief price drop on its platform. Some had been withdrawn to personal bank accounts, and some was used to buy other cryptocurrencies, according to local media. The exchange is now holding what it described as “one-on-one persuasion” talks with roughly 80 customers who cashed out, asking them to return the won equivalent voluntarily. It is reportedly seeking to avoid civil lawsuits, where courts could, under civil law, order the return of the original asset rather than its cash equivalent. The FSS escalated its response to a full investigation, while the country’s parliament has scheduled an emergency hearing for 11 February to question both the exchange and financial authorities. Bithumb said in its apology: “Bithumb takes this incident very seriously and will do its utmost to prevent recurrence by redesigning the entire asset payment process and enhancing the internal control system. “We want to make it clear that this incident is unrelated to any external hacking or security breach, and does not pose any issues with system security or customer asset management.”

‘A free limo is hard to turn away’: how car diplomacy turbo charges politics in the Pacific

At a ceremony in January, a shiny black luxury sedan rolled into the leafy, rain-soaked ground of Fiji’s state house. It was a gift from China to the Pacific nation’s president, Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu, who thanked Beijing for the “beautiful limousine”. The vehicle given was a Hongqi or “Red Flag” car, the same brand used by China’s leader, Xi Jinping, during military parades. It is an example of China’s “prestige diplomacy”, says Yun Sun, director of the China Program at the US-based Stimson Center. “This is more symbolic than substantive,” Sun says. “It’s part of China’s aid program that aims to build good personal relationships with leaders.” Across the Pacific, countries have long used vehicles – from ambulances and police trucks to school buses – as a diplomatic tool. But as strategic competition in the region intensifies, these donations have become visible markers of rival efforts to court Pacific governments and solidify partnerships. In a region where geographic isolation and high import costs drive up the price of new vehicles, foreign-donated cars – often delivered at the donor’s expense – are highly prized by Pacific governments. Australia, the US, New Zealand and Japan are among the other nations that have donated vehicles in the Pacific. China has given luxury cars, alongside more practical fleets, to countries in the region. As early as 2013, China donated luxury vehicles to Fiji’s leaders, and regularly delivers cars to host nations during the Pacific Islands Forum, the region’s main leaders’ gathering. Over the past decade, China has been steadily expanding its diplomatic, economic and political footprint across the Pacific, courting governments with infrastructure projects, development aid and high-profile gifts. One objective is to persuade Pacific nations to cut ties with Taiwan and publicly back Beijing’s One China principle, Beijing’s claim that Taiwan is part of its territory. Seven years ago, Taiwan counted six allies in the Pacific region. Now, with Nauru severing its Taiwan ties in 2024, only three remain – Tuvalu, the Marshall Islands and Palau. Fiji’s president and China’s embassy in Fiji did not respond to requests for comment about the latest gift. But in a speech given as the car was handed over in February, Lalabalavu reaffirmed Fiji’s commitment to the “One China policy”. Blake Johnson, Pacific affairs expert and senior analyst at the Development Intelligence Lab, says the link between gifts and political messaging is often clear. “That reiteration of support for the One China policy is a common phrase that comes along with most kinds of ceremonies where [Pacific leaders] receive gifts or thank China for the aid and support,” Johnson says. “Gift-giving in the region is always a two-way street.” Vehicles ‘reinforce relationships’ China’s growing presence has unsettled traditional partners in the Pacific, particularly Australia, which has long positioned itself as the primary partner – and it remains the largest foreign aid donor to the region. Over the past decade, Canberra has moved to reassert that role, expanding policing partnerships, security agreements and infrastructure assistance - including its own vehicle donations. Last year, Solomon Islands’ prime minister released two public statements in quick succession, first thanking Australia for a fleet of police vehicles, then thanking China for a fleet of SUVs. The incident highlighted a “level of one-upmanship”, Johnson says, and also Australia’s desire to maintain its relationships in the Pacific in the face of Beijing’s growing influence. “Australia has made it quite clear it wants to be the security partner of choice in the Pacific,” he says. “When Australia is working so closely with forces across the Pacific, it is easier to have vehicles and equipment that match.” China and Australia are not the only players, though. In January, the United States donated two ambulances to Palau. Japan, Korea and New Zealand have all supplied fleets to Pacific governments. For donor nations, the appeal is clear. Johnson describes these vehicles as “moving billboards” – rubbish trucks in Honiara emblazoned with “China Aid”, government cars in Vanuatu bearing stickers noting their donation from Korea, or a glimmering black presidential car with the red Hongqi symbol. “Vehicles are good bang-for-buck for foreign partners,” Johnson says. “They drive around every day, reinforcing that relationship again and again.” Johnson says most Pacific island countries need support and “vehicles can be useful regardless of where they come from.” “A free limo here and there is pretty hard to turn away,” he says.