Read the daily news to learn English

UAE blames Iran or its proxies for drone strike fire near nuclear plant

The United Arab Emirates has blamed a fire near its nuclear power plant on a drone launched by Iran or one of its proxies in what the UAE called a “dangerous escalation”. The fire was just outside the Barakah nuclear plant and caused no injuries or radiation alerts, with the emirate’s nuclear regulator saying there was no radioactive leak or risk to the public. But it came at an extremely tense moment in the sixth week of a ceasefire in the Iran war, with peace talks stalled and Donald Trump voicing impatience at the deadlock. “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!” the US president wrote on his Truth Social site. According to Axios, Trump met national security advisers on Saturday at his golf course in Virginia and is due to meet his national security team on Tuesday to discuss options. Trump also spoke to Benjamin Netanyahu before an Israeli security cabinet meeting to discuss Iran, Lebanon and Gaza, amid widespread speculation in Israel that the Iran war will restart in the absence of signs of compromise. According to state media, the UAE foreign minister, Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, held talks with other states in the region, including Saudi Arabia with which it has had a strained relationship recently. Riyadh condemned the attack. The minister also informed the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, of the details of the drone strike. He told Grossi that his country had the full right to respond to such “terrorist attacks”. The UAE is reported to have retaliated for earlier Iranian attacks on its oil infrastructure with airstrikes on Iranian facilities. It has tightened its partnership with Israel over the course of the war and has been the most hawkish of the Gulf states over military action against Iran. The UAE’s defence ministry said the drone that targeted the Barakah plant was one of three that “entered the country from the western border direction”. It said the unmanned aircraft had hit “an electrical generator outside the inner perimeter of the Barakah nuclear power plant in the Al Dhafra area”. “Investigations are ongoing to determine the source of the attacks, and updates will be disclosed upon completion of the investigations,” the ministry added. Anwar Gargash, an Emirati presidential adviser, made clear that he believed Iran or a regional proxy were the perpetrators. “The terrorist targeting of the Barakah clean nuclear power plant, whether carried out by the principal perpetrator or through one of its agents, represents a dangerous escalation,” Gargash wrote on X. Gargash called the incident “a dark scene that violates all international laws and norms”, and accused those responsible of having a disregard for civilian lives.

What is Ebola and why is WHO treating outbreak as global health emergency?

Health authorities in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda are trying to contain an outbreak of Ebola involving – so far – 246 suspected cases and 88 deaths. It began in Ituri province, in eastern DRC, but cases have already been detected elsewhere in the country and in neighbouring Uganda. On Sunday, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak “a public health emergency of international concern” and urged robust efforts to limit its spread. What is Ebola? Ebola is a highly contagious and often fatal disease. Caused by different viruses mostly associated with fruit bats, the infection often results in viral haemorrhagic fever. More than 40 outbreaks have been documented since it first emerged in 1976. This is the 17th outbreak in the DRC. Outbreaks result from “zoonotic spillover” – animal to human transmission. Infected humans then pass on the disease to others through bodily fluids such as vomit, blood and semen. Symptoms include fever, fatigue, muscle pain and headache followed by vomiting, diarrhoea, rash and internal and external bleeding. It has a 50% death rate. There are four types or strains of Ebola that affect humans: Zaire, Sudan, Bundibugyo and Tai Forest. The WHO says the latest outbreak involves the Bundibugyo virus. There have only been two previous outbreaks involving this strain, in 2007 and 2012. Why is this outbreak causing such concern? Because the strain of Ebola involved is rare, there is no vaccine for it, and conflict in the DRC makes efforts to contains its spread difficult. Dr Simon Williams, an infectious diseases expert at Swansea University, says: “This outbreak is more worrying than others because … the existing Ebola outbreak vaccine, the Ervebo vaccine, is not appropriate. There are no Bundibugyo virus-specific therapeutics or vaccines. “And it’s a nasty disease with a very high case fatality rate; much higher than Covid, for example. Fortunately, Ebola is much less transmissible than Covid or, say, measles. But it is much more severe and can be fatal to anyone, not just the elderly or immunosuppressed or other higher-risk groups.” When no vaccine is available, infection control usually involves bringing those affected into treatment centres to minimise transmission. That may be very difficult in this case because of the conflict and the targeting of healthcare facilities, says Paul Hunter, a professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia. He says: “In the past healthcare facilities have been targetted by militias and this is one reason why [affected individuals] may choose not to seek care, so pose an ongoing risk to family and other contacts.” Why was the outbreak not detected sooner and how could that delay affect what happens? The outbreak began last month. The earliest-known suspected victim, a 59-year-old man, developed symptoms on 24 April and died three days later. Health authorities were only alerted to the outbreak through social media on 5 May. Fifty people had already died by then, according to the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Slow detection gave the outbreak time to spread, says Dr Jean Kaseya, the director general of the Africa CDC. Any delay in responding to an Ebola outbreak “can have catastrophic consequences”, says Dr Anne Cori, an associate professor in infectious disease modelling at Imperial College London. The large numbers of detected cases and deaths “suggests an unusually high number of suspected cases were identified before the outbreak was officially declared”, she adds. “This indicates that the outbreak has likely gone undetected for several weeks or even months, which can make standard control measures, such as contact tracing, considerably more difficult to implement effectively, especially in a setting which already faces other challenges such as conflict.” How big could this outbreak get? A lot bigger, potentially. While it began in Ituri, two confirmed cases have also been found in neighbouring Uganda – both of the infected individuals had travelled there from the DRC. One of them died at a hospital in the Ugandan capital, Kampala. The WHO fears that the high proportion of positive cases found among those who have been tested, combined with the spread to Kampala and the deaths in Ituri, “all point towards a potentially much larger outbreak than what is currently being detected and reported, with significant local and regional risk of spread”. “There are significant uncertainties to the true number of infected persons and geographic spread associated with this event at the present time, it has said.

The UAE must be held responsible for its part in Sudan’s crisis | Letters

Nesrine Malik’s article is timely, highlighting how evidence of the United Arab Emirates’ complicity in Sudan’s war has begun to prompt calls for action to be taken (The UAE tries hard to keep its reputation spotless. But with the war in Sudan, how can it?, 13 May). What is now needed is a concerted international response. The UN and African fact-finding bodies have to date largely focused on the responsibility of Sudan’s warring parties for international law violations committed. It is time to complement this focus, by documenting and investigating the UAE’s involvement in the war with a view to establishing possible state and individual responsibility. This ranges from a failure to prevent both genocide in Darfur and international humanitarian law violations across the country to liability for the commission of international crimes. Such an inquiry ought not to be confined to the UAE. Multiple reports have pointed to the involvement of several states in the region and beyond in support of both sides, which has fuelled the war, particularly drone warfare. Foreign businesses and other actors have also reportedly been pivotal in sustaining and benefiting from Sudan’s war economy. Having an official report documenting violations by external actors might spur states and others into adopting overdue measures in response. It might also influence the political calculus of influential states such as the UAE which have not faced any accountability to date. If that were to happen, diminished support for and pressure on the warring parties might well raise the prospects for an end to the fighting in Sudan. In turn, this would bring into focus who should provide reparations to the victims of the war and pay for the reconstruction of the country. Sudan’s people have a right to freedom, peace and justice. This entails an end to the interference with their rights, be it from within or outside their country. Dr Lutz Oette Professor of international human rights law, Soas University of London • Nesrine Malik rightly draws attention to the fact that “successive British governments have studiously looked away from one of the primary sponsors of the Sudan calamity”, that is to say the United Arab Emirates, which, despite its repeated denials, has long supported the Rapid Support Forces with money, weapons and mercenaries. It is now nearly two years since the Guardian reported on claims that the Foreign Office was actively trying to suppress criticism of the UAE, even as the RSF was besieging the city of El Fasher in Darfur (UK ‘tried to suppress criticism’ of alleged UAE role in arming Sudan’s RSF militia, 24 June). This too was denied. The UK is the designated UN security council “penholder” for Sudan, and also for the UN’s women, peace and security file, and must do more if this devastating war is to be brought to an end. I am a trustee of a UK charity, Women’s Education Partnership, which enables disadvantaged women and girls in Sudan and South Sudan to access education. Since the war started, we have not had local staff on the ground, and the students are now displaced, trying to follow their degree courses online. Some are too traumatised to study; others have disappeared from contact lists. Most, however, are persevering despite three years of war. Sudanese women played a major role in the inspiring revolution of 2018-19. Let us hope that they will be able to flourish when peace eventually returns. Anna Snowdon Cambridge • Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.

WHO says Ebola outbreak in DRC and Uganda is ‘emergency’ of international concern

An Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Uganda is a “public health emergency of international concern”, the World Health Organization has said. The WHO made its declaration on Sunday after 88 deaths and more than 300 suspected cases linked to the outbreak of the Bundibugyo virus, prompting Africa’s top health official to say he was “on panic mode”. Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the director general of the WHO, announced the decision before convening a formal emergency committee at the organisation. Experts said the speed was likely to reflect the gravity of the situation. The Bundibugyo virus is one of three strains that can cause Ebola virus disease, and the least common. There are no approved vaccines or treatments for the strain, or specific tests. Ebola is a highly contagious disease, spread via bodily fluids such as blood and vomit. It has a high fatality rate, particularly in low-resourced settings that are unable to provide the supportive care typically available in the intensive care units of a high-income country. Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) announced the outbreak publicly on Friday, but said it was not yet clear when it had begun. It is convening experts and likely to announce a continental public health emergency in the coming days. Dr Jean Kaseya, the director general of Africa CDC, told Sky News: “Currently, I’m on panic mode because people are dying. I don’t have medicines. I don’t have [a] vaccine to support countries.” He said the outbreak pointed to the need for vaccine and medicine manufacturing capacity on the continent, describing it as an “equity issue” and warning: “Western countries, they don’t understand that when Africa is affected, they are also at risk because people are flying every day.” Kaseya was due to be in Geneva this week for meetings at the annual World Health Assembly, but said he would return to Africa tomorrow in order to support the response. He said officials were in talks with companies who had potential tests, vaccines and treatments at an early stage of development, to see whether any could be safely used or trialled during the outbreak – expressing a hope that some would become available in the “coming weeks”. Kaseya stressed the importance of basic infection control measures such as gloves and handwashing at an earlier press briefing, although officials said many informal health facilities in the affected regions may have limited supplies of that equipment. There have been 80 suspected deaths, eight laboratory-confirmed cases and 246 suspected cases in the DRC’s Ituri province, which is in the east of the country, bordering Uganda and South Sudan, and about five days’ travel from the capital. Two cases, including one death, have also been reported in Uganda’s capital, Kampala, apparently in people who had travelled from the DRC. A suspected case in the DRC’s capital, Kinshasa, had been previously reported, but the WHO later said the individual had “tested negative for Bundibugyo virus on confirmatory testing”. There were “significant uncertainties as to the true number of infected persons and geographic spread associated with this event at the present time”, the WHO said. It said that the signs, however, “all point towards a potentially much larger outbreak than what is currently being detected and reported, with significant local and regional risk of spread”. The WHO stressed that, unlike for the Zaire strain of Ebola, which has caused multiple outbreaks in the DRC, “there are currently no approved Bundibugyo virus-specific therapeutics or vaccines. As such, this event is considered extraordinary”. Conflict was continuing in the Ituri region, the WHO said, with a lot of people moving around and living in close quarters in urban or suburban areas – factors that can make spread more likely. On Sunday, a laboratory confirmed a further Ebola case in the city of Goma, in a separate part of the DRC also affected by conflict and under the control of the Rwanda-backed M23 militia. “A positive case in Goma has been confirmed by tests carried out by the laboratory. It involves the wife of a man who died of Ebola in Bunia, who travelled to Goma after her husband’s death whilst already infected,” Prof Jean-Jacques Muyembe, director of the Congolese National Institute for Biomedical Research (INRB), told AFP. Journalists from Associated Press in Ituri’s capital, Bunia, interviewed locals who said there had been unusually high numbers of burials and that they were afraid. “Every day, people are dying … and this has been going on for about a week. In a single day, we bury two, three or even more people,” said Jean Marc Asimwe, a resident of Bunia. “At this point, we don’t really know what kind of disease it is.” The WHO said the outbreak did not meet the criteria of a pandemic emergency, but the declaration of a public health emergency of international concern is designed to galvanise support and resources for the affected region. An announcement from DRC officials said the first case they were aware of had been in a nurse on 24 April. Helen Clark, a former prime minister of New Zealand and co-chair of the Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response, said: “We commend the director-general for acting with urgency in declaring this PHEIC. His decision to proceed ahead of convening a formal emergency committee reflects the gravity of the situation and the need for immediate global mobilisation.” She added: The world must now respond with the speed and solidarity this emergency demands – with resources, expertise, cross-border coordination, and critically, diagnostic capacity for this strain deployed to where it is needed most.”

Andalucíans vote in election seen as gauge of Spain’s wider political change

Voters in the southern Spanish region of Andalucía are casting their ballots in an election that is likely to deliver an absolute majority to the conservative People’s party (PP) and inflict another debilitating defeat on Pedro Sánchez’s embattled socialists in what was previously one of their proudest strongholds. Sunday’s election in Spain’s most populous region – the last big poll before next year’s general election – will serve as a barometer of wider electoral opinion and could also reveal whether the popularity of the far-right Vox party is beginning to peak. The PP, which has governed the former socialist bastion for the past seven years, is seeking to frame the election as a referendum on Sánchez, the country’s prime minister, whose inner circle, party and administration are facing an array of corruption allegations. According to the polls, the incumbent PP regional president, Juan Manuel Moreno Bonilla, is on course to almost replicate his result at the last election in 2022, when the conservatives won 58 of the seats in the 109-seat regional parliament. Meanwhile, the Spanish Socialist Workers’ party (PSOE), which ruled Andalucía from 1982 to 2019, looks set for its worst-ever results, dropping from 30 seats to 28. Vox, which entered mainstream Spanish politics in the 2018 Andalucían regional election, is forecast to pick up another seat or two to add to the 14 it won four years ago. Moreno is hoping another absolute majority will mean he does not need to depend on Vox, which has been seeking to drag the PP further to the right in regional coalitions by insisting Spaniards receive priority over foreign-born people for housing and public services. The regional president appears so confident of his majority that he has rubbished Vox’s so-called “national priority” policy as “an empty slogan”. Both Moreno and the PP’s national leader, Alberto Núñez Feijóo, are keen to use Sunday’s vote to advance the party across the country by making the most of the scandals engulfing the national government. Moreno has referred to his PSOE opponent, the former national minister and deputy prime minister María Jesús Montero, as “the lady from the past” and has spoken of the need to “bury bad politics and leave the past in the past to build the future”. Feijóo has been blunter still, saying Andalucían voters need to “choose between the conspiracy that Sánchez led and Montero watched over, and [Moreno’s] crack team”. Recent events have put the socialists under even greater pressure. Montero was fiercely criticised earlier this week for referring to the deaths of two Guardia Civil officers who lost their lives while pursuing drug-traffickers off the Andalucían coast as a “workplace accident”. She later corrected herself and said the deaths had occurred “in the line of duty”. Moreno has also found himself under fire. With 42.2% of Andalucían voters identifying healthcare as their region’s biggest problem, his handling of a cancer-screening scandal has returned to the fore during the campaign. Towards the end of last year, the regional government admitted that more than 2,300 women had not been informed of their inconclusive mammogram results, meaning follow-up tests and treatments were missed. The delay in diagnosis triggered huge anger and prompted protests that culminated in the resignation of the regional health minister. Moreno insisted this week that no one had died as a result of the administrative failure – a claim that has been challenged by campaigners. Ángela Claverol, the president of the breast cancer support association Amama Sevilla, said at least six women had died because of the failure to communicate screening results. She said the cancer scandal was indicative of a wider crisis in Andalucían health services that she and many others blame on Moreno’s privatisation of the public health system. Under Spain’s decentralised system, Spain’s self-governing regions are responsible for healthcare. “It’s awful; there are delays of up to three months for cancer surgery,” she said. “There are delays for CT scans, MRIs, appointments with oncologists, radiotherapy, etc. The delays are horrendous for oncology, but at the normal level for ordinary people, if I request an appointment with the GP at my health centre, they won’t give me one for 21 days.” Claverol said the public healthcare system had collapsed because of the regional government’s growing use of private providers. “Instead of reinvesting that money in the public sector, in hiring people, in hiring doctors, in hiring specialists, in hiring administrative staff, what they’ve done is siphon it off to the private sector,” she said. Moreno, however, says his government has modernised and upgraded hospitals and equipment and increased capacity “so that more patients can be seen and waiting times can be reduced so that we can move towards a closer, more agile and decisive health system”. Housing is another significant concern for voters in Andalucía, as elsewhere in Spain. As cities such as Seville, Málaga and Córdoba suffer the effects of overtourism – including soaring rents and a shortage of places to live – local groups are urging the regional government to focus on residents rather than tourists. Juan Carlos Benítez, a member of Albayzín Habitable, a residents’ association formed two years ago in response to dramatic changes in the picturesque Albaicín neighbourhood of Granada, said the Moreno government appeared to have opted for “a strategy of quantitative tourism over qualitative tourism”. Benítez said Granada was the latest Andalucían city to fall victim to short-term thinking that favoured rapid economic growth through tourism over sustainable development. He said recent months had been “catastrophic” for the neighbourhood, with a local health centre closing and many important local buildings being sold off for redevelopment. “It’ll become a Disneyland-type centre where no real people live and which only generates money for restaurant and shop owners, but doesn’t really benefit society as a whole,” Benítez added. Pablo Simón, a political scientist at Madrid’s Carlos III University, said the results of Sunday’s election would be felt far beyond Andalucía as Spain gears up for the general election. Polls suggest that the PP will once again finish first next year, but will need Vox’s support to govern. “If Moreno Bonilla maintains his absolute majority and Vox fails to gain influence in forming a government, that will confirm the notion that Vox is now somewhat stagnant and the PP is gaining more ground,” said Simón. He said that despite performing relatively well in recent regional elections in Aragón, Extremadura and Castilla y León, there was a feeling that Vox was stalling amid internal bickering and that its chances of taking a coveted 20% of the vote might be fading. “It’s a party that’s well anchored around 13-14%,” added Simón. “That means that nationally it’s around 17%. That’s a very good result. But since they already had the idea of being at 20%, that’s backfired on them.” However, he added that any scandals involving PP-led regions – such as the conservatives’ botched handling of the deadly floods in Valencia in 2024 – could yet reverse Vox’s fortunes. Simón also said the socialists would be bracing for a “terrible” result on Sunday. “The latest poll I’ve been given shows 27 seats, so three fewer,” he said. “We’re talking about a gap of more than 20 points between the first and second party – it’s just awful.”

Ukraine war briefing: more than 500 drones strike at Russia, killing 3; US allows Russian oil sanctions waiver to lapse

More than 500 Ukrainian drones attacked Russia overnight, killing three people around Moscow, authorities said on Sunday. Air defences shot down 556 drones in more than a dozen regions, including Moscow, Russia’s defence ministry said. The attack came after Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy vowed on Friday to launch more retaliatory strikes because of an earlier Russian attack on Kyiv that killed 24 people. Moscow and Kyiv have traded attacks following a prisoner swap and the expiration of a three-day truce on Tuesday. The Trump administration on Saturday allowed a sanctions waiver to lapse that had previously allowed countries including India to buy Russian seaborne oil after a month-long extension aimed at easing oil supply shortages and high prices due to Iran’s closure of the strait of Hormuz. The US Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, had previously said he would not renew the general licence allowing the purchase of Russian oil stored on tankers. As of early afternoon Washington time on Saturday, no renewal notice had been posted on the Treasury website. Two top Democratic US senators, Jeanne Shaheen and Elizabeth Warren, on Friday urged the Trump administration against renewing the waiver because it was providing revenue to Russia to aid its war in Ukraine, but said there was no evidence it was bringing down fuel costs for American consumers. An unexploded projectile was discovered on a property in south-eastern Romania near the EU and Nato member’s border with Ukraine on Saturday, its defence ministry said. Romania shares a 650-km (400-mile) land border with Ukraine. Russian drones attacking Ukraine’s ports on the Danube river have repeatedly breached Romanian airspace and fragments have sometimes fallen on its territory as Ukrainian forces shoot them down. An unguided reactive projectile was found in the yard of an uninhabited house in the village of Pardina in Romania’s Tulcea county, the ministry said without indicating its suspected origin. Last month, an explosive drone landed in a back yard in the city of Galati, marking the first time since the start of the Ukraine war that such an incident had damaged property in Romania. The leaders of Nato’s 14 eastern flank nations this week said Russia’s repeated violations of their airspace underlined the urgent need to consolidate the alliance’s air defences against missiles and drones. Several Russian and Ukrainian drones have crashed in Latvia since Russia invaded Ukraine, stirring public disquiet in the small former Soviet republic that is now a member of Nato and the EU. Latvian President Edgars Rinkevics on Saturday proposed opposition lawmaker Andris Kulbergs as the next prime minister after Evika Silina resigned. Silina stepped down triggering the collapse of her coalition after she dismissed defence minister Andris Spruds because Ukrainian drones strayed into Latvia and exploded at an oil facility. The Latvian army said it failed to detect the drones as they crossed from Russia. Silina blamed Spruds for not developing anti-drone systems quickly enough. In response, Spruds’ Progressives party withdrew support from Silina’s government on Wednesday, leaving her without a parliamentary majority and exposed to a no-confidence vote.

‘Feels like an illusion’: inside post-Maduro Venezuela’s bewildering new era

When Ángel Linares heard a strange buzz followed by an explosion, his first thought was that neighbours were setting off fireworks to celebrate the new year. Then his windows shattered, the building’s walls shook and its facade was ripped off, sending him flying on to the ground of an apartment suddenly reduced to rubble. His 85-year-old mother, Jesucita, feared Venezuela’s northern coast had been devastated by an earthquake, like the one she remembers from 1967. Next door, Elizabeth Herrera jumped out of bed in her pyjamas and realised something more sinister was afoot when the post-explosion silence was filled with the sound of gunfire: “Tah-tah-tah-tah-tah-po-po-tah-tah-tah.” “Is it a coup? … I don’t believe ‘Papá Trump’ would have dared to invade,” Herrera remembers her husband speculating as their housing estate’s panicked residents struggled to make sense of the mayhem just before 2am on 3 January. All four residents of the Urbanización Rómulo Gallegos project in Catia La Mar, a seaside town 20 miles north of Caracas, were wrong. Donald Trump had indeed ordered an invasion of Venezuela, albeit a lightning-fast one to abduct the country’s then president, Nicolás Maduro. Their community found itself at the eye of the storm as air-to-surface missiles rained down on defence and radar systems and radars along the country’s Caribbean coast and helicopter-borne Delta Force fighters swept south towards the capital. “They were 10 minutes that felt like an interminable hour,” said Herrera, who lost two elderly neighbours during the attack that was apparently targeting military installations on a nearby hill. She recalled her autistic son’s anguish as they rushed out into the darkness and sheltered in a nearby school. “Mummy, are we the baddies? Are Venezuelans the baddies? Are they going to kill us?” he asked. “I told him, ‘No, it’s probably just an issue between the White House and Miraflores,’” she replied, referring to Venezuela’s presidential palace. “So why are they shooting at us?” her son insisted. “In his autistic mind … it made no sense that if this was a thing between governments, why were the missiles falling here?” More than four months after Operation Absolute Resolve, Herrera and her neighbours are far from the only ones still trying to make sense of Trump’s intervention and its impact on the future of a country already reeling from years of poverty, hunger and repression. Across Venezuela, ordinary citizens, opposition activists, diplomats, businesspeople and members of Maduro’s movement are trying to fathom the bewildering new era ushered in by the autocrat’s capture and Trump’s unexpected decision to recognise his vice-president, Delcy Rodríguez, who has held power since. “Everything is so confusing …. This feels sometimes like an illusion,” said Jesús Armas, a former political prisoner and ally of the exiled opposition leader and Nobel laureate, María Corina Machado, who had hoped to take power but has been sidelined from Venezuela’s post-Maduro transformation. Changes have undoubtedly occurred since Maduro’s 13-year rule was brought to an end during a two-and-a-half hour blitz that left scores of Cuban and Venezuelan troops and at least three civilians dead. After years of increasingly despotic rule, which deepened after Maduro was accused of stealing the 2024 presidential election, an incipient political thaw has descended. Murals of Maduro have been painted over, his portraits quietly removed from some government offices, and foreign journalists are being allowed into the country for the first time since the 2024 vote. Hundreds of political prisoners have been freed and dissidents have emerged from hiding or returned from exile to continue their push for a transition back to democracy. On a recent evening, hundreds of people gathered outside Venezuela’s most notorious political prison – a shopping mall-turned-torture centre called El Helicoide – for a previously unthinkable protest to demand fresh elections and the release of the estimated 500 detainees remaining. “People have lost their fear,” said Jeisi Blanco, a human rights campaigner, as colleagues chalked the names of those still incarcerated on the pavement under the gaze of police who filmed participants but did not intervene. “They aren’t just statistics, they are people with stories and with families who have spent more than three years behind bars,” she said. Armas, who was released from El Helicoide in February as a gesture from Maduro’s heirs, said: “I feel great … I feel hope right now. I know that we are going to change this country. “We’re going to bring back freedom … and I know Venezuela will be a democracy in the next few months,” he said, insisting Machado would return in the coming weeks to tour Venezuela, rally supporters and complete its political transformation. US officials also celebrate what many here call the “new political moment” enabled by Trump’s audacious, although, to many, illegal raid. “The president likes action. He also likes deals, and he likes progress, and we’re seeing all of that in a very short period of time,” said Jarrod Agen, the director of Trump’s national energy dominance council, after arriving in Caracas on the first US commercial flight to the oil-rich country in more than seven years. “We’re moving at Trump speed … I’m super excited,” he said, flanked by smiling Venezuelan officials who have spent years at loggerheads with their US counterparts. But alongside the excitement and optimism there is bafflement and trepidation about the fact that Maduro’s rendition led not to fully fledged regime change or democratisation, but to a peculiar rapprochement between the fallen dictator’s authoritarian allies and their longtime foes in Washington. Trump has repeatedly praised Rodríguez as a “terrific” partner, while Venezuela’s new leader has given no indication that fresh elections are coming. “I don’t know, some time,” she deflected when asked recently when a vote might be held. Caracas-based diplomats voice astonishment at the political handbrake turn performed by Maduro’s supposedly anti-imperialist successors, who have rolled out the red carpet for Trump officials – and allowed Venezuela to be turned into what some have called a US protectorate – with virtually no explanation. “It’s the theatre of the absurd, it’s Beckett,” said one foreign envoy, recalling how, after Japan’s 1945 surrender to allied forces, Emperor Hirohito urged citizens to “bear the unbearable and endure the unendurable” to salvage their nation’s future. Rodríguez’s team had offered no such justification for embracing Trump, the diplomat said: “They just went from A to B without explaining why.” Experts say the once improbable marriage of convenience between Washington and Caracas is rooted in Trump’s desire to secure access to Venezuela’s vast oil reserves and for a foreign policy “win” amid the debacle in Iran, and Rodríguez’s determination to retain power and save the political movement Hugo Chávez founded more than 25 years ago. “The purpose is not to be the cat’s paw of the United States, to be a partner of the United States,” said Tom Shannon, a US diplomat who has worked with Venezuela since the 90s. “The purpose is to maintain and preserve the Bolivarian revolution, to the extent that it can be preserved, and to do what has to be done in order for that revolution to be preserved and for the political leadership that has defined it to be able to survive.” “I’m sure she feels it to be humiliating,” he said of Rodríguez, whom he has met numerous times. “She finds herself in a position that I’m sure she sees as politically complicated and difficult, but historic in terms of the trajectory of the Bolivarian revolution.” For opponents of the movement, who blame it for an economic and humanitarian disaster that has forced about a quarter of the country’s population to flee abroad, the détente and incomplete transition have left a bitter taste. Sitting outside her home, next to a government memorial to the victims of Trump’s attack, Herrera recalled her initial exhilaration at what seemed like imminent change, even as parts of her housing estate lay ruined. “I thought it was all over … I thought, thank goodness we’re going to escape this situation which is strangling us,” she said, a freshly painted government mural behind her bearing the message: “We will prevail”. But as the days passed, the excitement turned to dismay. “On the news they talk about how much oil they’ve taken and how much gold … yet we’re stuck in the same place … [If Trump came here] I’d ask him to think about Venezuelans and not just the natural resources that Venezuela has,” she said. “I feel hope but I also feel fear … Our fear is harbouring hope that the situation is going to change and then this not happening.” Sitting on a sofa beside a shrapnel-pocked portrait of Venezuela’s liberation hero Simón Bolívar, Jesucita Linares said her main worry was a repeat attack. In preparation, she has turned her shopping trolley into an emergency go-bag filled with clothes and medicine. “I’ve been asking God for this never to happen again,” said Linares. “But you never really know.”