Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) said it targeted a US base in Jordan, claiming to have destroyed a number of military equipment including air defence systems, an aircraft hangar and fuel tanks. The IRGC’s statement, published by Iranian state media this morning, did not name the US base.
Good morning. On 29 June, as the media gathered in Manchester at the People’s History Museum to hear Andy Burnham set out his blueprint to transform the UK, over in Westminster the 1824 Vagrancy Act was quietly repealed. It ended two centuries of criminalising people for the typically blameless fact of not having a home. While this largely symbolic move away from punishment to prevention was welcomed by charities, it did nothing to tackle the scale of the problem. The number of people sleeping rough on a single night in the autumn of 2025 in England – the most recent snapshot – was at a new record high of 4,793, exceeding the previous peak of 4,751 in 2017 and the fourth annual increase in a row. This is despite UK government spending on homelessness more than doubling in the past five years. On Monday, addressing the nation for the first time as prime minister, Burnham said his first instruction in office would be “to end rough sleeping in our country”. It was a familiar refrain for Burnham watchers – he made a similar pledge on his first day as mayor of Greater Manchester in 2017, after spending the early morning in the city’s Albert Square with people who had slept out there overnight. And he’s by no means the first Labour leader to be thus moved: the “scandal” of citizens forced to sleep outdoors in all weathers was one that Tony Blair vowed to end in 1999 – an aim his government came close to achieving before progress unravelled under successive Conservative governments. It was a commitment that Jeremy Corbyn had planned to announce if elected prime minister. I spoke to Dr Maya Singer Hobbs, of IPPR North, about the Manchester rough sleeping case study, and what lessons it holds for a national effort. But first the headlines. Five big stories Middle East | The US has signed a landmark nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia that could allow the kingdom to enrich uranium in the future. UK news | A political lobbying firm founded by the former electoral strategist for Boris Johnson secretly pays journalists to write pieces for British newspapers that are favourable to their clients. UK politics | Andy Burnham is immersed in a deepening political row after ordering a review of plans for the early release of thousands of killers, rapists and sex offenders from prison in September. Environment | Extreme heat supercharged by the climate crisis is sucking Europe dry in summer and intensifying the drought hitting the continent, a scientific analysis has found. World news | A modelling scout who recruited women for Jeffrey Epstein has been found dead at his home near Paris, French officials have said. In depth: ‘It’s not easy sitting on the ground with people walking past you’ Whenever I write about rough sleeping, I remember Mark Starr. I spoke to him in 2019 when Glasgow city council was piloting a scheme to help homeless people with digital exclusion. We talked about what it was like to have his first email address at the age of 53, but also his childhood in Kent, his work as a teenager at the local stables and his love of horses. “Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine I’d end up on the streets,” he told me. “It’s not easy sitting on the ground with people walking past you.” The article was never published because Mark died on those same streets after we met. A few months later my colleague Simon Hattenstone talked to Mark’s family for his devastating series on The Empty Doorway. I mention this now as a reminder to myself, as much as anyone else, that every rough sleeper is an individual, quite likely with friends and family who miss them, and certainly with memories and dreams of better days. Rough sleeping – and homelessness more broadly – have risen to record levels in recent years, and the reasons are many and various: a chronic shortage of social and affordable housing, local initiatives derailed by the pandemic, inadequate support for prison leavers or those fleeing domestic abuse. Young people especially become vulnerable when tenancies end, and housing benefit can’t keep pace with soaring private rents – especially in city centres like Manchester. And then there is hidden homelessness, sleeping in a car or on a friend’s sofa and abruptly tipped into crisis when circumstances change. Charities working with migrants describe a funnel effect as individuals granted asylum have nowhere to go after their 42-day “move-on” period from home office accommodation. Add to this the growing numbers whose immigration status gives them no recourse to public funds – perhaps someone who has exhausted their appeal process or who has conditions attached to their visa – meaning they are barred from homelessness services but also have no right to work. On Monday, IPPR North published a report, co-authored by Singer Hobbs with the charity Crisis, calling for a genuinely “housing-led” approach to homelessness. As reported by our north of England editor Josh Halliday, it predicts current levels of homelessness could rise by 25% to more than 230,000 people by 2030 without radical action from central government. We know that Burnham was paying attention: he had been due to write the foreword for the report before he launched his bid for re-election to the Commons. *** The Manchester model The report recommends the national rollout of two Manchester-tested initiatives. Burnham’s “A Bed Every Night” programme expanded emergency overnight accommodation to anyone who needed it, not just to those with “priority need”, like pregnant women or people with children, to whom councils already owe a statutory duty. Alongside this, Housing First is a model that targets the most entrenched rough sleepers, who usually have very high support needs on account of addiction, mental illness or other challenges. It works on the assumption that people make most progress when based in stable housing rather than a hostel or B&B. Following success in the US and Finland, Housing First has been piloted in the West Midlands and Liverpool too, as well as across Scotland. What can’t be underestimated is the significance of Burnham making rough sleeping his immediate mayoral priority. “He expended political capital,” says Singer Hobbs, “and people working in the sector told us that made it easier because they knew exactly what he wanted.” This forced much more effective collaboration across boroughs and agencies, for example, sharing data on who was rough sleeping in different areas. *** Scaling up Although rough sleeping numbers in Manchester fell every year from 2018 to 2021, post-pandemic they have crept back up. Local charities interviewed on Monday after he made his pledge argued that a nationwide approach was needed to tackle many of the systemic drivers of rough sleeping, something IPPR North, and Burnham himself, have likewise identified. “As the mayor of Greater Manchester, he had no control over many of the things that drive homelessness,” says Singer Hobbs, “the welfare system, the home office or the Ministry of Justice. As prime minister, he has those levers.” The challenge now is what she describes as “the eternal balance of any kind of devolution”. For frontline services, it makes sense to have coordination at hyper-local level – where many rough sleepers are already well known. But prevention sits nationally, ensuring “you don’t end up with a policy being made in one department inadvertently driving homelessness up somewhere else”. One preventive act, for example, would be increasing the “move-on” period for those recently granted refugee status. And criticism has been levelled at A Bed Every Night. The offer could be a bare minimum of a sleeping bag on a hostel floor, and night shelters have little capacity to move people out of their current circumstances, sometimes escalating their vulnerabilities. The UK government is already spending billions on expensive and regularly sub-standard temporary accommodation, with growing numbers getting stuck at this stage because of the lack of available housing. Research for the Children’s Commissioner for England last year found that 520 families in England had been living in a B&B for over a year. IPPR North has examined some innovative approaches: Wigan has leased long-term empty homes at lower rates from private landlords; Waltham Forest has repurposed council-owned buildings. But this is another pinchpoint for Burnham: can he do enough at the end of the housing chain to ensure temporary accommodation is just that – a brief emergency provision on the way to a settled home. If Burnham really does “oversee the biggest council housebuilding programme since the postwar period”, as he outlined in June, that will also go some way to ease the pressure on local authorities. But his predecessor Keir Starmer’s efforts to tackle the crisis by building 1.5m homes over five years stalled because of a perfect storm of high interest rates, rising construction costs, and the impact of Brexit. *** Look north Here it is worth taking a detour through Scotland, where Holyrood’s homelessness legislation has been lauded as some of the most progressive in the world. But it has failed to deliver because of a catastrophic mismatch between ambitious legal rights and the practical resources required to fulfil them. The vast majority of Scottish councils already have the Housing First programme Burnham favours, but, like in England, rough sleeping has been on the rise since lockdown. Campaigners in Scotland suggest that, despite the standout early success of the pilots, momentum was lost after Covid, with the Scottish government failing to provide the long term oversight and vision required. And unlike England, in Scotland – and recently in Wales – the concept of priority need has been abolished. But at a time when local government is struggling financially, this universal duty to house anyone who is unintentionally homeless added a huge additional burden on councils. It has also attracted people newly granted asylum in other parts of the UK to the country, something Reform were swift to weaponise during the Holyrood election campaign earlier this year. Nevertheless, IPPR North and Crisis argue this move is fundamentally fairer, and have urged the UK government to roll it out nationwide, albeit with a timeline in place and additional resources. Charities in Scotland believe this would at least balance the system, reducing the incentive for people in need to move across the border. *** An end to rough sleeping? Can Andy Burnham end rough sleeping across the country? “I’d like to think so,” says Singer Hobbs, with the immediate caveat that the funding he announced on Monday is unlikely to be enough. It has been substantially reduced before: Blair’s rough sleepers’ unit was spearheaded by the cast iron problem-solver Louise Casey who also coordinated ‘Everyone In’ at the start of lockdown, which gave local authorities across England just three days to move all rough sleepers into emergency accommodation. That showed what could be achieved if homelessness was treated as a public health crisis. Most people – fortunately – won’t ever experience homelessness, and yet it is becoming an increasing public anxiety. According to polling ahead of May’s Holyrood elections, one in three Scots were worried they could lose their home in the coming years, while 61% were more likely to vote for parties who prioritised action on homelessness. “People sleeping rough is a really visible sign of our public realm not being fit for purpose,” says Singer Hobbs. Burnham already understands that homelessness is a political choice. Now facing an electorate weary of broken promises, he has staked his government’s reputation on it. What else we’ve been enjoying This Guardian investigation exposes how the ultra-processed food industry is copying the tactics of big tobacco: when all else fails, sue (even if you’ve no chance of winning). Hettie If you haven’t tried this already, use our new analysis tool to discover how different voting systems return wildly different election results in your local area. Libby How do you solve a problem like the Treasury? Burnham’s first week as PM showed just how much power it holds, and as Larry Elliot writes, his chancellor has a challenge on his hands. Hettie We’re big fans of feedback on First Edition, so I’ve taken time to read and digest what Guardian readers say they want from Andy Burnham’s premiership. Libby Tate needs a total rethink, a fresh pair of eyes, and should maybe even start calling itself “the” Tate. I enjoyed reading our art writer Jonathan Jones on the job facing the institution’s new director. Hettie Sport Cycling | Anti-doping authorities at the Tour de France have rejected accusations of preferential treatment towards Paul Seixas, the teenage French rider and home favourite who is placed fourth overall. Football | Southampton’s manager, Tonda Eckert, is facing a lengthy suspension from all football activity after being charged with three counts of misconduct by the Football Association. Football | The Amazon founder Jeff Bezos has held talks about joining the consortium that is seeking to buy 30% of Liverpool. The front pages “Burnham steps in to order review in row over early prisoner release”, is the Guardian’s front page today. The Times leads with “Prison chaos as Burnham calls halt to early release”, the Mail also goes on “Burnham forced to review early prison release”, the Telegraph’s take is “‘It is deplorable that freeing prisoners early is acceptable’” and the Express splashes “My Andrew and every victim deserves better”. Elsewhere, the FT writes “Fear for winter supplies drives gas prices near Iran war peaks”, the i Paper has “Water execs face criminal charges, accused of major conspiracy to fake sewage tests”, the Sun leads on “Stig: I nearly died in Freddie crash”, and Metro says “Andy Tap!” on Burnham’s transport plans. The Latest Zelenskyy ousts Ukraine army chief after protests Volodymyr Zelenskyy has fired his commander-in-chief, Oleksandr Syrskyi, in Ukraine’s biggest military shake-up in two years. Nationwide protests broke out after Zelenskyy sacked Mykhailo Fedorov as defence minister, who the Ukrainian president says will now be brought back into government in a ‘prominent position’. Lucy Hough speaks to the Guardian’s senior international correspondent, Luke Harding. Cartoon of the day | Nicola Jennings The Upside A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad Ray Exworth created one of Britain’s most extraordinary bodies of sculpture, but almost nobody has even seen it. He had just one major exhibition in his lifetime, at the Whitechapel Gallery in 1975. But then he disappeared almost entirely from public view, retreating to a labyrinth of sheds in remote Cornwall, where he spent the following decades working on his sculptures. Now, a new book, “Ray’s Sheds,” provides unprecedented access to this work for the first time. It documents his unwavering dedication and asks what the purpose of art is when it’s never publicly seen. 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
Narendra Modi has said he will set up “fast track courts” to expedite the punishment of corrupt officials who leaked examination papers,as India’s prime minister seeks to quell the youth-led “cockroach” protest movement that has rocked Delhi and challenged his government. In his first public remarks on the movement, Modi said on X “Nothing is more important than the welfare and future of our youth … Those who try to harm the future of our youth will not be spared.” The offer of faster justice than usual from India’s clogged judicial system, which can take decades to deliver a verdict, was swiftly rejected by the Cockroach Janta party (CJP), the satirical name the youth protest movement coined after India’s top judge called unemployed youths “cockroaches”. “Dharmendra Pradhan must resign,” the CJP said, referring to the education minister. His resignation is a core demand of the movement, along with reform of the education system. An estimated 50,000 people protested in Delhi on Monday, even though police denied them permission to march on parliament and later mounted baton charges and fired teargas. On Wednesday, more than 1,000 people remained camped out at the CJP’s protest site in central Delhi despite the gruelling heat and humidity. Many protesters had travelled for miles to be there. Modi’s statement follows indications the government is softening its stand somewhat. Ministers have been at pains to say they are willing to talk to the CJP but the one thing they refuse to mention is Pradhan’s resigation. The protest site at Jantar Mantar is overflowing with supporters eager to show their solidarity. Unable to fit into the enclosed area, the crowd has spilled outside on to the roads. Some sort out donations of food and water sent by well wishers, others hand out food, including to the police on duty, fan those wilting from the heat, or clear up litter. Young men and women in other cities across India have also voiced their support for the CJP’s demands by holding their own demonstrations. At a press conference on Wednesday, the opposition leader Rahul Gandhi escalated the rhetoric, demanding that apart from Pradhan resigning, Modi should apologise for failing to provide a fair education system. Gandhi said the country had seen 152 exam paper leaks over the past decade without resulting in a single conviction. “Somebody, or a group of people, are destroying our education system, India’s most valuable asset, destroying the lives of our students. What does the government do? Zero convictions,” he said. If anything, the movement is hardening its stance after Monday’s brutal crackdown by the police. CJP leaders were deeply disappointed when their meeting on Monday with the health minister, J. P. Nadda – the first in over 60 days – resulted in nothing. Its founder, Abhijeet Dipke, has said they will not go to the government. If ministers want to speak to them, they will have to come to the protest site and talk to them in public, he said.
In the spring of 1944, Elsie Barber, a member of the Women’s Auxiliary Air Force, had a fling with a Royal Air Force pilot named Arthur Brown, known as Buster. The liaison at the RAF base near High Ercall in Shropshire was clandestine. She was 24 and single, he was a recently married 21-year-old. Buster died months later, on D-day, when his Mosquito fighter plane crashed in the Netherlands, leaving Elsie with a lonely dilemma. She was pregnant, and after giving birth to a daughter, made the decision to give her up for adoption. The girl grew up unaware of her origins – until, decades later, she decided to investigate and discovered a tale of family secrets, heartbreak and glory. Judy Bain is now 81 years old and a living link to a legendary figure in aviation who was born on 23 July 140 years ago. Buster’s father – Judy’s grandfather – was Arthur Whitten Brown senior, who with John Alcock completed the first nonstop transatlantic flight in 1919, crossing 1,950 miles (3,138km) from Canada to Ireland in 16 hours and 12 minutes, a feat that astonished and enthralled the world. For aviation enthusiasts Brown’s birthday, 23 July 1886, has a melancholic tinge because when he died in 1948 – grief-stricken after the loss of Buster, his only child – it was believed he had no descendants. In fact he has seven: Judy, her two children and four grandchildren. “One of the things that saddens me is that when he died, and his son died, there was no other family,” said Judy, speaking from her home in Perth, Australia. “Neither of them knew about me and there were no other relations at all.” Piecing together her family’s story proved bittersweet, but discovering the touch of celebrity was a welcome surprise. Alcock and Brown’s flight in a first world war Vickers Vimy biplane from Newfoundland to Clifden in County Galway was an exploit that showed the potential of long distance air travel and won acclaim and knighthoods for both men. Buster followed his father into the RAF, married in 1943 and had his fling with Elsie while posted to the training base in Shropshire from January to March 1944. He was on a scouting mission when he was killed. Later that year, Elsie gave up their baby for adoption to a couple in Cornwall. When Judy was about 10, the couple told her she was adopted, then shunned the topic. It was not a happy childhood, she said. “I didn’t fit into that family. I was adventurous and they weren’t.” After studying social science at the University of Liverpool, Judy married a Scot, Andy Bain, and they moved to western Australia in the 1960s. Andy died of a brain tumour, leaving Judy to raise their son and daughter while juggling different jobs, including teaching. In the 1990s, Judy, through a researcher, identified and traced her birth mother to Cornwall. Elsie was in her 70s and married with two adult children to Tom Salmon, a retired BBC TV journalist. Mother and daughter met in Cornwall in 1994, said Judy. “We got on really well.” However, Elsie misidentified Judy’s father. She appeared to think the father was another RAF man with whom she had a relationship in 1944, and she died in 2000, at the age of 81, without identifying Buster. Elsie’s daughter-in-law Elizabeth Salmon had a passion for genealogy and DNA research and with Judy’s permission investigated her parentage. “I’m like a jack russell, once I start, I never let go,” said Elizabeth. After establishing that the other RAF man was not the father, she identified Buster in 2020. “It was the eureka moment.” Judy had never heard of the doomed young pilot but as a schoolgirl had learned about his famous father. “It was exciting to discover that I had a historical grandparent,” she said. One of her four grandchildren – Brown’s great-great-grandson – has visited the biplane at London’s Science Museum. Brendan Lynch, an Irish author who chronicled Alcock and Brown’s feat in a 2008 book, Yesterday We Were in America, published by the History Press, helped Salmon with her research on Brown and has forged a bond with Judy. He hopes she will attend a commemoration of the landing in Clifden. “At previous events there was an Alcock and I felt the absence of a Brown relative very acutely. It would mark a long overdue reunion and a fitting conclusion to one of aviation’s most daring feats.” Illegitimate children bore a stigma in the 1940s, but Lynch believes the aviation pioneer would have embraced Judy had he known about her. “As well as being a fearless flyer, Arthur Whitten Brown was known to his contemporaries as a thoughtful and considerate man. I am convinced that he would have braved the controversy of his son’s escapade and welcomed his granddaughter.” Brown was still mourning Buster when he died in 1948, aged 62, from an overdose of sleeping tablets. Some say it was an accident, others suspect he took his own life. “I like to think that if he had met Judy he would have given her a good home, that it might have been a plus for him,” said Lynch. Judy has inherited her grandfather’s taste for adventure. She drove a camper van across Australia and scuba dived into her 70s and despite a recent hip operation still adores the ocean. “I enjoy snorkelling. There’s a really good spot just down the road from me.” • In the UK and Ireland, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123. In the US, you can call or text the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline at 988 or chat at 988lifeline.org. In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. Other international helplines can be found at befrienders.org
Hotels are booking out two years in advance in the New Zealand city of Dunedin as it prepares for the region’s first total solar eclipse in more than 850 years. At 4.17pm on 22 July 2028, the moon will pass in front of the sun, casting a roughly 100km-wide shadowy band across parts of southern New Zealand. Everywhere within that band – from tourist hotspot Queenstown in the west to Dunedin city in the east – will be plunged into daytime darkness for 2 minutes and 51 seconds. Despite there being two years still to go, hotels are already fielding booking inquiries, including the Dunedin Leisure Lodge, which by Thursday was fully booked for its “solar eclipse package” that includes complimentary eclipse glasses. Dr Ian Griffin, an astronomer and director of Tūhura Otago Museum, said: “The last one visible from Dunedin was in 1163, which was before humans reached New Zealand. “So we will be the first people in Dunedin ever to see a solar eclipse from this part of the world, which is quite exciting.” It will also be the first total solar eclipse visible anywhere in New Zealand since 1965. “That three minutes of darkness, if it’s clear, will be absolutely memorable for anybody who sees it,” Griffin said. On Wednesday, Dunedin’s museum started the clock for the two-year countdown, in what is tipped to be a major tourism event for the city. Roughly 35,000 visitors are expected to descend on the city, which has a population of 130,000. Griffin, meanwhile, has been preparing for the eclipse since 2013. “I did buy my house all those years ago based on the fact that you could see the eclipse from it,” he said. The eclipse will happen in the middle of New Zealand’s winter, just after the country celebrates Matariki – the Māori new year. Matariki is the Māori name for a cluster of stars known elsewhere as the Pleiades. The constellation is visible from New Zealand for 11 months of the year, but disappears from the skies for a month in winter, reappearing around the time of the winter solstice. Dunedin is planning a night-sky festival beginning with Matariki and going through to the eclipse. “It’s actually unique anywhere around the world,” Griffin said. “We’ve got the cultural holiday celebrating the night sky, and then will be following it about 10 days later with a fantastic eclipse.” The Dunedin mayor, Sophie Barker, said anticipation for the eclipse was being felt across the city. “This remarkable event is now firmly on the horizon.”
Yemen’s Houthi militia attacked two Saudi Arabian oil tankers, the Iranian-aligned group said on Thursday, with a Saudi news agency later confirming one of the vessels was ablaze in the Red Sea. The threat of new front opening up in the US-Iran war came as the US military launched its 12th successive night of strikes, which have now widened to western and central Iran. The Houthis said they attacked two tankers, the Encelia and Layla, saying the vessels had violated a naval blockade imposed by the group on Saudi Arabia in the Red Sea. The Houthis said they targeted the tankers with a number of ballistic and cruise missiles as well as drones. Saudi Arabian news outlet SPA said an attack caused a fire on the bow of the Encelia but all crew members were safe. It did not say who targeted the vessel. A maritime security source said earlier on Thursday that the Encelia had transmitted a distress call via VHF radio, reporting it had been struck by a missile while operating at the outer port limits of Saudi Arabia’s Jizan, in the Red Sea, and was on fire. The British maritime risk-management group Vanguard also said the Saudi-flagged tanker Encelia was struck by an unknown projectile about 70 nautical miles (130 km) south-west of Saudi Arabia’s Al Shuqaiq. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations agency (UKMTO) said it had received a report of an incident in the same area, saying the master of a tanker reported being struck by an unknown projectile that caused a fire onboard. It was not immediately clear whether the UKMTO report referred to the Encelia, though details matched Vanguard’s report. In the statement announcing their attack on the two tankers, the Houthis claimed they had forced about 10 ships to retreat and return. Five tankers changed course in the Red Sea on Wednesday, with two signalling the Suez canal as their new destination after the Houthis warned ships to avoid Saudi ports, ship-tracking data showed. Brent crude oil on Wednesday jumped more than 3% to move back up above $95. Before the Red Sea flare-up, Trump had vowed to destroy an Iranian bridge or power plant every time Iran shoots at a ship in the strait of Hormuz, a claim Iran said it would respond to. US attacks on Thursday lasted five hours and struck at Iranian military targets including maritime capabilities, missile and drone storage facilities, coastal surveillance sites, and air defence assets. Iranian media reports said the US twice on Thursday attacked a military target in Bushehr, near the country’s only operating commercial nuclear power reactor, marking three strikes there in two days. State TV reported two people were killed and 11 wounded in what a Khuzestan provincial official described as a US missile attack on the Shalamcheh border crossing with Iraq. Despite triumphant statements from Washington, Iran has demonstrated it retains missile and drone capabilities. Iran pounded vital water desalination and energy plants in Kuwait this week and targeted US military assets there. US allies Bahrain and Jordan have also come under attack in recent days. An Iranian health ministry official said 53 civilians had been killed and 592 wounded since late last month. Since the US and Israel launched the war on 28 February, thousands of people have been killed and millions displaced. The war has also led to the deaths of 18 US service members and injured more than 450 troops. Trump attended a ceremony on Wednesday at Dover air force base for four US service members killed in Iranian attacks on military bases over the last few days. “For me it’s one of the hardest things to do as a president. But it has to be done,” Trump said before leaving for the ceremony.
The US and Saudi Arabia have agreed a landmark deal that would use American technology and expertise to establish a civilian nuclear program in the Gulf country, a move that has caused alarm across the Middle East and through the corridors of power in Washington. Much of the deal remains unclear, but concerns centre on whether Saudi Arabia would have the capability to enrich uranium domestically, and what that means for nuclear proliferation. What is the nuclear deal that’s agreed? The 30-year deal is designed to meet the “energy needs” of oil-rich Saudi Arabia, according to a statement from US energy secretary Chris Wright. Under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s economic plan, Saudi Arabia aims to use nuclear power for some electricity generation, thereby boosting oil sales by freeing up more supplies for export. The deal would make American companies central in the development of the country’s nuclear infrastructure, while denying competitors like China and Russia a foothold in the country. The deal is thought to be worth tens of billions of dollars, and is the continuation of a plan first conceived during the Biden administration. That deal would have seen the US agree to nuclear cooperation in exchange for Saudi Arabia establishing formal ties with Israel. The prospect of normalisation between Israel and Riyadh has been derailed by the 7 October attack by Hamas, and the resulting years-long war in Gaza. The Trump administration has chosen to push the deal through without the wider agreement with Israel. Will Saudi Arabia be able to enrich uranium on its soil? The deal reportedly paves the way for the building of a uranium enrichment facility in Saudi Arabia, but this would be contingent on a joint US-Saudi study determining such a facility is necessary. The study would run for two years, potentially leaving Donald Trump’s successor in the White House with the decision on whether to sign off on allowing domestic enrichment in Saudi Arabia. Many countries with nuclear energy industries do not enrich uranium domestically – a process which could theoretically produce highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon. They instead rely on importing the fuel for reactors. Part of the US justification for going through with the deal, is that Washington would have oversight of any enriched uranium and spent fuel from reactors, ensuring they could not be reused to make a bomb. Why is it controversial? Nuclear nonproliferation groups have warned for years that such a deal could set Saudi Arabia on the path to develop a nuclear weapon. Riyadh has in the past said it would need a nuclear weapon if its regional rival, Iran, acquired one. The US is engaged in a war with Iran that is in part being fought to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear bomb or enriching uranium to weapons-grade level. US secretary of state Marco Rubio has dismissed concerns about the Saudi deal, saying the US is “not going to reach any agreement with any country in the world that leads to the risk of proliferation”. The Trump administration’s nuclear cooperation agreement was signed alongside a separate “bilateral safeguards agreement” which it said would provide for adequate monitoring. But experts have expressed alarm that Wednesday’s deal lacks the oversight and guardrails of previous nuclear agreements. Saudi Arabia will reportedly not be subject to the most rigorous monitoring from the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA’s “Additional Protocol” has been implemented by dozens of countries, and was one of the requirements of the Obama-era nuclear deal with Iran from which Trump withdrew in 2018. It involves inspection and verification to ensure that countries are using nuclear material solely for peaceful purposes. When the US struck a similar deal with the United Arab Emirates, the UAE agreed not to seek enrichment or process spent atomic fuel, a measure that became known as the “gold standard” for nations wanting atomic power. The Saudi-US agreement reportedly does not include this gold standard. Can this deal be blocked? Opponents have long argued that providing Saudi Arabia with a domestic nuclear program will set off a race across the Middle East for other countries to pursue similar capabilities. Israel – which is known to have a secretive nuclear weapons program – has reportedly raised concerns that the deal could launch a regional arms race. Democrats in Congress have expressed similar concerns. Senator Chris Murphy said the agreement would “set off a nuclear race in the region, further disincentivizing Iran from limiting its own program”. However, Murphy and his colleagues in Congress will probably have difficulty blocking the deal. The deal is expected to be submitted to Congress for approval in the coming days, but to block the agreement, Congress would need to pass a joint resolution and have a two-thirds majority to override the president’s veto.
Walking out of one of Hong Kong’s last remaining independent bookstores, hands behind her back but head held high, the woman’s T-shirt was emblazoned with a simple slogan: “I am a bookstore employee”. Escorted by police, the woman was among five people arrested during raids on two bookstores last week, suspected of displaying and selling publications with “seditious” content, a national security crime which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years. Since then, the T-shirt phrase has spread far and wide on Taiwanese social media amid concern for the fate of Hong Kong’s booksellers. On the social media platform Threads, booksellers, lawmakers and activists shared the hashtag “I am a bookstore employee” to show their support for Hong Kong. Taiwan’s president, Lai Ching-te, also weighed in, writing on Facebook: “Ideas and words should never be silenced by political pressure”. It is the third time in recent months that people in Hong Kong linked to independent bookstores have been arrested. The Hong Kong authorities have not specified what the allegedly seditious books were in the latest raids. But after the arrest, Hong Kong’s security chief, Chris Tang, said that booksellers had a responsibility to ensure their books were lawful, “just like merchants selling food have to make sure their food won’t make people sick”. All five arrested in last week’s raids have since been released on bail. The Hong Kong police declined to comment further, but reports that the offending books may have included Let Only Red Flowers Bloom: Identity and Belonging in Xi Jinping’s China, written by NPR journalist Emily Feng, prompted a run on the book in Taiwan. The Taiwanese publisher, Acropolis Publishing, ordered an emergency reprint of 10,000 additional copies last week. Sara Sung, a senior editor at Acropolis, said some readers were buying copies as “a statement of democracy and freedom”. “They’re showing that they will not be silenced or intimidated by censorship from China,” Sung said. Chang Hui-ju, the owner of Touat Books, an independent bookshop in Taipei, Taiwan’s capital, said she was completely out of stock of Feng’s book. “Before this, hardly anyone paid attention to it,” Chang said. “But right after the incident, the book sold out everywhere.” The ban ‘only made me more curious’ Another Taipei store, Kuo’s Astral Bookshop, also sold out of the book. One customer looking in vain for a copy, Wu Jia-xuan, said she was not normally interested in China-related books but that her interest had been piqued by the Hong Kong arrests. “The fact that it had been banned only made [me] more curious,” Wu said. Feng’s book examines Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s ideological control over the country. One chapter, titled The Bookseller, focuses on the prominent Hong Kong bookseller Lam Wing-kee. Lam was arrested by Chinese authorities in 2015 but later escaped custody and fled to Taiwan, where he re-opened his bookstore, Causeway Bay Books, in Taipei. Lam died earlier this month and the fate of his Taipei store is uncertain: the closed-up shopfront is covered with notes, flowers and cans of beer left by his supporters. Lam’s story charts the uneasy and complex relationship that Taiwan and Hong Kong have with each other, as well as with mainland China. Taiwan has never been part of the People’s Republic of China. But Beijing has long claimed the self-governing island as part of its territory and has vowed to unify it with China. One path to peaceful unification, suggested by Beijing, is for Taiwan to be ruled under a “one country, two systems” framework, similar to Hong Kong. Over 80% of Taiwanese reject that idea. In Taiwan, politicians from the ruling Democratic People’s party (DPP), which rejects the idea of closer ties with China, have pointed to Hong Kong as an example of the dangers of what happens under Chinese rule. Beijing’s crackdown on Hong Kong in 2019 has been credited with galvanising DPP voters to win the election for Tsai Ing-wen, Lai’s DPP predecessor, in 2020. On Monday, discussing the Hong Kong raids, DPP legislator Wu Pei-yi accused China of “burning books”. But in Taiwan, rhetorical support for Hong Kong has rarely been matched by practical policies, such as taking in refugees. For DPP politicians, “it’s very easy to use Hong Kong as a way to frame what will happen to Taiwan if the People’s Republic of China is able to ‘unify’ Taiwan,” said Lev Nachman, a professor of political science at National Taiwan University in Taipei. But actual support has been “shallow”, Nachman said. For Chinese people, Taiwan is now the last place in the Chinese-speaking world where they can freely access books without the threat of Communist party censorship. One student, originally from Fujian province, visited Touat Books on Sunday looking for a copy of Feng’s book. She’d read about the Hong Kong raids on social media, news which kept her awake until 2am. “In mainland China, none of this would come up on your feed … It was quite a shock,” she said. “This shouldn’t be happening. I think independent thought should still be allowed – at least in Hong Kong.”