'Blood Emirate' Expands Across Sahel in Hunt for Gold, Power  

Al-Shabaab fighters display weapons as they conduct military exercises in northern Mogadishu, Somalia, October 21, 2010. (AP file photo)
Al-Shabaab fighters display weapons as they conduct military exercises in northern Mogadishu, Somalia, October 21, 2010. (AP file photo)
TT

'Blood Emirate' Expands Across Sahel in Hunt for Gold, Power  

Al-Shabaab fighters display weapons as they conduct military exercises in northern Mogadishu, Somalia, October 21, 2010. (AP file photo)
Al-Shabaab fighters display weapons as they conduct military exercises in northern Mogadishu, Somalia, October 21, 2010. (AP file photo)

In the Libyan city of Sabha, known as the “Bride of the South,” authorities dismantled three terrorist networks in August, revealing links stretching across and back to the African coast.

Five months earlier, in March 2025, security forces in western Libya had reported the arrest of another “terrorist organization” and aired “confessions” from several members who said they belonged to a jihadist group called “Nasr”. They spoke of “plans to recruit young men and manufacture drones.”

Across the vast belt of the Sahel, spanning countries separated by as much as 2,300 kilometers, militant attacks have intensified in recent months. Omar al-Mahdi Bashara, a veteran Chadian rebel, says these operations aim to “subject the region to the calculations of global powers and exploit its impoverished, underdeveloped populations.”

Bashara, who leads the Chadian National Salvation Movement, told Asharq Al-Awsat that “the former colonizer is overseeing from afar the drawing of a new map for the Sahel and the Sahara in blood, with his eyes fixed on the region’s resources.”

The Sahel stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea. Geographically and climatically, it encompasses northern Senegal, southern Mauritania, Mali, southern Algeria, Niger, Chad, South Sudan and Eritrea.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) use a broader definition that includes Mauritania, Senegal, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Nigeria, Cameroon and Chad.

The term “Sahel” here does not refer to a sea coast, but to the “edge” — the long geographic strip lying south of the Sahara Desert, from the Atlantic coast in the west (Mauritania and Senegal) to the Red Sea in the east (Sudan and Eritrea).

As terrorist organizations have expanded across this belt, they have also deepened the bloodshed through armed attacks targeting soldiers and civilians over the past decade, leaving more than 150,000 people dead, according to the Africa Center for Strategic Studies.

Before tracing the map of these groups — which Bashara sums up as “a nightmare weighing on a region forgotten by development” — it is worth noting a significant shift: these organizations are increasingly turning to modern technologies, even artificial intelligence, while expanding beyond their traditional rural strongholds into urban centers.

Groups that once thrived on the ignorance of poor communities are now adopting artificial intelligence, outpacing some of their state adversaries still clinging to rifles, cannons and conventional warplanes.

Domestic proxies

Amid a bloody contest for influence, recruits and resources, ISIS has come to rely on its affiliates in West Africa, Central Africa and the Greater Sahara, while al-Qaeda moves more fluidly through local alliances with Jama’a Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM) and Ansar al-Din.

Hamdy Abdulrahman Hassan, an African affairs expert who teaches at Zayed University and Cairo University, noted that “many of these globalized groups have taken on a local character, and the lines between them have blurred.” Local residents interviewed by Asharq Al-Awsat echoed the same view.

Both al-Qaeda and ISIS now have domestic proxies. As grievances against “new ruling regimes” have grown, these groups have managed to infiltrate social structures and exploit poverty — a key factor behind their resurgence, according to Fareh Wali from Somalia.

Wali explained that al-Shabaab members “win people over with money and by appealing to national sentiment, portraying themselves as defenders of the country against an infidel government.” In a written statement to Asharq Al-Awsat, he added: “They exploit people’s ignorance, poverty and hatred of those in power to recruit them. Those who refuse are kidnapped or killed.”

In Somalia, al-Shabaab killed around 30 people in two attacks, one on the Cairo Hotel in Beledweyne and another on a military recruitment center in Damanio, in March and May 2025.

Egyptian scholar Hassan identified several factors behind the surge in terrorist activity, including the region’s “porous” borders, which are “too loose to control,” and the “fragile state structures inherited from colonial rule.”

He also pointed to the wave of coups that have swept the region, saying: “These groups found an opportunity to expand, especially in the absence of regional coordination.”

In several parts of the Sahel, al-Qaeda has adopted local grievances and “localized its narratives to appeal to communities,” according to a July 2025 report by the UN Monitoring Team. This ideological pragmatism, the report said, helped expand the group’s territorial influence.

Dr. Ramadan Qarni, another African affairs expert, linked this deep societal penetration to the entry of international powers into the Sahel, which militant groups “used to stir local sentiment against them.”

Alongside the financial incentives mentioned by Wali, “perceived injustices” have served as another justification used by extremists to gain ground among Sahel and Sahara populations disillusioned with the “new authorities” that took power after eight successive military coups.

Hassan noted that the Macina Brigade, a JNIM affiliate active in central Mali and along the Burkina Faso border, draws its strength from the “historic grievances” of the Fulani, nomadic herders who accuse local authorities and Dogon militias of committing abuses against them, including “mass killings.”

Following this same pattern, al-Qaeda has expanded its operations through its local arm, JNIM, while ISIS and its affiliates have intensified their campaigns across the Sahara.

Blood and interests

The growing threat in the Sahel is not only measured by the frequency of attacks and rising death tolls, but also by the “pragmatism” of militant groups operating on volatile ground fraught with conflict, as they interact with civilians and seek to recruit new fighters for their brutal wars.

Contrary to expectation, the behavior of ISIS and al-Qaeda reveals contrasting ideologies. Mauritanian scholar and researcher on the Sahel, the Sahara and armed groups, Mohameden Ayeb, describes them as “a mix of global jihadist Salafism, local exploitation of ethnic and tribal disputes, and economic interests rooted in smuggling and extortion.”

While al-Qaeda and its branches tend to adapt to local environments in the Sahel and court the goodwill of tribes, ISIS rejects popular compromise and clings to the notion of a centralized caliphate, adhering to a stricter and more violent framework.

From his own experience in several Sahel countries, Sudanese national Abdelghani Ismail recounts witnessing the movements of extremist groups. “They try to impose themselves wherever they exist to achieve their goals of seizing power,” he said.

Ismail, who later traveled to Europe through Libya, told Asharq Al-Awsat that these groups “are locked in a battle for survival, driven by a misguided ideology, and they do not hesitate to blow up anyone who stands in their way.”

Map of groups and resources

In this fragmented security landscape, Ayeb maps militant groups across the Sahel and the Sahara, linking their movements in some areas to a push to control the region’s subterranean wealth.

Ayeb warns that the threat posed by these groups has changed from what it was before, as fighting has intensified in the border triangle of Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso, historically known as Liptako- ourma, a zone the 2024 Global Terrorism Index ranked among the ten most terror-affected areas in the world.

He told Asharq Al-Awsat that Jama’a Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin, the al-Qaeda affiliate, and ISIS, Sahel Province, “have tightened their grip on this area rich in gold and uranium deposits,” and that “local arms of the groups have become the strike force in their sophisticated operations,” pointing to ISIS activity in Nigeria, Mozambique, Cameroon, Togo and Benin.

Al-Qaeda, he added, has not only deepened its reach in Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso, it is also present in the northwestern borderlands bordering Lake Chad, overlapping with other groups such as Boko Haram.

Ayeb said Jama’a Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin, announced by al-Qaeda in March 2017, is a coalition of four main components, namely Ansar al-Din, led by Tuareg commander Iyad ag Ghaly, the Katibat al-Murabitun faction that split from al-Murabitun and was formerly led by Mokhtar Belmokhtar, the Macina Liberation Front, a socially rooted movement in central Mali led by Amadou Koufa, and the Greater Sahara Emirate, formerly affiliated with al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.

The group has reached a new level of operational capability, able to carry out complex attacks on well-fortified garrisons using drones, improvised explosive devices and large numbers of fighters, according to the UN report to the Security Council in June 2025.

Fighting has escalated in recent months between ISIS and al-Qaeda over the Liptako-Gourma triangle, Ayeb said, because the area is rich in raw gold and dense forest terrain that “is inaccessible to ground forces or airborne operations.”

Arms linked to ISIS, including units in West Africa Province and Greater Sahara Province, have expanded their footprint and their propaganda output to recruit fighters and raise funds, with signs of foreign fighters, mostly from West Africa, arriving during 2024.

The United Nations estimates that ISIS in West Africa comprises between 8,000 and 12,000 fighters. UN experts say Jama’a Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin has also broadened its operational reach, operating with relative freedom in northern Mali and across much of Burkina Faso. ISIS activity in the Greater Sahara has also seen a resurgence, particularly along the Niger, Nigeria border where the group seeks to consolidate its presence.

Banditry and cattle theft

Militant groups in the Sahel employ multiple methods, often justified in religious terms, to secure weapons and funding, including theft and armed robbery. Ayeb described this as “a form of pragmatism that permits and forbids according to their interests.”

A report submitted by the UN Monitoring Team to the Security Council said ISIS has increasingly turned to kidnappings, either directly or through criminal networks, to obtain ransom payments. It added that such operations serve as a source of financing and recruitment, which “could further intensify as the group seeks to break its isolation in the border area between Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger.”

Bashara told Asharq Al-Awsat that “armed groups have widely resorted to kidnapping local residents.”

Member states informed the UN committee preparing the report that “cattle theft in the Lake Chad Basin has become a common source of revenue, with livestock sold in local markets.” The report also noted that Boko Haram collects zakat, or alms, at a rate of four to five cows for every 120.

Regarding weapons supplies, both al-Qaeda and ISIS depend on “small and light arms, either smuggled or stolen.” Member states observed that the transfer of these weapons “is coordinated among organized criminal networks.”

The report warned that both groups “are actively seeking to enhance their expertise in drone operations by recruiting specialists.”

‘Sea jihad’

As militant groups in the Sahel continue to build up their forces and arsenals, academic expert Hassan warned of what he calls a “dangerous development,” noting that these groups “are preparing to move westward from the Sahel toward the ocean, in an attempt to control maritime routes and revive what they call ‘sea jihad,’ targeting gas lines.”

He also pointed out that after ISIS declared its Mozambique Province in Central Africa, it is now seeking to expand its rule by establishing a Borno Province in West Africa.

This geographical belt, stretching from the Atlantic Ocean in the west to the Red Sea in the east, forms a semi-desert strip that separates the Sahara Desert to the north from the tropical regions to the south, extending roughly 5,400 kilometers.

The Mozambique Province, though smaller in size, is more brutal, posing a direct threat to major international economic interests linked to natural gas, making it a focal point of global attention.

Lake Chad

What is happening in the Sahel is closely linked to events in Chad, which on August 18 dealt a sharp blow to ISIS in West Africa by arresting six leaders of a local cell, including Muslim Yusuf, the youngest son of Boko Haram’s founder in Nigeria.

A report by the African Center for Strategic Studies (ACSS) said Boko Haram and its West Africa Province were responsible for about 66% of violent deaths in Nigeria in 2024.

Although Chad lies in Central Africa, its northern region, Borkou-Ennedi-Tibesti, is a direct extension of the Sahara, while its south is closer to tropical Africa, and the country is a member of the Group of Five Sahel States, G5.

Academic Hamdi Abdulrahman told Asharq Al-Awsat the Lake Chad area has become a “testing ground for ISIS’s new caliphate,” a development he describes as entrenching a grim picture of a bloody conflict that has quietly escalated into one of the most violent jihadist theaters in the world.

He said ISIS controls large swathes of rural land in the poorest and most densely populated parts of Nigeria, and it levies taxes said to generate about $190 million a year as it seeks to expand its influence.

He added that the group has built a parallel state infrastructure in West Africa, creating departments to oversee military operations, collect taxes and enforce sharia.

Conflict between Islamist insurgencies in the region’s northeast killed nearly 350,000 people and displaced more than two million by the end of 2020, the United Nations Development Program said.

Who controls the lake?

Four countries share responsibility for managing Lake Chad and its resources: Chad, which contains most of the lake, Nigeria to the west and southwest, Niger to the northwest, and Cameroon to the southwest.

Bashara, the former rebel, said that about 70% of the lake’s area, spanning northeastern Nigeria, southeastern Niger, northern Cameroon and western Chad, “is now beyond the control of these states.”

Bashara told Asharq Al-Awsat: “Unfortunately, these terrorist groups enjoy broad popular support among local populations, which explains their continued presence across most of the Lake Chad Basin.”

Local residents, including Somali analyst Wali, attributed this support to “financial inducements” used to advance the groups’ agendas, but he notes this does not prevent them from “oppressing the most vulnerable members of society, especially women.”

Women and girls bear the greatest burden, according to Sima Bahous, Executive Director of UN Women, who told the Security Council in August 2025, that this is a region where women are effectively erased from public life.

Bahous said that over one million girls are out of school, 60% of whom have never attended, amid widespread child marriage and sexual violence.

Strikes with cheap drones

The security vacuum in parts of the Sahel, combined with the overlap of local terrorist agendas and international interventions, is turning the region into a long-term conflict hotspot that threatens North Africa and Europe. Notable developments in terrorist tactics are a key factor.

Hassan warned that “current waves of violence are unlike previous ones, with significant advances in tactics and capabilities.”

Since April 2025, ISIS in West Africa launched a campaign called “Burning the Camps,” targeting fortified military bases long considered secure. Hassan said: “Observers might think these are ordinary raids, but the reality is far more complex.”

He added: “Terrorists in the Lake Chad region have learned to carry out night attacks using drones and night-vision devices,” cautioning that the area “has become a major battlefield for ISIS West Africa and its rival faction Boko Haram. ISIS today is different from before; it has acquired night-vision equipment that allows coordinated strikes during Nigeria’s low-visibility hours.”

The group now arms itself with commercially available, low-cost drones launched from safe distances to drop small explosives on army and security camps, which Hassan described as “a persistent aerial threat that complicates traditional defenses.”

The United Nations recorded more than 400 terrorist attacks in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger alone between April and July 2025, killing 2,870 people, according to Leonardo Simao, head of the UN regional office for West Africa and the Sahel, speaking before the Security Council on August 8.

International maritime security

Concerns over the expanding use of modern technologies by extremist groups dominated the session. Simao warned of “increasing use of drones, encrypted communication technologies, and cooperation between terrorist groups and transnational organized crime networks.”

He also expressed concern for maritime security, noting that shipping routes “are now at risk” and that “youth have become a prime target for recruitment.”

In response to this threat, the Africa Center for Strategic Studies highlighted “growing cooperation between al-Shabaab in Somalia and the Houthis in Yemen,” warning of “rising risks to navigation in the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden, and western Indian Ocean.”

The center cited a UN report from February 2025 indicating “evidence of contacts between the Houthis and al-Shabaab, including actual meetings in 2024 regarding the transfer of military equipment and training from the Houthis in exchange for increased piracy and arms smuggling activities.”

The report noted that the relationship between the two groups “is based on mutual benefit, not sectarian affiliation,” and detailed a flow of weapons from Yemen to areas controlled by al-Shabaab between June and September 2024, including ammunition and explosives delivered via the ports of Marka and Barawe in Lower Shabelle. Al-Shabaab was tasked with escalating piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden and off the Somali coast.

‘Companies of evil’

UN concerns have grown over terrorist groups’ use of advanced technologies, including artificial intelligence and social media, which were described as “a new challenge” during a Security Council session last August.

These worries were reinforced by Rami Shaheen, an international expert on AI technology, who said, “Imagine a geographical theater spanning 10 African countries, where burning sands meet the coolest technologies in the AI world.” Shaheen noted that these groups are no longer simply armed militias, “they have become startup companies of evil investing in cutting-edge technologies.”

Shaheen told Asharq Al-Awsat about what he called “liquid recruitment,” highlighting the use of “customized content,” where “each target receives promotional messages tailored specifically to their vulnerabilities and hopes.” He gave the example of “a young man in Niger receiving an AI-modified video showing a prosperous future with the group.”

He also discussed what he termed “digital camouflage,” involving “self-destructing communication networks,” which are applications that send encrypted messages disappearing after being read.

He described this as a shift “from the rifle to the algorithm,” particularly when combined with funding through complex cryptocurrencies that are difficult to trace.

Shaheen’s points were echoed by Vladimir Voronkov, head of the UN Counter-Terrorism Office, before the Security Council in August, as reported by the UN mission in Libya.

Voronkov warned of the use of emerging technologies by extremist groups, saying they continue to use encrypted messaging platforms to secure their communications, exploit crowdfunding systems to raise funds, and increasingly experiment with AI to enhance their propaganda.

From Africa to Al-Hol in Syria

Libyan authorities dismantled three terrorist cells, announcing the discovery of large and varied caches of weapons buried in storage beneath a house in Sabha, including shells, bombs, improvised explosive devices, medium and heavy ammunition, and anti-aircraft guns.

Investigations indicated the first cell was responsible for recruiting fighters, facilitating their movement from North Africa to Somalia and the Sahel, and supplying them with forged passports and safe housing.

The second cell laundered money through front companies to help fighters and their families escape the Al-Hol camp in Syria and relocate to Libya, where they were housed in accommodation funded by ISIS, the cell also sought to make investments in regional states.

The third cell handled transfers to ISIS using cryptocurrencies.

A source at the Libyan public prosecutor’s office told Asharq Al-Awsat that ongoing investigations showed the cells received logistical support from groups in the Sahel, and from some neighboring Arab states.

The source also described the July 2024 dismantling of a cell led by a Libyan who had ties to Jama’a Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin, saying that cell was involved in supplying satellite communications equipment.

In confessions aired by a security agency in western Libya, one suspect spoke of plans to target sensitive military and security sites, and of contacting Algerians to train members of the network in drone manufacture.

Expulsion of French forces

Explanations for developments in the African Sahel vary.

At the UN level, Senegalese diplomat Abdoulaye Mar Dieye, the UN Special Coordinator for the Sahel, believes that “the destruction of Libya has fueled counterterrorism challenges in the Sahel,” dismissing the idea that the crisis stems from events in northern Mali some 13 years ago.

In remarks reported by Senegalese media in early August, Dieye said: “The world owes a huge debt to the Sahel countries, and that debt has not yet been paid.”

At the same time, local residents in several Sahel states, speaking to Asharq Al-Awsat, said the situation in their countries is a predictable outcome of weak governance. Bashara noted that ethnic tensions have “fueled conflicts and opened the way for cross-border jihadist growth.”

Some observers argued that the expulsion of French forces from several Sahel states has paved the way for the rise of extremist groups.

Qarni said that “targeting numerous local leaders and chiefs has weakened governance,” adding that “the absence of genuine development frameworks and the channeling of national resources toward military efforts have also exacerbated the terrorist phenomenon.”

Bashara considered Qarni’s assessment one of the main factors enabling terrorist expansion, attributing the failure of governments in the Lake Chad Basin to confront these groups to “the exclusion of local communities from development and security,” adding, “N’Djamena has made security the responsibility of the people themselves.”

Mali has faced a deepening security crisis since 2012, fueled by armed rebellion. Yet the UN peacekeeping mission requested to leave the country at the end of 2023, after a decade of support to the government.

France remained the main security and military actor in Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso and Chad, and to a lesser extent in Mauritania, providing military and intelligence support until its withdrawal. Russia has since emerged as a “new alternative” in an attempt to fill the resulting vacuum.

Gold before ideology

Dieye said the aim of warring groups is less about religion and more about economic gain. Speaking in early August, he said, all the terrorism we see is not ideological; it is purely economic.

Ayeb agreed, noting that “the material dimension of these groups is always the priority,” explaining that “Nigeria is a gas country, Niger is a uranium region, and Mali is a gold zone; therefore, the problems these countries face are linked to their resources.”

Bashara added that “gold mines in northern Mali are overseen by terrorist groups.”

The Malian transitional government’s Minister of Mines, Amadou Keita, previously revealed that proceeds from illegal gold mining “contribute significantly to financing terrorist and criminal networks.”

The South African Institute for Security Studies points out that jihadist groups such as ISIS’s Sahel Province impose taxes on miners and control smuggling routes.

Gaddafi’s weapons

Experts on African affairs say developments in the African Sahel cannot be separated from the interests and historical legacies of international powers in a region plagued by poverty and conflict, despite its abundant resources.

Bashara said that “the French colonizer will not leave its former colonies so easily, seeing the resource-rich Sahel countries as part of its strategic reserve for itself and future generations.”

He accused France, whose forces were previously expelled from Sahel states, of “mobilizing its proxies in extremist groups and affiliated organizations to destabilize countries from which its military bases were recently removed.”

Following military coups in Mali (2021), Burkina Faso (2022), and Niger (2023), French troops were gradually withdrawn from these countries, eroding Paris’s historical influence in Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso.

Russia quickly entered through southern Libya into the Sahel, especially Mali, deploying forces it calls the “African Legion” to fill the security vacuum, alongside growing influence from China and Türkiye.

The magazine African Defense Forum, affiliated with AFRICOM, previously reported on Russian moves in the Sahel, citing military analyst Andrew McGregor from the Jamestown Foundation in July 2025.

McGregor said Russia has been using the Khadim airbase as an advanced platform for operations in the region.

Located about 100 kilometers east of Benghazi, the Khadim base is believed by McGregor to have become a hub for storing weapons and smuggling resources to and from the African Sahel.

He added that Russia is repeating the mistakes of Moammar al-Gaddafi in the 1980s when he attempted to use Soviet weapons to expand influence in the Sahel. The Kremlin is now reinvesting in the same base Gaddafi used to attack Chad.

Russia, seeking to build new alliances in Africa, signed a defense memorandum of understanding with Niger, Mali, and Burkina Faso, announced on August 14.

However, the Conflict Armament Research Center, which tracks conventional weapons and military materials, said in April 2025 that weapons flowing from Libya to the Sahel accounted for only 7% of the total arms circulating there.

The situation in the African Sahel thus reveals a complex equation in which rising terrorist activity intertwines with international influence and interventions, while the struggle for resources remains a central objective pursued by armed groups.



What We Know and Don't Know about the Emerging Deal to End the Iran War

Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)
Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)
TT

What We Know and Don't Know about the Emerging Deal to End the Iran War

Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)
Government supporters hold Iranian flags and pictures of Iran's Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, during a ceremony honoring the armed forces and those killed in the war with Israel and the US in Tehran, Iran, Sunday, May 24, 2026. (AP)

A deal appears to be emerging between the United States and Iran to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz, and US President Donald Trump over the weekend said it had been “largely negotiated.”

It is not clear when or how the deal might be finalized and when its various parts will take effect. Trump spoke after calls with allies in the Middle East, including a separate call with Israel. Details come from two regional officials and a US official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive negotiations.

Here’s what we know and don’t know:

The war would end

In the 12 weeks since the US and Israel launched the war with attacks on Iran that killed senior officials including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Tehran has insisted that any deal focus on ending the fighting on all fronts. That includes Lebanon, where the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militant group has been fighting Israel since two days into the war.

A fragile ceasefire has held since April 7. An end to the war would ease concerns throughout a region that saw Gulf states like the United Arab Emirates struck by Iranian missiles and drones. It would allow for global shipping, including an estimated 20% of the world's oil and natural gas, to begin flowing through the Strait of Hormuz again. It also would allow the rebuilding of energy and other infrastructure in the region.

Both regional officials said the draft deal includes an end to the war between Israel and Hezbollah, as well as a commitment to not interfere in the domestic affairs of countries in the region including Iran. That’s a critical reference to Iran’s support for proxies, which also include the Houthi militants in Yemen, Hamas militants in Gaza and Shiite armed groups in Iraq.

The US wants Israel to have a free hand to respond to what it views as threats in Lebanon while Iran rejects it, one regional official said. The US official said the deal would guarantee Israel’s right to act against imminent threats in self-defense.

The Strait of Hormuz would reopen gradually

Iran’s nuclear program, missile program and support for armed proxies were the stated reasons for the US and Israel attacking Iran. But Tehran’s retaliatory grip on the Strait of Hormuz quickly shot to the top of global concerns as hundreds of ships carrying oil, natural gas, fertilizer and other supplies were stranded.

Under the emerging agreement, the strait would gradually reopen in parallel with the US ending the blockade of Iran’s ports it launched on April 17, the regional officials said. The blockade has limited Iran’s ability to ship its oil and bring in badly needed cash for its long-suffering economy.

The US would allow Iran to sell its oil through sanctions waivers, said one of the officials, who has been briefed on the negotiations. Sanctions relief and the release of Iran’s billions of dollars in frozen funds would be negotiated during a 60-day period, the official said.

Iran would give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium

Iran’s nuclear program and international concerns over its possible pursuit of a nuclear weapon underlie all tensions, and the US and Israel have considered highly complex military operations to go in and take out its highly enriched uranium.

Under the potential deal, Tehran would agree to give up that stockpile of highly enriched uranium, according to the regional officials. One official, with direct knowledge of the negotiations, said how Iran would give it up would be subject to further talks over the 60-day period. Some would likely be diluted and the rest transferred to a third country, potentially Russia, the official said. Russia has offered to take it.

A US official confirmed the 60-day period and said if Iran doesn’t give up its stockpile, there will be no sanctions relief.

Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Iran says it has an “inalienable” right to nuclear technology while insisting its program is peaceful. On Sunday, President Masoud Pezeshkian told state TV they were ready “to assure the world that we are not after a nuclear weapon.”

Trump on Sunday on social media said that “our relationship with Iran is becoming a much more professional and productive one. They must understand, however, that they cannot develop or procure a Nuclear Weapon or Bomb.”

What appears to be missing

Other issues have not been mentioned in descriptions of the emerging deal, including the status of Iran's uranium enrichment.

Another is Iran's missile program, which Israel in particular has sought to destroy.

And while the United States and Israel entered the war with stated ambitions of seeing Iranians rise up against their government after nationwide protests early in the year, any discussion of leadership change in Tehran appears to be out.

As for Iran's past stated aims during negotiations, there appears to be no mention of any withdrawal of US forces from the region, or for reparations for the damage the war has caused.


Attacks on Ebola Treatment Centers Are One of Several Problems Affecting Congo’s Outbreak Response

People wait to be attended at the Mongbwalu General Referral Hospital, as aid agencies intensify efforts to contain an Ebola outbreak caused by the Bundibugyo virus in Mongbwalu, Democratic Republic of Congo, May 23, 2026. (Reuters)
People wait to be attended at the Mongbwalu General Referral Hospital, as aid agencies intensify efforts to contain an Ebola outbreak caused by the Bundibugyo virus in Mongbwalu, Democratic Republic of Congo, May 23, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

Attacks on Ebola Treatment Centers Are One of Several Problems Affecting Congo’s Outbreak Response

People wait to be attended at the Mongbwalu General Referral Hospital, as aid agencies intensify efforts to contain an Ebola outbreak caused by the Bundibugyo virus in Mongbwalu, Democratic Republic of Congo, May 23, 2026. (Reuters)
People wait to be attended at the Mongbwalu General Referral Hospital, as aid agencies intensify efforts to contain an Ebola outbreak caused by the Bundibugyo virus in Mongbwalu, Democratic Republic of Congo, May 23, 2026. (Reuters)

Arson attacks on Ebola treatment centers in eastern Congo show how authorities are faced with a number of serious complications — including a backlash in local communities — as they try to stop an outbreak of an infectious disease that has been declared a global health emergency.

The burning of the centers in two towns at the heart of the outbreak shows the anger in a region beset by violence linked to armed rebel groups, the displacement of a large number of people, the failure of local government and international aid cuts that experts say have stripped health facilities in vulnerable communities.

"A devastating set of emergencies are converging," said the Physicians for Human Rights nonprofit.

Here's a look at the longstanding crises in eastern Congo that have made it home to one of the world's worst humanitarian disasters, and how they are now affecting the response to a rare type of Ebola:

The region has a constant threat of violence

Eastern Congo has seen violence by dozens of separate rebel groups for years, some of them with links to foreign countries or Islamic State.

The Rwanda-backed M23 rebels are in control of parts of the region. While the Congolese government still largely controls the northeastern Ituri Province, which is the epicenter of the Ebola outbreak, that control is tenuous. The Allied Democratic Forces, a Ugandan group linked to ISIS, is one of the dominant rebel groups there and responsible for violent attacks against civilian targets.

Before the outbreak, Doctors Without Borders said in an assessment of the situation in Ituri that the insecurity had worsened recently, causing doctors and nurses to flee and leaving overwhelmed health facilities and "catastrophic" conditions in some parts.

Nearly a million people are displaced in Ituri

Nearly 1 million people in Ituri have been displaced from their homes by conflict, according to the United Nations humanitarian office.

That means this Ebola outbreak is "unfolding in communities already facing insecurity, displacement and fragile health care systems," said Gabriela Arenas, Regional Operations Coordinator at the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies.

It's a significant concern that the disease might spread to the large displacement camps near the city of Bunia, where the first cases were reported.

Authorities have announced more than 700 suspected Ebola cases and more than 170 suspected deaths, mostly in Ituri. But cases have been reported in two other eastern provinces, North Kivu and South Kivu, where M23 are in control, and also in the neighboring country of Uganda.

That means that part of the outbreak in Congo is being managed by the government and part by rebel authorities, with an array of aid agencies also helping.

Aid cuts were devastating for eastern Congo

Health experts say international aid cuts last year by the United States and other rich nations were devastating for eastern Congo because it has so many problems.

The cuts "reduced the capacity to detect and respond to infectious disease outbreaks," said Thomas McHale, public health director at Physicians for Human Rights. Congo has had more than a dozen previous Ebola outbreaks.

Aid groups fighting this outbreak on the ground say they don't have the equipment they need, like face shields and suits to protect health workers from infection, testing kits, and body bags and other materials needed to safely bury the bodies of victims, which can be highly contagious.

"We have made requests to different partners, but we have not yet really received anything," said Julienne Lusenge, president of Women’s Solidarity for Inclusive Peace and Development, an aid group operating a small hospital near Bunia.

"We only have hand sanitizer and a few masks for the nurses."

The Bundibugyo type of Ebola virus responsible for the outbreak has no approved vaccine or treatment.

Health and aid workers also face anger from local communities

The burning of two treatment centers by people in the Rwampara and Mongbwalu areas — which have the highest case counts — show how a backlash in some communities is further complicating the response.

Colin Thomas-Jensen, director of impact at the Aurora Humanitarian Initiative, said the attacks may reflect the "built-in skepticism and anger" of people in eastern Congo over how the region has been treated, with years of violence from foreign-linked rebel groups and a failure of their government and international peacekeepers to protect them, he said.

Another source of anger has been the strict protocols around the burial of suspected victims of Ebola, which authorities are taking charge of wherever they can to prevent further spread of the disease when families prepare the bodies and people gather for a funeral.

The first burning of an Ebola center in Rwampara was by a group of local youths trying to retrieve the body of a friend who died, according to witnesses and police. The witnesses said the crowd accused the foreign aid group operating there of lying about Ebola.

Authorities in northeastern Congo have now banned funeral wakes and gatherings of more than 50 people in an effort to curb the spread, and armed soldiers and police are guarding some burials carried out by aid workers.


Report: Netanyahu Relegated from Partner to Passenger in Trump's War on Iran

 US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)
US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)
TT

Report: Netanyahu Relegated from Partner to Passenger in Trump's War on Iran

 US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)
US President Donald Trump, right, meets with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Oval Office of the White House, in Washington, Feb. 4, 2025. (AFP)

In the run-up to the February 28 attack on Iran, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel was not only in the Situation Room with President Trump, he was leading the discussion, predicting that a joint US-Israeli strike could very well lead to the demise of the regime in Iran.

“Just a few weeks later, after those sanguine assurances proved inaccurate, the picture was starkly different. Israel was so thoroughly sidelined by the Trump administration, two Israeli defense officials said, that its leaders were cut almost entirely out of the loop on truce talks between the United States and Iran,” said a New York Times report on Saturday.

“Starved of information from their closest ally, the Israelis have been forced to pick up what they can about the back-and-forth between Washington and Tehran through their connections with leaders and diplomats in the region as well as their own surveillance from inside the Iranian regime,” said the two officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

“The banishment from the cockpit to economy class has potentially significant consequences for Israel, and especially for the prime minister, who faces an uphill re-election battle this year.”

“Netanyahu has long sold himself to Israeli voters as a kind of Trump whisperer,” uniquely capable of enlisting and retaining the president’s support. In a televised speech early in the war, he portrayed himself as the president’s peer, assuring Israelis that he talked to Trump “almost every day,” exchanging ideas and advice, “and deciding together.”

“He had led Israel to war in February with grand visions of achieving a goal he has pursued for decades: stopping Iran’s push for nuclear weapons once and for all. As the war began with a stunning decapitation of much of the government in Tehran, it seemed as though an even more grandiose dream might come true: the toppling of the regime.”

“But many in Trump’s inner circle had always viewed the idea of regime change as absurd. And it wasn’t long before American and Israeli priorities began to diverge more, especially after Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz, sending oil prices soaring and pressuring Trump into agreeing to a ceasefire.”

Far from vanquished, Tehran has behaved as though it won the war, merely by surviving it. Israel, by contrast, has seen its biggest objectives for the war elude its grasp.

Netanyahu set three goals at the start of the war: toppling the regime, destroying Iran’s nuclear program and eliminating its missile program. None have been realized.

Instead of burying Iran’s nuclear ambitions, a recent American proposal called for a 20-year suspension of, or moratorium on, Iranian nuclear activity and that time frame may have gotten smaller in subsequent proposals. That raises the prospect that an eventual deal could resemble the Obama administration’s 2015 nuclear accord, which Netanyahu fought against at the time and Trump exited from three years later.

With the Trump administration excluding Israel from the negotiations, Iran’s arsenal of ballistic missiles may have been left off the table, as far as Israeli officials know. In that respect, any deal would fail to improve on the 2015 agreement, which Netanyahu assailed in part because it did not address Iran’s missiles.

It would also be a dismaying setback for the Israeli public, for whom life largely ground to a halt as the nation was bombarded by Iranian missiles in March and April.

There are other concerns for Israel about the possible contours of a US-Iran agreement, including a lifting of economic sanctions against Tehran. Doing so could amount to an economic lifeline, flooding Iran with billions of dollars that it could then use to rearm and to help its proxy forces, like Hezbollah, replenish their own arsenals with weapons to use against Israel.

While little is certain yet about the shape of an eventual deal — and any agreement could still be postponed by a renewal of fighting — what seems clear is that Israel’s partnership with the United States has come at a steep price. A country that for generations prided itself on “defending ourselves by ourselves,” and whose leaders exasperated a succession of American presidents with their hardheaded recalcitrance, is now making little secret of its need, and willingness, to submit to Trump’s demands.

As Defense Minister Israel Katz said on April 23, as Trump threatened to resume the war and bomb Iran back to the “Stone Age”: “We are only waiting for the green light from the US.”

“That admission was a humbling climbdown from the heady first days of the war, when the two countries achieved air supremacy and were so confident of success that they urged the Iranian people to topple the regime and secure their future,” said the NYT.

Within two weeks, it became clear that the war would not produce instant victory, as Trump had hoped. The White House, and some Israeli leaders, put aside their hopes for regime change, and Trump turned his attention toward ending the fighting.

“He had viewed Netanyahu as a war ally, but not as a close partner when it came to negotiating with the Iranians,” American officials familiar with his thinking said; in fact, he considered Netanyahu someone “who needed to be restrained when it comes to resolving conflicts.”

Israel soon found itself demoted from “equal partner” to something more akin to a “subcontractor” to the US military.

Israel would often clear plans with the United States, only to have the Trump administration throw it under the bus after those plans were executed, such as when Israel struck the South Pars natural gas field and oil facilities along the Gulf in southern Iran.

Trump even pressured Israel to bring a premature halt to its campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon within days after the ceasefire on April 8, forcing Israel to accept restraints on its fighting with a hostile adversary right on its border.

“The sidelining is particularly hard to take for some Israeli officials, who, speaking on condition of anonymity, noted that the country willingly shouldered some of the war’s more controversial assignments.”

For Netanyahu, it has meant repeatedly recalibrating his rhetoric, and even adjusting his description of Israel’s war objectives, in response to Trump’s frequent vacillations.

After initially telling his citizens that Israel’s goals were to “remove” the existential threats of an Iranian nuclear weapon and of its ballistic missile arsenal, by March 12 Netanyahu was articulating a new idea. This one downplayed the fact that those threats had not been removed, and instead exalted Israel’s close partnership with the United States.

“Threats come and threats go, but when we become a regional power, and in certain fields a global power, we have the strength to push dangers away from us and secure our future,” he said. What gave Israel such newfound strength in the eyes of its adversaries, Netanyahu asserted, was his alliance with Trump — “an alliance like no other.”

 

*David M. Halbfinger and Ronen Bergman for The New York Times