Being a MAGA influencer just isn’t what it used to be.
When the Trump administration returned to power nearly two years ago, the influencers swaggered into Washington, D.C. with unrelenting hubris. The inauguration gave us a window into just how decisive they’d been in the previous election. The late Charlie Kirk “got a better seat than every member of Congress,” according to The Daily Beast. Jake Paul and his brother Logan took selfies with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, one of many Big Tech Trump allies who donated to his inaugural fund to secure access to the administration. Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson mingled with government leaders and titans of industry.
In any other election cycle, a viral Fox News gaffe would have registered only as a momentary laugh. Last week, reporter Lucas Tomlinson was covering a South Carolina rally for incumbent Republican Sen. Darline Graham, who is seeking to serve a full term following the death of her brother, Sen. Lindsey Graham. In reality, the event was more about Donald Trump, who had flown to the Palmetto State to help shore up Graham’s candidacy, which increasingly appears to be at-risk. Spotting a middle-aged white man with a beard, Tomlinson assumed he was about to get some choice footage of a gushing Trump superfan. Instead, Tom Hoyle, with an admirable deadpan, joked that he had turned out for the rally because he was too young to have witnessed the 1978 Jonestown massacre, in which 918 followers of Rev. Jim Jones died after drinking a fruit drink laced with poison. “There’s nothing like seeing a cult right up front, man,” he added.
“All right, maybe this is not a Trump supporter,” Tomlinson said, scurrying away.
The surreal moment capped what has been a desultory midterm election season for Fox, a network that bills itself as “news” but has long been seen by fans and detractors alike as Republican propaganda. Despite their largely worshipful coverage of the president, Trump has been complaining that the network isn’t doing enough to salvage the campaigns of the GOP.
“FoxNews is spending far too much time putting on the OPPONENTS of Republican Party Candidates,” he recently posted on Truth Social, echoing his prior complaints that the network focuses too much on the Democrats running this cycle than on their Republican opponents.
Trump is not wrong about the coverage tilt. According to Media Matters, during this election cycle the network has mentioned the names of Democratic candidates at over three times the rate of Republicans. That disparity, though, doesn’t mean the coverage is sympathetic. To the contrary: Fox producers likely recognize that this year’s GOP field of candidates is deeply uninspiring. Some, such as Vivek Ramaswamy, who is running for governor of Ohio, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is seeking a Senate seat, are so repulsive that even lifelong Republicans can’t pretend to like them.
This season, Democratic candidates are making more compelling TV, particularly the charismatic incumbent Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., Michigan’s Senate nominee Dr. Abdul El-Sayed and Texas state representative James Talarico, who is running against Paxton. The most Fox News can hope for is to hijack these candidates’ ability to command attention, and then use it to drive negative polarization with endless “who do these people think they are?” outrage. But then again, the network knows its audience.
As Salon’s Sophia Tesfaye recently noted, it’s not like Fox News knows what else to do. The hosts, she writes, have been grabbing wildly at straws, praying they can find any story to spark culture war hysteria that will distract voters from serious issues like inflation, the war with Iran or the metastasizing deportation crisis. The network tried to make hay out of the French riots, but even Fox viewers struggled to see why student protests in Paris matter to America. It attempted to pretend Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., was calling for mass arrests of young Republicans when she was asked during a recent appearance about holding the GOP accountable, but that never really caught on either. A last-minute gambit to feign outrage over Barack Obama’s recent joke comparing Trump’s White House decor to the Cheesecake Factory fizzled out as well, likely because it simply reminded people of how the current resident is defiling the People’s House.
Part of Fox’s problem is immediate. Many voters’ economic woes are sky-high, making it hard for culture war nonsense to feel relevant. But there’s also a longer-term problem for the network, which is that they don’t make as much sense as they used to.
Fox News has long existed to dress up gutter bigotries and far-right paranoia in the clothes of respectable news coverage, mostly through the use of dog whistles and innuendo. In the past, winks at some of the fouler ideas out there was enough to titillate the audience while keeping up the pretense of respectability. But now, that stuff seems dated and out of touch.
This is an era when, as Jamelle Bouie of New York Times said on YouTube, the actual president offers “Klansman-level racism” from the campaign stump, calling Black people “low IQ,” flinging a slur for transgender people at Democratic politicians and suggesting that El-Sayed’s Muslim faith makes him a terrorist. Right-wing social media, especially the Elon Musk-owned X, reads like Stormfront message boards from the 1990s, with Musk himself regularly promoting white nationalist ideas and memes. Former Fox hosts Megyn Kelly and Tucker Carlson offer their former employer stiff competition by being more dishonest and outrageous than the lawsuit-wary network can be, with segments suggesting only supermodel-hot women get raped or that Holocaust deniers have a point.
But according to Salon’s Alex Galbraith, one Fox host seems to be getting sick of his network’s culture war strategy. Jesse Watters has complained openly on air about how bad the GOP is doing and how Fox coverage isn’t doing much to excite their audience. In one particularly telling segment, he lashed out about the relentless attention Fox News gives to non-stories from the WNBA, including hysteria over trans players, of which there are zero.
“I don’t want to push this story anymore!” Watters said. “I want to leave this story alone! I am no longer talking about the WNBA. As of now, I boycott this segment.”
Although his reasoning may differ, the host is right that the Fox fixation on the WNBA is stupid. The league has become such an obsession on the right because, plainly put, many male conservatives hate seeing female athletes perform feats they couldn’t even manage in their youth. They want to end professional women’s sports and return to the sexist delusion that all men are stronger and faster than all women. This much is evident in how real-life right-wingers behave toward the WNBA, such as going so far as to buy tickets so they can throw sex toys at the players.
Fox hosts are careful to never say outright that women shouldn’t play sports; that, as they well know, could alienate millions of Republican voters, especially women and fathers of female athletes who are more moderate on this issue. Instead, the network attempts to hijack the antipathy many conservatives feel toward female basketball players with their traditional wink-and-nudge coverage, pretending they want to “clean up” the sport. This preserves the illusion that the right doesn’t hate female athletes while portraying the players — the white ones at least — as fragile, helping to reassure an insecure male audience.
In the past, this kind of tap dance has worked. Now, as Watters implied, it’s floundering, feeling much too tepid when compared Fox’s online competitors and actual politicians flinging unprintable slurs. Watters suggested as much during another segment, when he argued that Republicans need more “fear porn” if they want to win.
His use of the word “porn” is telling. Watters was arguing that it doesn’t do to be coy any longer — that only the hard-core stuff will move the base. But for Fox News, that would come at the cost of losing advertising dollars and the eyeballs of less radical viewers. This is a true dilemma — and it’s one that couldn’t happen to a more deserving network.
With the midterm elections just three days away, “Saturday Night Live” returned from a two-week hiatus Saturday with Donald Trump interrupting a Halloween favorite to deliver an unusual campaign message.
Tom Hanks reprised his role as David S. Pumpkins in the Oct. 31 cold open, accompanied by skeleton dancers including former cast member Bobby Moynihan. But the haunted amusement park ride was interrupted by James Austin Johnson’s Trump, who commandeered the sketch to discuss the approaching elections.
“We both appeared in 2016,” Trump’s character said of Pumpkins. “We’re both very loud, very orange, and very, frankly, annoying.”
Johnson’s Trump mocked Republican polling numbers, compared Texas’ political landscape to his discolored hand and reluctantly urged viewers to support Republican Ken Paxton over Democrat James Talarico, or rather “Tala-FREAK-o” in Trump’s universe.
The sketch also revisited Trump’s recent remarks about men’s backsides, with Hanks becoming an unlikely recipient of the president’s fictional admiration.
After a quick Nicki Minaj impersonation of her recent hype of MAGA and love of Trump, a parody of former White House press secretary Katie Zacharia rightfully botched the show’s signature opening line.
Despite Tuesday’s approaching elections, the episode largely limited its political satire to the cold open and a handful of “Weekend Update” jokes. Colin Jost opened the segment with a montage of Trump’s remarks about Ohio Sen. Jon Husted‘s backside, extending the posterior joke.
Elsewhere, the Halloween broadcast leaned heavily on nostalgia and celebrity appearances.
Moynihan returned as his recurring character “Drunk Uncle” during Weekend Update, joined by Milwaukee Brewers players Christian Yelich and Brice Turang and manager Pat Murphy, who brought the World Series trophy.
In one of the evening’s more pointed moments, host Inde Navarrette took aim at previous host Shane Gillis, whose remarks a few weeks ago describing women at the gym as dressing like “whores” drew widespread criticism. Discussing the fitness demands of her upcoming Marvel role, Navarrette turned his words back on him: “Every morning, I put on my ‘little whore outfit,’ and I hit the gym.” The audience responded with cheers and applause.
KOREAN DEMILITARIZED ZONE — Friedrich Merz ended his five-day trip to Asia on Friday reflecting on Europe’s past.
After visiting the blue barracks where the armistice that ended the Korean War was signed in 1953, in the Joint Security Area where North and South Korean troops stand face-to-face, the German chancellor addressed the obvious parallels between his country’s history and Korea’s present.
“Thoughts are running through my mind about how grateful we may be that in Germany we haven’t had to experience this for 36 years,” Merz said.
The remarks concluded a tour of Singapore, Japan and South Korea, where the chancellor was challenged by Asian capitals over security and trade cooperation — and often reminded of how the region’s turmoil are intertwined with Europe’s precarious moment.
‘Collective security’
One only has to look across the border. Shortly before Merz arrived in the demilitarized zone, North Korea fired about 10 short-range ballistic missiles toward the Sea of Japan. The chancellor’s greatest security concerns at home — Russia’s war against Ukraine and Moscow’s threat to Europe — are increasingly becoming problems in the Asia-Pacific region as well.
The fact that Pyongyang is able to launch so many ballistic missiles, testing and expanding its long-range strike capabilities, is directly linked to its cooperation with Russia. North Korea has been sending soldiers to the Russian front in Ukraine for two years and in return benefited from combat experience and technology transfers.
North Korean state television on Thursday showed leader Kim Jong Un with new military drones, including a potential stealth drone, underscoring the great strides the country is also making in drone development. These are serious security issues that other countries in the region, including Japan, cannot ignore.
Besides provocations from Pyongyang, there is China, which is not only becoming increasingly dominant in trade but also casting its eye toward Taiwan, making far-reaching territorial claims in the South China Sea and putting strong pressure on critics such as Japan. And there is Russia, which is forging close military ties with Beijing and carrying out joint bomber flights with the Chinese air force near the Japanese border.
“Russia’s war against Ukraine is ever-present here in the region,” Merz told reporters following his visit to the border. “There is no longer such a thing as unilateral security in the world, only collective security,” he added, underscoring his call to “work closely” with Japan, South Korea and Singapore “on security policy issues” and in the defense industry.
Middle power struggle
This German offer has generated considerable interest. Given Berlin’s position as Ukraine’s largest supporter, German defense companies are highly active in the war-torn country and cooperate with local manufacturers, giving them access to rapid technological developments. This makes them attractive to Asian partners who fear falling behind North Korea and China as they benefit from their cooperation with Russia.
The fact that the chancellor traveled with a large business delegation — the kind previously seen only on visits to China — underscores this focus. Among the companies were several defense firms, including aircraft manufacturer Airbus, air defense manufacturer Diehl Defense and drone specialist Quantum-Systems. Japan welcomed the cooperation, with Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi speaking of a “premium partnership” with Germany.
Yet Merz’s trip was about more than defense deals. The chancellor used his visits to warn against violations of international law by Russia but also increasingly by China and the United States. “We are on the threshold of a new era,” he said in Tokyo. “We are witnessing how the major powers are pursuing a new policy and how international rules are eroding.”
Friedrich Merz arrives in Japan on Oct. 28, 2026. | Hans Von Der Burchard
His words echoed a similar warning issued by German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier during a parallel trip to Beijing. “An order that was never perfect, but at least served as the foundation for international cooperation, is eroding. Lawlessness looms. I see this as a great danger for all of us,” said Steinmeier.
To counter this trend, Merz built on Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s proposal that “middle powers” should team up to better defend themselves in the face of unreliable major powers and toothless international organizations.
In speeches in Tokyo and Seoul, Merz proposed a “global political alliance for rules-based trade.” Medium-sized powers such as the EU, Asian nations, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the South American Mercosur trade bloc should “coordinate” and “act together” if others challenged international rules “or if economic pressure were to be exerted,” said the chancellor.
It’s a thinly veiled reference to Chinese threats to restrict access to rare earth metals and the tariff threats made by U.S. President Donald Trump. Merz also said the alliance could strengthen the World Trade Organization and seek to unblock the nomination of judges to the organization’s appellate body.
“Considerable concern” over Franco-German car deal
During his trip, however, Merz experienced firsthand just how difficult it is to put such an ambitious proposal into practice when special interests complicate an alliance of small and medium-sized powers.
This became most evident when the Asian countries issued a sharp protest over planned “Made in Europe” rules for the car industry. Under a proposal agreed by Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron, Brussels would restrict subsidies for cars to vehicles produced inside the EU, Switzerland and the U.K., putting foreign manufacturers at a disadvantage.
In polite but direct terms, South Korea’s President Lee Jae Myung told reporters he had “asked Merz for support so that Korea would be treated like the EU member states.” A similar complaint was voiced in Japan.
“That was, in fact, a topic that surprised me a bit, given the intensity with which it was presented,” Merz told reporters before returning to Germany on Friday evening. He admitted that the Franco-German proposal had “sparked considerable concern in the region — in Singapore, Japan, and Korea — that we may be facing a new wave of protectionism in Europe, that we are closing ourselves off from other countries.”
Merz vowed to take those complaints “very seriously” and raise them at the next EU leaders’ summit. Yet they are a sharp reminder of how much industry-specific details can hamper the implementation of his proposed broader alliance.
The chancellor’s trip also revealed challenges when it comes to security cooperation: A request for Japan to supply Patriot anti-aircraft missiles to Ukraine fell flat. And it remains unclear whether Tokyo continues to contribute several billions to a new Ukraine loan next year, as Brussels hopes.
A Japanese diplomat, granted anonymity to discuss sensitive matters, posed a different question to the German delegation: “How exactly will you help us if China attacks Taiwan?”
The Axel Springer Global Reporters Network harnesses the resources of the company’s newsrooms to publish ambitious scoops, investigations, interviews, opinion pieces and analysis. It allows journalists — including those from POLITICO, Business Insider, WELT, BILD, Onet and Fakt — to collaborate on major stories for an international audience of hundreds of millions across platforms: online, print, TV and audio.
More than 40% of people flagged by the Trump administration as suspected noncitizen voters in California aren’t on the state’s current voter rolls, according to a new analysis filed in federal court Saturday, raising fresh questions about the Justice Department‘s efforts to intervene in ballot counting days before the midterm elections.
Researchers with UCLA’s Voting Rights Project examined a list of 20,930 people identified by federal officials as potentially ineligible voters. They found that 8,880 names, or 42%, could not be matched to California’s current voter file.
The analysis also identified at least 22 people who appear to be U.S. citizens, with researchers warning that the number of citizens included on the list could be considerably higher.
The findings were submitted in litigation brought by the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, which is challenging the administration’s efforts to use federal immigration data to identify suspected noncitizen voters.
🚨 CHIRLA & the UCLA Voting Rights Project have filed a federal lawsuit to defend voting rights ahead of the 2026 midterms.
The case seeks equal treatment under the Constitution for all U.S. citizens, regardless of birthplace.
No second-class citizens. No second-class votes.
The Justice Department demanded that California election officials separate ballots associated with the listed individuals and withhold them from counting until their citizenship can be verified. Federal prosecutors have also warned election officials of potential criminal consequences for knowingly processing ballots cast by noncitizens.
California officials rejected the demands, questioning the list’s reliability and warning that separating ballots could disrupt an election already underway.
On Friday, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the administration’s emergency request to force California to set aside the disputed ballots. The court concluded that the government had not demonstrated that such extraordinary intervention was legally justified.
A federal district judge had previously rejected the request, warning that it could disenfranchise eligible voters and create chaos in the election system.
The Justice Department maintains that its efforts are intended to prevent illegal voting, which is prohibited in federal elections. The administration has defended its data and argued that counting ballots from ineligible voters would undermine legitimate votes.
But the new analysis raises questions about whether the government’s list accurately identifies people who are registered to vote, much less whether they are ineligible.
The dispute comes as millions of Californians have already cast ballots ahead of Tuesday’s midterm elections.
If you live in West Virginia, you're lucky enough to get a cryptid-themed license plate. West Virginia is the only state that offers a cryptid-themed plate, including multiple beloved monsters from popular urban legends. All of the creatures are from urban legends that are specific to West Virginia lore. — Read the rest
On Thursday night, the smear at the heart of the mysterious transgender mailers that have rocked the final weeks of the midterm elections in Texas completed its journey. What began as baseless social media whispers quickly ascended the ladder of conservative influence, jumped into mailboxes across the Lone Star State and ultimately into the comforting prime-time embrace of Fox News.
At a town hall in Fort Worth, a Texas mother of six named Rebekah Smith told Vice President JD Vance that her 11-year-old daughter had received a letter explaining how to transition without her parents ever knowing, and asked how Republicans would keep the government out of her family. “I don’t know who sent that letter to your child,” the vice president said, “but I think the person who sends a letter to an 11-year-old about gender transition, what I call that in my family is a pervert, and that person ought to go to prison.” Host Jesse Watters, never one to let a grievance go to waste, promised that Fox would investigate “this perverted letter.” Vance asked Smith to talk to his staff because he would “like the Department of Justice to investigate that” as well.
Watters rushed to promote the spectacle. “WHOA! Texas MOM tells JD Vance her DAUGHTER received a letter telling her TO TRANSITION TO A BOY,” he posted on X, followed by Vance’s promise. Missing from that framing was the question that should have governed the segment: Who actually sent the material?
Nobody on that stage mentioned that the pamphlet was a fake. Nobody mentioned that the real transgender advocacy group named inside it had disavowed the mailer. Nobody mentioned that sworn testimony filed that same week had tied the text messages that accompanied it to a national Republican organization. The vice president was asking federal prosecutors to chase a forgery that may well have originated in his own party’s orbit — and he was doing it on a network whose viewers had been marinating in that forgery for weeks.
The race between Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton and Democratic challenger James Talarico has become a crucible for dark-money maneuvers. As polls show the Republican grip on the Lone Star State slipping, conservative campaigns and their surrogates have resorted to increasingly desperate tactics. In early October, for example, Talarico took a brief hiatus from the campaign trail to recover from a severe case of the flu. Rather than accepting a routine human illness, the right-wing echo chamber treated a temporary absence as evidence of mental illness. Within days, the fabricated scandal has collapsed — yet the machinery of right-wing media simply pivoted to amplifying a more insidious operation designed to trigger visceral outrage.
This second October surprise involved millions of unsolicited text messages and a wave of physical mailers sent to Texas households with materials that directed readers to the website of the Transgender Education Network of
It does not need to survive scrutiny. It just needs to circulate upward.
Texas while inserting provocative advice on child emancipation that the real organization says it never authored or authorized. By flooding the electorate with extreme material disguised as progressive advocacy, right-wing operatives appear to have sought to create a fake controversy that could be weaponized in attack ads and campaign speeches. Vance, for instance, told the Fox News audience that Talarico has “a weird fascination with trans kids,” and that “he’ll probably defend the right of the person sending the letter, not the right of the parent who is rightfully creeped out by this.” Vance claimed that Talarico “has actually called it abusive when parents try to prevent their children from transitioning” and that Paxton “has fought hard to prosecute those people, whereas James Talarico has fought hard to protect those people.” Even the distortion had been laundered by then — Talarico called denying a child’s gender identity abusive, a different claim from saying parents must permit medical transition, but at the top of the ladder the difference no longer exists.
That is how a smear works in the closed ecosystem of the American right. It does not need to survive scrutiny. It just needs to circulate upward. An anonymous account posts it; an influencer adopts it; a donor-funded outlet reports the influencer’s outrage as news; an elected official demands an investigation, and the demand becomes proof the story matters; cable news books the controversy; a vice president promises federal action. Each rung launders the one below it. The correction, when it comes, travels in the opposite direction and arrives nowhere.
The paper trail looks like what you would expect from a covert operation. Texas Transgender Student Union LLC was formed in Wyoming on Sept. 2 through a commercial registered agent that helps owners stay anonymous. After CBS News Texas visited the agent’s address in Sheridan, Wyoming, the agent announced it was resigning. The mailers listed a Houston-area post office box. The Texas Observer reported that the barcode on the envelopes traced to a mail-tracking company that has taken federal campaign money from only one group this year, the National Republican Congressional Committee. The committee said it had nothing to do with the mailers, and the company would not say who paid. CBS News Texas reported that the bulk-mail permit belongs to an Illinois printer owned by the Zerrusen family, who have given heavily to Republican PACs and been photographed with Donald Trump.
When the real Transgender Education Network of Texas filed a petition in Travis County court to unmask the perpetrators behind the impersonation campaign, the partisan safety nets of the Texas judiciary eventually snapped into action. A deposition of Infobip, the messaging company that delivered the texts, which a Travis County judge ordered made public, indicated that the texts were sent on behalf of the Republican Women’s Caucus Fund and a man named John Braun. But on Friday, the Texas Supreme Court, composed entirely of judges appointed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott, issued an administrative stay that blocked its release. Chris Hilton, an attorney who previously served under Paxton, defended him during his impeachment trial and was later pushed out of office amid sexual harassment allegations, argued on behalf of the company that the mailers were not political speech because they named no candidate or party.
Dirty tricks are an old tradition of American politics. This cycle, Republican PACs in Nevada mailed a flyer calling a nonpartisan candidate, Danielle Ford, the “AOC of Nevada,” hoping voters would mistake her for the actual Democratic nominee, Aaron Ford. This week also brought word that the group that funded Cornel West’s 2024 ballot drives raised every dollar through a dark-money network bankrolled by Elon Musk.
The president’s party whines about decoy candidates in Alaska while running them at home. Ratf**king is a long and proud Republican tradition, and the Texas operation fits inside perfectly.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani knows what they’re saying about his grocery plan.
Conservative media outlets and right-wing commentators have, for more than a year, been practically apoplectic about Mamdani’s push to open five municipal stores to sell discounted food. Local Republicans have responded to the initiative by comparing Mamdani to Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez. Last year, as Mamdani made the plan a central plank of his campaign, Fox Business published a dramatic piece featuring interviews with “descendants of socialism” from Eastern Europe and Cuba suggesting Mamdani’s agenda was reminiscent of the “vivid memories,” “tales of woe” and “scars” they experienced.
Now, the plan is underway. The first store is set to open its doors by the end of next year, and Mamdani is thoroughly unmoved by the backlash. In a conversation with TPM last week, the mayor dug into the details of his grocery store plan and brushed off the critics.
“If I listen to that commentary every day, I would become afraid of my own shadow,” Mamdani said with a laugh. “And I think, for too long, we have allowed the right to dictate the entirety of the discussion. And we have limited ourselves to a response to a landscape that they have created.”
As he sat in the Governor’s Room of City Hall, Mamdani emphasized his words by tapping his hand against the large conference table. It’s a gesture that would go unnoticed if it were not for his signature silver rings gently rapping against the wood. The sound served as periodic punctuation as he expressed his frustration with the limitations of Democratic politics as usual and his enthusiasm for the city-run stores.
“It is time for us to ask ourselves, what is our party for?” he asked. “And to me, the answer has to be the working class. It’s the only majority in this country. And then what can we do to materially change the lives of those working class New Yorkers or Americans?”
Those are the people who inspired Mamdani’s groceries initiative. The mayor explained that he settled on the idea during his campaign last year based on conversations with city residents.
“If you ask New Yorkers, .. what are the costs that you’re reckoning with as part of the skyrocketing cost of living crisis in our city? … What is pushing you to reconsider if you should be living in this city? … Again and again, you hear about housing, childcare, groceries,” Mamdani said. “We’d hear about public transit, we’d hear about other things, but groceries would always be up there.”
Data shows it’s gotten far more expensive to eat in New York City. A report released by the state comptroller last year showed food prices in the metropolitan area were up over 25 percent since 2019. And as Mamdani and his advisers looked at ways to confront the issue, they became adamant new approaches were needed.
“When everyone is telling you that prices are too high, the common refrain is therefore we should subsidize the private market further,” said Mamdani. “And yet, what we’ve seen is that we’ve explored those kinds of strategies here in New York City. They have not had a substantial impact on the cost of groceries.”
The plan is rooted in a very New York “tradition.” Mayor Fiorello La Guardia, a progressive New Deal Republican who steered the city through the Great Depression, opened public markets that gave street vendors support and space for their businesses. That vision has continued with Essex Market, a warren of shops and restaurants on the Lower East Side that the city has operated since the 1990s.
Mamdani describes La Guardia as “an inspiration each and every day.” One of New York’s five new grocery stores is being constructed at La Marqueta in East Harlem’s El Barrio, a site that was home to one of the original 1930’s markets. More recently, a similar public grocery store initiative has begun in Atlanta.
Despite the histrionics — including dire warnings from Fox News and right-wing think tankers that Mamdani’s stores could cause widespread food shortages — the actual plan is fairly limited in its scope. There will just be five stores (one in each of New York City’s boroughs). In addition to La Marqueta, another is planned for a city-owned site at Hunts Point in The Bronx. That store, which has been dubbed The Peninsula, is slated to be the first to open towards the end of next year. The other three locations, which will be in Brooklyn, Queens, and on Staten Island, have not been identified yet. Mamdani has pledged to open all of them by the end of his term in 2029.
Inside the stores, a slate of items that Mamdani’s team has dubbed a “core basket” will be offered at a 30 percent discount that will be adjusted monthly and pegged to the market rate. This includes produce, meat, seafood, dairy, and a selection of pantry staples. Other items will be on sale at standard prices. The city estimates this will save customers roughly $90 per month.
Those market rate costs for the majority of goods in the grocery stores are hardly in line with the visions of Havana spun by the right. The “government-run” moniker conservatives have slapped on the project is also an exaggeration. Mamdani’s grocery stores are actually a public-private partnership. The New York City Economic Development Corporation currently has proposals out looking to rent privately owned sites for the final three stores. They also have accepted bids from experienced operators to run all of the venues.
Some of the criticism of the plan has been based on its potential cost to taxpayers. The city initially invested $70 million to cover construction and real estate expenditures associated with the five sites. According to officials, with solicitations for sites and operators ongoing, the final annual cost of the program is not clear. However, they are confident having the spaces paid for will be sufficient incentive to enable the store operators to offer the “core basket.” If necessary, the city may also provide further subsidy beyond covering real estate capital costs to ensure operators can stock the discounted items. Furthermore, they expect the NYCEDC’s competitive bidding process will help identify companies who can keep the stores’ overhead low.
In the interview with TPM, Mamdani insisted the plan will be “sustainable.” And, thus far, the mayor has a track record of managing the costs of his ambitious programs. This year, Mamdani, who inherited an approximately $12 billion deficit when he took office in January, balanced the city budget. While much has been made of the fact that the feat required some help from the governor’s mansion and a delay in pension payments that will need to be dealt with down the road, Mamdani made up nearly half the difference by finding new revenue through taxes on the wealthy and cost-saving measures like cutting unnecessary overtime.
Joseph Hernandez, the Republican candidate for state comptroller, has been one of the more vocal critics of Mamdani’s municipal grocery stores. He’s unveiled estimates claiming the plan could cost $200 million. There are some issues with that figure. Along with the initial $70 million in construction costs and an estimated $106 million in projected operating costs, Hernandez’s tab includes a supposed $30 million that he says will be lost by other businesses from competing with the stores.
“We can absolutely afford it,” Mamdani said with a laugh. “We are a city budget that has significantly north of $100 billion on an annual level — and we already spend about $850 million in programs that seek to address food insecurity, ranging from our school system to funding food pantries.”
“What we’re talking about here is a drop in the bucket of what the city already spends,” he added. “But one that will be felt by every single New Yorker who goes to these stores.”
Mamdani further argued that those who raise questions about the price of social programs “prefer not to see the cost today” of the underlying issues those initiatives seek to address.
“We are dealing with the costs of food insecurity every single day. We’re sitting down to talk in the wealthiest city in the wealthiest country in the history of the world and yet one in four New Yorkers are in poverty,” Mamdani said. “It is not tenable, it is not acceptable.”
For the mayor, the situation calls for a different kind of politics. He described himself as “unwilling” to simply point at the problem “and then hope that somebody comes up with a solution.”
“This is a city of innovation. It’s a city of imagination. It’s time we bring those kinds of ethos to our politics as well,” Mamdani declared.
The idea that the new stores will hurt other businesses has been one of the more persistent arguments from critics of the plan. A group of minority-owned bodegas and supermarkets has even sued to stop the initiative. Yet Mamdani argues his stores are fundamentally different, particularly from bodegas which typically offer ‘round-the-clock service and core items that won’t be available in the municipal shops.
“The biggest things that drive revenue for bodegas are tobacco, lottery tickets, and alcohol. We’re not selling those,” Mamdani explained. “Our goal here is not to compete with fundamental parts of New York City.”
Mamdani, who noted there are thriving bodegas in the immediate vicinity of the existing public Essex Market, also framed it as fairly simple math.
“We’re speaking about a city that has north of 10,000 bodegas, north of a thousand different grocery operators. We’re talking about five city-run grocery stores,” he said emphatically as his ring tapped against the wooden table.
As they select locations for the stores, city officials are looking for neighborhoods where there isn’t much competition. They are aiming for locations with insufficient grocery store options as well as a high rate of residents accessing public benefits. Though the goal is to ensure the discounted food will be easily accessible for lower income New Yorkers, the stores will be available to anyone who wants to shop at them.
“These are stores for everyone,” Mamdani said.
In building out his vision for the municipal grocery stores, Mamdani named his chief of staff, Elle Bisgaard-Church, who he calls his “left hand,” as a key force behind the project. He also pointed to Deputy Mayor for Economic Justice Julie Su, the highest ranking City Hall official with the stores in their portfolio, and NYCEDC Executive Vice President Jamie Horton as being among the key officials overseeing the plan.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani at a food distribution center on July 27, 2026. Mamdani announced that the five upcoming city-owned grocery stores will offer a 30 percent discount on produce, meat, bread, and milk when they begin to open next year. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
Speaking to TPM, Horton said one key aspect of the program for Mamdani is ensuring that the stores will be a “pleasant experience” without “stigma.” The solicitations for operators and sites specify the visual language and design elements that will be part of creating an elevated environment inside the shops.
“It’s really important that this is an example of public excellence, that the public sector can deliver a high quality experience. It’s also about providing a service … that treats folks with dignity, that this isn’t a handout for folks, it’s that the government is delivering for its people,” Horton said.
Overall, Mamdani said a core goal of the project is making a real change in the environment for city residents.
“I am tired of the fact that politics has increasingly become an act of describing working peoples’ struggles as opposed to putting forward what you will do about those struggles,” he said, before asking, “How are you going to deliver them a different reality?”
That ethos and desire to take concrete steps to address cost of living has been the central plank of Mamdani’s platform. As he ran for office last year, the grocery stores were one of the highest profile parts of his campaign along with a partial rent freeze and a plan for fast, free city buses. Mamdani delivered on the rent freeze for certain stabilized units in June. While the plan for free buses has run into legislative opposition, in July, Mamdani and Gov. Kathy Hochul unveiled a road map to speed up service.
At every turn, Mamdani’s various proposals have faced backlash and questions about costs. The criticism has been amplified by Mamdani’s membership in the Democratic Socialists of America. All of this has, for better or worse, made Mamdani a national figure who has received both positive attention and ire from President Donald Trump. Last June, after Mamdani won the Democratic primary en route to City Hall, Trump took to social media and blasted him as “a 100% Communist Lunatic.” Less than five months later, after Mamdani was victorious in the general election, the two had a warm meeting in the Oval Office where the president heaped praise on the new mayor.
“I met with a man who’s a very rational person. I met with a man who wants to see — really wants to see — New York be great again,” Trump said, adding, “I’ll be cheering for him.”
Along with the rhetoric, Trump’s allies have also played their part in the opposition to Mamdani’s grocery plan. One of the legal complaints from store owners was filed with the America First Policy Institute, a right wing dark money group chaired by Larry Kudlow, the former director of the National Economic Council in the Trump White House.
Mamdani smiled broadly as he offered some choice words for Kudlow.
“Larry must love paying a lot of money for eggs,” Mamdani said, adding, “There will always be opposition wherever there is innovation and wherever there is imagination. And we welcome it. We are fully confident in the legality of this program and even more so than the legality, the urgent necessity of it.”
While the mayor clearly has his critics, Mamdani and the swirl of national buzz around his rise helped turn “affordability” into one of the major talking points of this election cycle. And, in New York, the most recent polling shows his popularity has surged to nearly 70 percent favorability.
Mamdani believes his fellow Democrats need to be less preoccupied with their detractors.
“I think you simply have to prepare and expect for this kind of backlash. What it is, is a backlash to any kind of change. And if you want to avoid backlash, then all you will do is just steward the status quo. And that is exactly what has gotten us to this point,” he said. “It is critically important that we stop the act of constructing an ever-lowering ceiling on our ideas.”
For Mamdani, his grocery stores epitomize this ambitious, unafraid vision and approach.
“That is what is so exciting to me,” he said. “Politics so often is something that has to be translated to someone who lives outside of the political world. There is no translation required about cheaper groceries. You understand it when you’re checking out.”
“For too long, politicians have had things to say and they haven’t had anything to do,” he added. “And it’s time to make this city an example of what we can do for people.”
This video shows a gigantic water spout seen on the Kama River in the Perm region of Russia. The water spout against the sunlight looks like a portal leading up into the sky. It's fascinating that something real can look so supernatural. — Read the rest
Burnham tries to avoid a slavery reparations ‘disaster’
The upcoming summit of Commonwealth countries threatens a reckoning with Britain’s imperial past — and a baptism of fire for its new prime minister.
By DAN BLOOM in London
Photo-illustration by Nate Kitch for POLITICO
Prime Minister Andy Burnham will have an unofficial goal when he meets members of Britain’s former empire next week: Avoid a fight about slavery reparations.
Good luck, as they say, with that.
His predecessor Keir Starmer’s trip to the last Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, at a beach resort on the Pacific island of Samoa in 2024, is still the stuff of rueful mutters in parts of Whitehall.
Lined up in a semi-circle of armchairs — “like an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting,” as one person briefed on the gathering put it — leaders from many of the 56 Commonwealth nations negotiated live over a 16-page communique on laptops and tablets. Starmer, a barrister, found himself personally redrafting a key paragraph about reparations on a screen surrounded by other leaders, said two further people briefed on the meeting.
The unusually intimate format of the leaders’ retreat meant they had no officials with them on the veranda, and Starmer had just one civil servant — No. 10’s private secretary for foreign affairs — stationed in a tent close by. His chief of staff Morgan McSweeney was woken at 4 a.m. London time by a phone call to talk about the strategy for reparations.
That, however, was never clearly resolved. The retreat dragged on hours late; some leaders left before it was even over. Starmer was frustrated and felt he had been “ambushed,” said one U.K. official involved in the 2024 trip. A second said they had blocked the incident from their memory. A third said Starmer was left “furious,” adding: “He went in blind and it was terrible for him.” A fourth said simply: “It was a disaster.” All were granted anonymity to speak frankly.
The eventual communique agreed on a “conversation towards forging a common future based on equity.” This fudge kicked the issue of reparations down the road — where it now lands in Burnham’s lap.
Britain’s new prime minister will touch down at the biennial summit in Antigua and Barbuda next week to find the issue still firmly on some Caribbean and African leaders’ minds.
At the United Nations in May, 123 countries passed a motion calling for “inclusive, good-faith dialogue on reparatory justice.” The U.K. abstained. Barbados PM Mia Mottley announced a manifesto from Caribbean leaders on the “moral, ethical and legal case” for reparations in June. Commonwealth Secretary-General Shirley Botchwey said last week that an apology for Britain’s role in the slave trade “wouldn’t hurt.”
The visit will be a test of how Burnham — who has a reputation for speaking off the cuff, especially on issues of moral justice — maintains a delicate U.K. government line that reparations are not “the answer,” as Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband told POLITICO last month. And Burnham will face that challenge in a unique spotlight: It will be his first overseas visit with King Charles III, who is the head of the Commonwealth.
POLITICO spoke to a dozen U.K. officials or politicians who were involved in the 2024 summit or the planning for Burnham’s upcoming visit. They painted a picture of acute anxiety in the British state over how to deal with calls for reparations from its former colonies; tensions between Downing Street and the Foreign Office over the handling of 2024; and serious questions in Whitehall about whether the summit is even useful for No. 10 — despite the king’s role leaving U.K. prime ministers little choice but to attend.
Burnham will not have to deal with the extreme jetlag and communications hurdles that dogged Starmer’s trip, which involved a 28-hour flight in each direction. But like Starmer, he will fly out at a time when his in-tray is crowded by other issues — not least the U.S. midterms happening at the same time and the domestic aftermath of his first budget, just unveiled this past Wednesday.
Keir Starmer attends a a state banquet during the CHOGM summit in Samoa, on Oct. 24, 2024. | Pool photo by Fiona Goodall via Getty Images
The first U.K. official quoted earlier in this story said: “There’s a sense that there can’t be a repeat of [2024] this time around.” The third U.K. official quoted above said: “I don’t understand why they’re making the same mistake. Does the prime minister really have to go?”
A No. 10 official, however, said Burnham made clear soon after taking power on July 20 that he was “very keen” to attend the summit. Miliband has “laid the groundwork so that things hopefully won’t be as tricky as they were in 2024,” this person added.
“Andy’s style is that he is an honest broker with people, and he will give an instinctive response to things,” the official said. “But the government’s position is clear that reparations are not seen as the right route. It’s a careful balancing act, but one that we’re well prepared for.”
Climate resilience fund in the works
One tactic for the current No. 10 will be to try to avoid talking about it public.
Downing Street has broken with recent precedent by deciding not to bring the usual “pack” of political journalists, taking a smaller media “pool” instead. This will limit the scope of questions that Burnham faces. (Political editors from news outlets, including POLITICO, have written to No. 10 to object to the arrangement.)
Timing could also allow the visit to slip under the radar. Burnham and Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband will be there alongside counterparts including Anthony Albanese of Australia and Mark Carney of Canada, creating a rare opportunity for them to discuss the implications of the U.S. midterm results in private. The symbolism, as “middle power” nations deal with a drift in U.S. relations under Donald Trump, would be obvious.
British PM Andy Burnham, center, leaves the stage at the end of the Labour Conference in Liverpool on Sept. 30, 2026. | Ian Forsyth/Getty Images
Officially, the agenda is to build an alliance that can boost these middle powers, along with the developing states that global summits usually overlook.
The Commonwealth Secretariat — the London-based body that co-ordinates the summit — said the aim of next week’s gathering is “partnerships and investment,” including in climate and youth employment, and removing trade barriers.
Likewise, the U.K. Foreign Office has been working on a climate resilience fund for developing nations, two people with knowledge of the talks said. A third said conversations in the U.K. government had focused on mobilizing public and private finance, and improving access to finance for climate-vulnerable countries.
Three people with knowledge of the planning emphasized that this summit would be an opportunity to build on relations with countries that could discuss bilateral trade, though they did not name specific nations and no U.K. trade ministers are due at the event.
“There will obviously be trade and investment discussions with a range of partners,” said one of the three people, a U.K. government official, who also noted that the U.K. will raise the impacts of El Niño. “The bigger picture is that we want to use the Commonwealth network to deepen trade and investment links across its 56 members — that Commonwealth advantage is one of the reasons the grouping matters to the UK.”
‘Playing Scrabble with words’
But leaders at these events, known by the awkward acronym CHOGM, can raise whatever topics they wish — reparations included.
Denis O’Brien, the Irish telecoms billionaire who founded the Repair Campaign calling for financial reparations to the Caribbean in 2022, said: “The conversation has moved radically forward.” He urged Britain and other European nations to “start off with an apology and then have an engagement,” adding: “The Foreign Office and the prime minister’s office are playing Scrabble with words — and unfortunately they’re leaving King Charles, who is so highly respected in the Caribbean, in a very difficult position.”
Paul Boateng, the Labour peer who was Britain’s first Black Cabinet minister and now campaigns on the issue, said Caribbean nations “are going to be pressing it. This issue is not going to go away.” The recent UN resolution reinforced Caribbean and African nations’ argument, argued Boateng: “We can’t be seen to simply ignore it … We cannot hold the Foreign Office line that it changes nothing.”
That position cast a long shadow two years ago.
No. 10 flew to Samoa in 2024 insisting reparations were “not on the agenda,” even though the summit’s free-wheeling format meant the choice was effectively out of Downing Street’s hands.
This message “went down like a bag of sick” with Caribbean nations who saw it as “colonial” and “arrogant,” recalled one person involved in conversations at the time.
The handling created tension between Downing Street and the Foreign Office, then led by David Lammy, who also attended, according to six other people with knowledge of the 2024 trip.
King Charles and Queen Camilla attend the bestowing and farewell ceremony on Oct. 26, 2024. | Pool photo by Manaui Faulalo via Getty Images
One of the six people said No. 10 figures had expected the Foreign Office to better manage expectations among Commonwealth nations ahead of Starmer’s arrival. The person said: “No. 10 did not feel like they were well enough informed, and felt some of this could and should have been handled in advance. There was the feeling that both Lammy and the Foreign Office were institutionally pre-disposed to this sort of stuff and not shutting it down. The PM didn’t know what he was going into.”
A second person said: “The FCDO world does forget, sometimes, the politics of what’s going on in the U.K. It’s very institutionalized.”
A third person stressed that senior aides in No. 10 had blamed Foreign Office officials, not Lammy personally. Before Starmer left office this year, No. 10 had been drawing up plans for Starmer to skip this year’s CHOGM — and send Lammy as his representative. By then Lammy had been moved from the foreign office and was Starmer’s deputy prime minister.
Another of the six people countered that it was No. 10 that persisted, ahead of the 2024 summit, with a line that was too binary — reparatory justice, as campaigners prefer to call it, has a wide definition that includes support for climate adaptation and education — and failed to listen to Foreign Office warnings ahead of time about the strength of feeling among Commonwealth nations.
“The audit trail would completely exonerate David and the Foreign Office,” this person said. They argued No. 10 officials — who were keen to hold on to the mantle of fiscal responsibility ahead of Starmer’s first budget — had viewed the row too much through how it would be perceived by the right-wing Daily Mail newspaper.
Two other people with knowledge of the 2024 trip insisted they did not remember any significant friction between No. 10 and the Foreign Office. Lammy’s office did not immediately respond to an invitation to comment.
UK review mooted a scaled-back summit
More significantly, the 2024 summit also led to discussions in Whitehall about the set-up of CHOGM itself.
Lammy commissioned an internal review by Foreign Office officials on the Commonwealth in the wake of the 2024 summit, his former Special Adviser Ben Judah told POLITICO.
Judah said the review suggested reducing the frequency of CHOGMs to “every four or five years,” potentially aligned with the hosting of the Commonwealth Games, and seeking to remove the final communique and leaders’ retreat.
It suggested an investment conference in alternate years modeled on the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, which could keep the Commonwealth branding but with no organizational role for the Secretariat, said Judah.
Judah suggested this would improve attendance at CHOGM, which is often patchy; India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi does not plan to attend next week’s summit, for example, though there will be a delegation led by External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. “The Indians think this thing is ridiculous and self-harming and just totally bizarre,” said Judah. “They’d be interested in a real investment conference, not this farce.”
A second former U.K. government official said they knew about the report, which has not been made public, adding that No. 10 figures under Starmer discussed similar concerns about the format of the Commonwealth summit after the Samoa visit.
Starmer sits with other leaders during the opening ceremony of CHOGM 2024 in Apia, Samoa. | Fiona Goodall/Getty Images
The Foreign Office declined to respond to questions about the report when contacted by POLITICO, including when it was finalized or whether any of its recommendations were pursued. One Foreign Office official, however, stressed that it was not the U.K. government’s position and that any decisions about future CHOGM arrangements would be for Commonwealth members collectively.
The U.K. government official quoted on trade and investment earlier in this piece said: “The Commonwealth is more important to our geostrategic position now than at any time throughout its 80-year history. In today’s more divided, unpredictable world, the Commonwealth has the potential to be a powerful, values-based force for good in the world.
“This gives us a huge opportunity to drive U.K. interests and priorities — Commonwealth relationships have helped to drive global support for Ukraine, and it is hugely important for our work on climate.”
Funding pulled from reserves
Judah, however, argued that the Commonwealth Secretariat is a “broken institution” and Britain should wind down its involvement to focus on an investment summit instead.
CHOGM has ended up as a “platform for the reparations campaign,” argued Judah: “There’s nothing else on the agenda because it’s not a real international organization, and it’s not a real summit with deliverables.” The Commonwealth and Secretariat, he said, has “essentially been taken over by the only countries that are still really invested in them, which are the Caribbean countries supported by a few African countries, to push the reparations agenda.”
For some, that extends to questions about the way the Secretariat spends its money.
Two people with knowledge of the situation said part of this year’s CHOGM summit is being paid for out of the Secretariat’s reserves. “There is a real sense of concern about the malaise and drift of the organization,” argued one of the two people. “Financially it’s in a dire, dire state.”
A Commonwealth spokesperson responded: “The Commonwealth Secretariat accesses reserve funds for the biennial Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting and always with member country approval.”
Back in 2024, Starmer’s most senior aides privately raised the question about whether he should attend the Samoa summit at all. “We were overruled,” said another person who worked under him.
Whitehall officials initially assumed that Burnham would not go either, until he said otherwise. “To a lot of the Caribbean countries, the word [from officials] was that he wasn’t going to show,” said O’Brien. “I think people were taken aback by that.”
But despite Starmer’s experience in 2024, Burnham will attend.
Among all other reasons, there is one very obvious one. “It’s very difficult for a prime minister not to go because the king goes,” said one person who worked under Starmer. “It’s important to him.”
Burnham’s ‘surer touch’
Once Burnham is in the room, campaigners hope he will at least be a listening ear.
Outside the prime minister’s Manchester office No. 10 North is a statue of Abraham Lincoln, commemorating the mill workers who refused to touch raw cotton picked by slaves.
Burnham referred to it in his first speech to the United Nations last month. “In 1862, people with little power used it to help those with none on the other side of the world,” he said. “The best change is change like that, bottom-up change led by people.”
The new prime minister “understands the importance of Manchester as the second great city of empire, and he has a surer touch than his predecessors,” argued Boateng. “We’ve got an opportunity to reset the relationship.”
What reparatory justice would look like is another matter.
Previous estimates have suggested Britain should owe as much as £18 trillion, but the conversation is far more nuanced than talking about a single big number.
Burnham departs Downing Street for prime minister’s questions on Oct. 21, 2026. | Leon Neal/Getty Images
While Boateng argues that no measures should be taken off the table, he would begin with reforming the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to give more Commonwealth countries a meaningful seat at the table, and returning historic artefacts such as the Benin bronzes that are displayed in London’s British Museum. “The British Museum holds loot, literally loot. These are stolen goods,” he said.
Britain is working on debt relief too. Chancellor John Healey plans to make international finance for developing countries a key theme when Britain hosts G20 finance ministers next year.
NGOs have urged Healey to make debt relief more generous by changing the G20’s common framework and UK domestic law, which sets the terms for 90% of debt that low-income countries owe to private lenders.
Maria Finnerty of Bond, the membership body for NGOs, said Britain “continues to play a role in enabling illicit financial flows through loopholes linked to the City of London and its overseas territories, amounting to the loss of billions from some Commonwealth countries.”
Miliband reflected all this in his POLITICO interview last month at the Labour Party Conference. While condemning the slave trade as “terrible,” he said his focus was on addressing current issues in countries “on the front line of the climate crisis, of the debt burden, of trying to reduce poverty in those countries.”
O’Brien is calling for monetary payments, however. Through the Repair Campaign, he wants to see the EU and U.K. make money available to the 15 Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries — with a special case for Haiti — “each year for the next 75 years” for issues such as education, green energy and storm defenses to deal with climate change.
O’Brien would not be drawn on a single figure, but suggested payments should supplement the national budget of each affected country by around 10% a year.
Asked if he had had conversations with the Foreign Office, O’Brien replied: “What do you think?
“I mean, we would like to. We’re approaching this in a very friendly way, taking a very, very sensitive period of history and trying to get results. We have the highest respect for the British government, and particularly the King. But it can’t go on forever.”
POLITICO’s Halloween guide to who — and what — lurks in EU nightmares.
By POLITICO
Illustration byNatália Delgado/POLITICO
Night falls in the European capital. Everything’s quiet, but the nightmares are about to begin.
Viktor Orbán’s ghost haunts the Schuman roundabout; ash from the bonfire of red tape covers the Justus Lipsius building; Ursula von der Leyen’s chief of staff, Björn Seibert, chases after staffers demanding to know what “associate membership” for Canada actually means; and MEPs tremble at the prospect of construction workers uncovering the skeletons of political intrigues past during renovations.
Scared? You should be.
Here’s our guide to who is terrified of whom in the Brussels bubble.
Everyone is scared of Marine Le Pen
The person haunting EU diplomats, officials and lawmakers is French presidential front-runner Marine Le Pen. Will she really halve Paris’ contribution to the EU budget, as promised? Will she pull Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni away from the Brussels mainstream? And will she demand von der Leyen’s head?
The bubble had warmed (slightly) to the idea of Jordan Bardella in the Élysée Palace, after his years leading the National Rally’s European operation revealed a certain pragmatism toward Brussels — only for those hopes to be shattered when a Paris appeals court cleared Le Pen to be a candidate for the presidency.
The next ECB chief is scared of Jean-Luc Mélenchon
The European Central Bank president is the euro’s last line of defense against unorthodox national economic decisions — but that could be tested by French presidential candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who is on course to reach the runoff after vowing to set billions of euros of French debt “on fire.” His incendiary plan calls on the Frankfurt-based ECB to waive interest payments on a vast tranche of French bonds — an unorthodox, perhaps impossible, maneuver that critics warn could even see France kicked out of the euro.
Now that we know Christine Lagarde will step down as ECB president in February, what France’s presidential candidates want to do about its monumental debt pile will haunt the race for her successor, with Dutchman Klaas Knot and Spaniard Pablo Hernández de Cos as the two frontrunners.
Lobbyists are scared of ChatGPT
The number of amendments lawmakers have filed has exploded since generative AI arrived, with key EU laws now facing thousands of proposed text changes. Parliament officials don’t think it’s a coincidence, with some pointing to amendments written in suspiciously bot-like language, and others saying sometimes amendments cite legislation that does not even exist.
The growing pile of amendments is haunting lobbyists, parliamentary assistants and officials forced to track and sort through it all — along with the fear that AI could eventually replace them. Spare a thought, too, for the MEPs who may have to vote through the amendments one by one, with hands raised in plenary.
Commission officials are scared of Austria’s Europe minister
Well-heeled Commission officials (and their families) are spooked by Austria’s Europe Minister Claudia Bauer, who has been leading a push to slash the Commission’s administration expenditure — which pays eurocrats’ salaries and offices — in the next seven-year budget. The campaign, backed by most EU capitals, resulted in an 8% cut to the admin budget in the latest budget proposal.
Bauer is so feared that EU officials joke they reduce their delegations’ size whenever they travel to Austria.
Jessika Roswall is scared of Stéphane Séjourné and Valdis Dombrovskis
Environment Commissioner Jessika Roswall and her department have reason to fear industry boss Stéphane Séjourné, who is taking the lead on the upcoming Circular Economy Act, despite Roswall’s official title of Commissioner “for a Competitive Circular Economy.” Making matters spookier, Roswall’s environment department now shares the Breydel building with Séjourné’s internal market and industry department, setting the stage for some chilling corridor encounters as Roswall pushes for greater environmental protection while Séjourné prioritizes industrial growth.
Roswall is also under pressure from EU simplification chief Valdis Dombrovskis to cut red tape on several environmental laws. The Latvian commissioner, who oversees the omnibus packages, wants a deal before year-end. Meanwhile, the center-right European People’s Party continues to press the Commission to reopen laws on birds, habitats, and water — the EU’s oldest nature protection laws — so they can be simplified too.
Alexander Stubb is afraid of Kaja Kallas and António Costa
Kaja Kallas has not publicly addressed the call that Finnish President Alexander Stubb made to Russia’s Vladimir Putin, but the EU’s top diplomat has made clear she dislikes such outreach. Still, if Putin offered serious talks and concessions, Kallas would be the obvious person to answer: as coordinating EU foreign and security policy is her job. “Of course I will talk if such an opportunity presents itself,” she told Estonian media in September when asked about speaking with Putin or his Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Also reaching for the phone: António Costa. EU diplomats note that the European Council president represents the bloc at the leaders’ level abroad. That institutional turf war may explain why Stubb stressed that he and Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Støre spoke only for their own countries — not for Europe.
Manfred Weber is scared of his own group …
What keeps the leader of the European People’s Party — Europe’s largest political family — up at night? Divisions within his own ranks. So far, Weber has kept a tight ship and wants to reunite his troops ahead of the 2029 EU election, which he is casting as a battle against the far right. But that may prove tricky as the EPP’s national delegations increasingly clash over whether to work with the far right or isolate them.
… and the group is scared of Ouarda Bensouag
Central to Weber’s strategy is Ouarda Bensouag, the group’s secretary-general and his chief of staff. One of his most trusted lieutenants, she has a reputation as a smart but ruthless operator who EPP staffers fear when crossing paths in the Parliament’s labyrinthine hallways.
No one is scared of the Parliament … but they should be
Parliament’s attempts to spook capitals over the next long-term budget have been borderline tragic so far: It keeps threatening to kill the budget, but nobody seems to care or believe it will.
They should care. When it comes time to pass the budget, 361 of 720 votes will be needed, and the margin could be razor-thin in a fragmented chamber that’s hostile to plans to pool farm and regional funds. The louder MEPs protest — and the longer the Council ignores them — the more determined they become to prove the threat is real.
By Max Griera, Gregorio Sorgi, Kathryn Carlson, Nick Vinocur, Jakob Weizman, Fiona McNally and Eliza Gkritsi
LONDON — Britain’s intelligence agency GCHQ cannot account for the whereabouts of thousands of storage devices which could contain sensitive material, according to an official watchdog.
A report by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner (IPCO) — which polices how Britain’s intelligence agencies use their spying powers — on Thursday found that a significant number of devices including USB sticks, hard drives and memory cards are unaccounted for.
Brian Leveson, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner, said that GCHQ “still cannot tell me what has happened to removable media that may hold sensitive data, years after I first raised it with them.”
He noted that the devices “may contain IPA-related data” — which has a high level of sensitivity.
IPA-related data refers to information collected or held under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. That could include intercepted communications such as emails, texts and telephone calls, as well as information extracted from people’s computers or phones.
The report added that GCHQ currently estimates the number of devices “to be in the thousands” and is currently undergoing work so it can report how many of the devices have been confirmed as lost.
“We remain very concerned about this issue and are disappointed with the time it has taken GCHQ to investigate,” the report notes.
Last year IPCO disclosed that GCHQ and fellow intelligence agency MI5 had been unable to locate considerable numbers of storage devices, some of which potentially containing information classified as “TOP SECRET.”
A GCHQ spokesperson said: “As IPCO have reported, our management system for removable media was previously not sufficiently robust to effectively track the items that were registered for use. IPCO are right to note the flaws in the data the system produced, and we have taken action against all their recommendations.
“We recognise the importance of security of removable media in our systems, and have a range of measures to mitigate the risks posed by these items. The findings in the report have been addressed comprehensively and all necessary steps to correct this issue have been taken.”
FRANKFURT — Christine Lagarde’s announcement that she will leave the European Central Bank in February quickly drew attention to more than her departure date: the two bandages on her face visible in a video statement she posted.
They prompted speculation on social media, which Lagarde addressed in a follow-up post. She said they were from a “small surgery” earlier in the week and urged people to follow medical advice and get their skin checked regularly.
In a separate internal video message to all ECB staff, seen by POLITICO, Lagarde offered a little more humor and detail: “I know I look funny. This is not kick-boxing in Thailand,” she said after attending the International Monetary Fund annual meetings in Bangkok earlier this month. “It is just a little skin cancer that had to go.”
The ECB declined to comment and referred to Lagarde’s earlier statement.
Earlier Thursday, Lagarde, who is 70, ended months of speculation about her future role, saying that she will step down on Feb. 7 ahead of her term officially ending in October next year.
An official familiar with Lagarde’s thinking, granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive matter, said she made her move almost a full year before the end of her term, to have “greater freedom to express her views and to engage in non-monetary matters, because she cannot remain neutral when she sees the developments taking place in her own country and in the world.”
Die EU-Kommission will nationale Regelungen zu Altersgrenzen für soziale Medien vorerst zurückstellen. Die Mitgliedstaaten sollen entsprechende Gesetzesvorhaben für ein Jahr aussetzen. Statt unterschiedlicher Regeln soll eine gemeinsame europäische Regelung kommen.
Seit dem vergangenen Jahr arbeiten sowohl die Kommission als auch einzelne Mitgliedstaaten an Altersbeschränkungen für soziale Medien. Als Grund gelten Risiken für die psychische Gesundheit junger Menschen. Doch auch nachdem die EU einen einheitlichen Rechtsrahmen vorgeschlagen hatte, verfolgten die Länder weiterhin unterschiedliche Ansätze und Altersgrenzen.
Im September schlug die EU den sogenannten Kids Act vor. Er soll EU-weit einheitliche Standards schaffen und unterschiedliche Beschränkungen für Kinder unter 13 Jahren und Jugendliche unter 15 Jahren vorsehen. Mehrere Mitgliedstaaten arbeiteten dennoch weiter an eigenen Verboten. Länder wie Griechenland und Dänemark erklärten, sie wollten nicht warten, bis die EU-weiten Regeln ausgehandelt und umgesetzt sind.
„Die Kommission hat beschlossen, alle Entwürfe nationaler Gesetze, die sich mit den künftigen harmonisierten Regeln überschneiden, für zwölf Monate aufzuschieben“, sagte Kommissionssprecher Thomas Regnier am Donnerstag vor Journalisten.
Österreich hatte die Kommission bereits im Juli gebeten zu prüfen, ob sein geplantes Gesetz, das den Zugang für unter 14-Jährige verbieten würde, mit EU-Recht vereinbar ist. Die Frist für eine Antwort der Kommission lief am Donnerstag aus. Die EU-Kommission forderte Österreich daraufhin auf, die Verabschiedung des Gesetzes für ein Jahr auszusetzen, sagte Regnier.
„Ein europäisches Problem erfordert eine gemeinsame europäische Antwort“, sagte Regnier. „Wir müssen uns nun auf die Verhandlungen zum EU Kids Act konzentrieren.“
Die Mitgliedstaaten müssen sich nun mit dem Europäischen Parlament und der Kommission auf die Einzelheiten des Kids Act einigen, bevor die Regeln umgesetzt werden können.
Nach dem Vorschlag der Kommission wäre der Zugang zu sozialen Medien für Kinder unter 13 Jahren in den meisten Fällen verboten. Für Jugendliche unter 15 Jahren würde er stark eingeschränkt. Zudem sollen Plattformen zu mehr Sicherheit bereits bei der Gestaltung ihrer Dienste verpflichtet werden. Die Vorgaben sollen auch für Videospiele und KI-Begleiter gelten.
Wie die Mitgliedstaaten auf die Aufforderung reagieren werden, ist zunächst unklar.
Griechenland hat bereits ein eigenes Gesetz für unter 15-Jährige verabschiedet und dürfte es voraussichtlich beibehalten können, weil das Verfahren bereits vor dem EU-Vorschlag durchlaufen wurde. Außer zu Österreich wollte sich Regnier nicht zu einzelnen Ländern äußern. Im Fall Griechenlands gebe es jedoch „Nuancen“, die damit zusammenhingen, wann das Land sein Gesetz der Kommission zur Prüfung auf Vereinbarkeit mit EU-Recht vorgelegt habe.
Dieser Artikel ist zuerst auf Englisch bei POLITICO erschienen.
The European Commission is telling capitals across the bloc to pause any national laws that restrict social media access to minors, as Brussels seeks an EU-wide set of rules.
But Austria, the first country told to halt its legislation Thursday, lashed out at the order.
“It is unacceptable for Brussels to block member states from enacting national laws without presenting a completed European solution of its own,” Austrian State Secretary Alexander Pröll told POLITICO.
The Commission and national capitals have been seeking age restrictions for social media over the past year, citing risks to young people’s mental health. But even after the EU proposed a unified law, different countries have continued pursuing different approaches and age limits.
In September, the EU proposed the Kids Act, which would set the same standard across the union, placing different limits on access for those under the age of 13, and for those under 15. But multiple capitals continued to legislate their own bans, as countries like Greece and Denmark have said they don’t want to wait for the EU-wide law to be negotiated and implemented.
“The Commission has decided to postpone for 12 months any draft national laws overlapping with the future harmonized rules,” the EU executive’s spokesperson Thomas Regnier told reporters Thursday.
Austria had asked the Commission back in July to check whether its own proposed law, which would ban access for under-14s, was in line with EU law. A deadline for the Commission to respond lapsed Thursday and the EU executive told them to pause adoption for a year, Regnier said.
“I have no sympathy for the European Commission’s delay of Austria’s social media ban,” Vice-Chancellor and Minister for Media Affairs Andreas Babler told POLITICO in a statement.
Austria will continue preparing its own legislation to get it ready for the end of the 12-month pause, said Babler. Vienna will “advance the legislative process at national level to ensure that the social media ban can be implemented immediately once the EU standstill period has expired,” he added.
“A European problem requires a united European response,” Regnier said. “We need to now focus on the negotiations of the EU Kids Act.”
The capitals have to negotiate with the EU Parliament and Commission to agree on the details of the Kids Act, so that it can then be implemented.
The Commission’s proposal would bar access to social media for minors under 13 in most cases and severely restrict access for teens under 15. It also sets requirement for safety by design on the platforms, including video games and AI companions.
The reaction of the other capitals to the order is not immediately clear.
Greece has already passed its own law for under-15s and will likely be able to keep it, simply because it went through the process prior to the EU proposal. Regnier declined to comment on specific countries other than Austria, but did say that there were “nuances” due to when Athens sent its law to the Commission for the compatibility check with EU rules.
Sebastian Starcevic contributed to this report. This article has been updated to include Austria’s reaction.
A top executive of a Singapore AI cloud company that was accused of illegally selling Nvidia chips to China could also have been a Chinese spy, sources have told the New York Times.
With less than a week to go before the midterms, the Republicans’ desperation is becoming obvious. Donald Trump is stumping in Mississippi, where Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith is locked in a tight race, and half the Cabinet is running around giving speeches to people who don’t know who they are. But the biggest sign of the GOP’s anxiety is the resurrection of a tried-and-true tactic: racism.
Only months ago, the party went all-in on red-baiting, accusing mainstream Democrats of being communist sympathizers, a reaction to the 2025 victory of New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and the primary wins of a few democratic socialist candidates. This came alongside the now perennial attacks on transgender Americans, led by the president who continues to insist that elementary schools are performing gender-affirming surgeries in the nurse’s office without parental consent.
We knew they would rely on xenophobia, which has been the central organizing principle of Trump’s decade of political dominance. He may not have kept most of his promises, such as “no new wars” and “bringing prices down on day one,” but he has delivered magnificently on his pledge to incarcerate and deport as many immigrants, undocumented and otherwise, as humanly possible. In fact, he’s even exceeded expectations.
Since they make up the largest share of immigrants, Latinos have been hit the hardest by this cruel policy, and Trump has long asserted that they are all violent criminals. But as we were warned in the 2024 presidential campaign, Haitians have also been among the top immigrant groups targeted by MAGA leaders, with Vice President JD Vance homing in on the racist right-wing id by declaring that these Black immigrants were eating the household pets of their Real American white neighbors.
For a moment, there seemed to be a new target when a social media post by Bo French, the GOP’s nominee for Texas Railroad Commissioner, went viral, exposing a growing conservative antipathy to Indian Americans. This was somewhat surprising since Vance, one of the party’s leading race-baiters, is married to the daughter of Indian immigrants, and Vivek Ramaswamy, another child of Indian immigrants, is Ohio’s Republican nominee for governor.
But none of these attacks and lies has gotten the traction they were hoping for, so the party has gone back to the deep well to draw up a big bucket of Islamophobia.
In the wake of 9/11, some in the GOP became infected by a strain of anti-Arab bigotry that, to his credit, George W. Bush attempted to fight. It waxed and waned as the attacks grew more distant. Then came Trump, whose demonization of Muslims goes back to the 2016 campaign. At that time, the U.S. was in the midst of an outbreak of “lone-wolf” terrorist attacks, and his violent rhetoric really got the crowds going.
Trump famously said he wanted to take up waterboarding “and worse,” and told lurid stories about dipping bullets in pigs blood to scare terrorists. Declaring that he would ban all Muslims from coming to America “until we can figure out what the hell is going on,” he executed his infamous “Muslim ban” days after taking office in 2017, an order that became the focus of legal challenges and, after some re-tooling by the administration, was ultimately upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018.
Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., has long been a particular focus of Trump’s ire. As a progressive, she has been a fierce critic of the administration, but no more than most other Democrats. But she’s a Black woman, an immigrant and a Muslim who wears a hijab. Omar, who fled Somalia with her family at eight and lived for years in a Kenyan refugee camp, represents Minnesota, which became one of Trump’s bete noirs after Kamala Harris chose the state’s governor, Tim Walz, as her running mate. Trump began attacking Minnesota’s community of Somali Americans with some of the most bigoted comments in American history, and that’s saying something.
Somalia, he said, is “garbage, a “sh*thouse country” that “stinks.” He has even claimed that 98% of Somali immigrants don’t work and that they are all criminals driving around in Mercedes-Benz and BMWs. Reprising his role as inciter-in-chief, the president called for (white) Minnesotans to “fight back” against the state’s Somali population, writing that they “view you as weak and stupid people.”
Another target of MAGA’s anti-Muslim bigotry is Dr. Abdul El-Sayed, the Michigan-born Democratic nominee for the Senate. Earlier this week, Vance referred to him as “very, very evil,” a “psychopath” who pushes “anti-white racial hatred.” This charge of reverse racism is one of the favorite tropes of the modern right, guaranteed to draw cheers at a MAGA rally. Trump called El-Sayed a violent jihadist, and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. expanded the attacks, saying that the one billion Muslims worldwide contribute nothing to society, having never won the Nobel Prize or any other prestigious awards, an easily disprovable lie.
The blatant bigotry of these latest attacks is enough to take your breath away, not because they are unprecedented; this is America, after all, and racism is one of our “exceptional” characteristics. But until the last decade, Republicans had learned that it was far better for them to obscure their racism with dog whistles and code words so as not to scare the suburban white people.
The blatant bigotry of these latest attacks is enough to take your breath away, not because they are unprecedented; this is America, after all, and racism is one of our “exceptional” characteristics. But until the last decade, Republicans had learned that it was far better for them to obscure their racism with dog whistles and code words so as not to scare the suburban white people. The famous quote from the notorious GOP strategist Lee Atwater, who recommended referring to “welfare” and “busing” to stand in for overtly racist language, held true for years.
Republicans stuck with that tactic for decades, starting with Richard Nixon, who used the term Trump thinks he invented, “law and order,” as a code word for cracking down on Black protests in inner cities. Ronald Reagan famously talked about “welfare queens” during his 1976 primary bid for president, and four years later he opened his presidential campaign by declaring his belief in states’ rights — another dog whistle — in Mississippi, near the spot where white civil rights workers were killed. Three decades later, Trump turned even more creative with his “birther” campaign against President Barack Obama, combining the party’s burgeoning Islamophobia with classic All-American racism. To this day, Trump refers to Obama using his full name — Barack Hussein Obama — with a childish glee.
I don’t think claiming that a whole African country is a “sh*thouse” or saying that Black immigrants are barbecuing their neighbors’ cats for dinner is the kind of subtlety Atwater was talking about. In fact, I will not be surprised to see Trump, who has lost virtually all rhetorical restraint, drop the ugliest epithets of all someday soon. It’s just a matter of time. And if he does, I’m sure JD Vance and all the rest of MAGA’s staunchest loyalists will find a way to rationalize it as something the other side is responsible for.
LONDON — Enforcement of the U.K.’s upcoming social media ban for under-16s will probably require older teens to show a form of photo ID, according to the U.K.’s online safety regulator Ofcom.
In a government-commissioned report, Ofcom said it had identified just four methods that are “highly effective” at determining whether a user is 16 or over — while noting that “the risk of circumvention cannot be entirely eliminated, and some children will succeed in bypassing age checks.”
The advice comes after the U.K. government vowed to take a tougher approach than Australia to enforcing its ban — due to come into force next year — by requiring platforms to use “highly effective age assurance” to identify underage users.
It will inform regulations to implement the ban which ministers have said they aim to introduce to parliament this year.
Three of the methods identified by Ofcom — photo ID matching, using a digital ID service, or banking-based checks — require a passport or driving license at some stage, while the fourth, facial age estimation, may in some cases need to be followed by a supplementary check using one of the other methods because of a high margin of error at younger ages.
“This ban will shape the future of children’s lives online, so it’s important to get it right,” Ofcom CEO Melanie Dawes said.
While the age checks would involve processing of personal data, “available methods can be delivered in a way that protects users’ privacy and complies with data protection law,” Ofcom said.
It also said social media platforms should take steps to mitigate circumvention, like enabling users to report suspected underage accounts, and using age inference technology to spot activity from users who may be underage.
The regulator said it will consult on further guidance for platforms once regulations to implement the social media ban are laid.
We live in an era where wars are fought not just on battlefields, but also on our screens, in our minds and through the narratives we are led to believe. Narratives are influencing perception while missiles destroy infrastructure. What happens when the war for truth becomes more dangerous than the actual battle itself? Who’s controlling the narrative?
Najla Al Midfa, researcher, TRENDS Research & Advisory
When wars end, the fighting over what they meant begins: who won, who was to blame and who can be trusted to keep the peace. These questions are settled less on the battlefield than on screens, in feeds and in group chats. For a Middle East emerging from the war that began on February 28, that contest may decide whether any new security order holds.
The region is now asking what comes after deterrence. That question brought policymakers, military leaders and researchers from the United States, Europe, Asia and the Gulf to the TRENDS 6th Annual Conference, held in Abu Dhabi and organized by TRENDS Global, in collaboration with its global offices. The answer cannot be measured only in missiles and alliances. Information resilience should be treated as security infrastructure, planned and funded like air defense, not managed as public relations.
What happens when the war for truth becomes more dangerous than the actual battle itself?
The struggle over perception can now matter as much as events on the ground. That is no longer hyperbole. In any crisis today, governments, media outlets, political movements and non-state groups compete in real time to define what is happening. Disinformation, coordinated propaganda and now content generated by artificial intelligence (AI) mean a false account can reach millions before an official one is drafted.
As former BBC correspondent Karen Allen put it at the conference, “Now in an instant, I’m able to influence millions of people,” and algorithm manipulation is what we are increasingly seeing.
This year’s war showed how real that is. Within days of the first U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran, an AI-generated video of Dubai’s Burj Khalifa on fire, with crowds fleeing, was viewed tens of millions of times, according to BBC Verify. Fabricated images of damaged U.S. facilities in the Gulf spread just as fast, some posted by Iranian state-linked outlets. UAE Minister of State Noura Al Kaabi later described the attacks on the country as coming “from the sky and behind our screens.” Her government’s answer was to treat “fake news and misinformation as a security threat.”
A more damaging false story was not a single video. It was the idea that the Gulf was a party to the war. The UAE did not want this war and said so. On March 3, Minister of State Reem Al Hashimy said the UAE did not “seek to expand the circle of confrontation,” that it had “repeatedly confirmed” its territory could not be used for any military operation against Iran, and that “returning to the negotiating table is the only rational way forward.” The attacks continued anyway. Reuters reported, citing UAE defense figures, that 186 ballistic missiles and 812 drones were fired at the country in the first days of the conflict.
Information resilience should be treated as security infrastructure, planned and funded like air defense, not managed as public relations.
Tehran sought to blur that record, framing strikes on Gulf cities as retaliation against American aggression. Its foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, told NBC News that Iran had “not attacked our neighbors,” only “American bases,” and called the hotels hit in Dubai “collateral damage.” Countering that narrative does not require propaganda of our own. It requires putting the record in front of the world quickly and repeatedly: the UAE’s public calls for restraint before the war, its refusal to let its territory be used against Iran, and the hundreds of missiles and drones fired at it, most of which it shot down. Facts published fast, through verified channels, in Arabic, English and Farsi, are harder to bury than corrections issued too late.
Even after a war ends, the threats do not disappear; they simply take different forms. Ceasefires and reconstruction depend on public trust. If populations come to believe that the peace is a betrayal, or that a neighbor cannot be trusted, no deterrence framework or security pact will survive contact with domestic politics. Spoilers understand this. Their cheapest weapon is a story.
Seen from the Gulf, the lesson of recent years is that speed and credibility beat silence. Crisis communication is not a side function of security. When official channels inform the public quickly, consistently and honestly, rumors have less room to grow. When they hesitate, someone else fills the gap.
None of this is simple. Governments everywhere are still working out where countering disinformation ends and controlling speech begins, and that debate should stay open. But the common ground is wider than it looks: a society cannot be secure if it cannot tell what is true.
The harder test comes now. After a war, influence campaigns shift from shock to slow erosion: relitigating who was to blame, questioning whether Gulf governments can protect their people, and setting neighbors and communities against each other. Young connected audiences are the main target. They are also the best defense.
Protecting our societies from that influence does not mean closing them. It means official channels fast and credible enough that people turn to them first. It means platforms held to clear rules on labeling AI-generated conflict content, as X began to do in March. And it means a generation of young Emiratis and Gulf citizens equipped to verify what they see and able to tell the region’s story themselves rather than leaving it to others.
The harder test comes now. After a war, influence campaigns shift from shock to slow erosion.
This is not only a Gulf problem. The campaigns aimed at audiences in the Gulf also shape how Washington and Brussels understand the region. The UAE and its partners already work closely on defense and intelligence. Detecting and exposing cross-border influence operations belongs on that shared agenda as a joint effort between governments, platforms and researchers.
Diplomacy, investment, and deterrence will rebuild the region’s security. Whether that security holds will depend on something harder to measure: what people across the region believe about each other, and about who protects them. For the UAE, winning that argument with facts is not public relations. It is part of keeping the country safe.
Najla Al Midfa is an Emirati researcher at TRENDS Research & Advisory, a company under TRENDS Group. Her research focuses on geopolitics, international relations, economic diplomacy and regional security, with a particular interest in the UAE’s foreign policy and strategic partnerships. She holds a master’s degree in Global Affairs and Diplomatic Leadership from the Anwar Gargash Diplomatic Academy, where her thesis examined the UAE’s economic diplomacy through its Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement strategy.
Sources
Sixth Annual TRENDS Conference 2026 kicks off on October 12 — WAM (Emirates News Agency), September 2026
TRENDS 6th Annual Conference 2026 — Sustainable Security: programme and speakers — TRENDS Research & Advisory
AI-generated Iran war videos surge as creators use new tech to cash in — BBC Verify, March 7, 2026
Factbox: Iranian missiles and drones fired at Gulf countries — Reuters (republished by Al-Monitor), March 3, 2026
X suspends revenue sharing for undisclosed AI war videos — AFP, March 3, 2026
UAE urges the US, Israel and Iran to return to the negotiating table — Euronews, March 4, 2026
Fake news treated as security threat during Iran war, says UAE minister — The National, September 15, 2026
Login
