Young protesters in Kenya returned to the capital’s streets for an eighth week of demonstrations on Thursday as President William Ruto swore in a new cabinet.

Police fired tear gas at protesters in Nairobi city center as many businesses remain closed. Widely shared posters on social media called for the “mother of all protests” dubbed the Nane Nane March after the Swahili translation of the day’s date – August 8.

“We shall march for our rights and tomorrow, we shall liberate this country,” Kasmuel McOure, one of the most prominent young protesters, told reporters on Wednesday.

The demonstrations started nearly two months ago, with mostly Gen Z Kenyans organizing on social media against a now withdrawn Finance Bill. They persisted as more citizens joined a largely leaderless movement against corruption, the high cost of living, and police brutality.

Violent police crackdown

At least 61 people have been killed in the protests nationwide, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights said, accusing police of using excessive force and live rounds on mostly peaceful protesters.

Another prominent protester, Shad Khali, called Thursday the third liberation of the country, saying it was the “climax of one and a half months of Kenyans demanding for accountability and governance by the rule of law” on his X account. Many young people have criticized the label of “anti-government protests” used by the media, insisting that they are marching for their rights as guaranteed in the constitution.

Police warned that criminals planned to infiltrate Thursday’s protests to commit crimes, promising to deploy adequate security personnel. Acting police chief Gilbert Masengeli advised members of the public “to take extra caution while in crowded areas that are likely to turn riotous.”

President Ruto dismissed his cabinet last month after public pressure but reappointed about half of the ministers, drawing fresh outrage. Lawmakers rejected only one of the 20 names the Kenyan leader submitted to parliament for vetting, including several opposition politicians.

“I am convinced that this moment to build a strong team of rivals. With the formation of this broad-based government that brings together former political rivals into one selfless patriotic team, we will unlock the potential of our country that has long been denied us by factional and sectarian competition,” he said at State House Nairobi.

The protests in Kenya have inspired similar demonstrations in Uganda and Nigeria.

Kyiv needed a win, but not a gamble.

Ukraine’s decision to launch a large amount of its scant military resources across the border into Russia – in pursuit of headlines but, thus far, an unclear strategic objective – marks a moment of either desperation or inspiration for Ukraine. And it does perhaps herald a new phase of the war.

Not because incursions into Russia by Ukraine are somehow new – they have been happening for over a year, mostly by Russian citizens, fighting for Ukraine with obvious Ukrainian military assistance but no official, public role.

It feels new because this is, according to Russia at least, the regular Ukrainian army mounting an attack on Russia, and a rare roll of the dice by a Ukrainian top brass whose movements have been criticized mostly in the last 18 months as being too slow and conservative.

On Tuesday, Kyiv took badly needed resources and fresh troops and launched them well inside Russia. The immediate effect satisfied two needs: a headline that involved Russian embarrassment and Ukrainian forward motion, and another that Moscow’s troops should scatter to reinforce their borders. After weeks of bad news for Kyiv, in which Russian forces have slowly but inexorably moved towards the Ukrainian military hubs of Pokrovsk and Sloviansk, Moscow is left scrambling to shore up its most essential front line – its own border.

But even as Kyiv declined to say anything Wednesday about what Russian President Vladimir Putin had called a “major provocation,” the wisdom of this gamble was openly questioned by some Ukrainian observers.

There may be a larger strategy at play here. Sudzha, now at least partially under Ukrainian control, is next to a Russian gas terminal, right on the border, which is key to supplying gas from Russia, via Ukraine, to Europe. That arrangement is said to close end in January, and this may be a bid to curtail a lucrative source of funding for Moscow that has angered Kyiv since Russia’s full-scale invasion began in 2022. (As of Thursday, there were no public indications of gas supplies being affected).

Yet until the wider importance of this incursion emerges, there remains a huge question mark over the strategic goals of Oleksandr Syrskyi, the comparatively new commander of Ukraine’s forces. Splits in his command have simmered into public view recently, with younger subordinates questioning Syrskyi’s willingness to endure significant casualties in frontline battles of attrition, in which Russia’s superior manpower usually prevails.

It is a Soviet mindset, and Syrskyi is from that era. But those dying or returning home as amputees are often from a younger generation who value dexterity and guile perhaps more than brute persistence.

Ukraine has for months exceled at targeting – often with what appears to be Western help – Russia’s internal infrastructure, chewing up runways, naval bases, and oil terminals in a bid to cause long-term damage to Moscow’s economy and war machine. But this is different: It is sending a large ground force miles into enemy territory, where Ukrainian supply lines are more fraught and objectives are by definition tougher to pursue.

The move comes at a time when the Ukrainian effort has begun to see a concrete benefit from Western weapons finally arriving.

F-16 fighter jets are new to the front lines but may be able to dent Russia’s withering air supremacy in the coming months. That could mean fewer gliding bombs hitting Ukrainian frontline troops and fewer missiles terrorizing Ukraine’s urban communities. Ammunition remains a problem for Kyiv, according to some accounts, but surely Western supplies may eventually plug that gap.

So why this high-risk move now? If we look beyond the immediate positive news cycle for President Volodymyr Zelensky, other goals emerge. For the first time in the war, talk of talks has begun. Russia may be invited to attend the next peace conference held by Ukraine and its allies. The proportion of Ukrainians who approve of negotiations, while a minority, is marginally growing. And the possibility of a Trump presidency is glowering above Kyiv.

US Vice President Kamala Harris may retain the same steadfastness as President Joe Biden over Ukraine. But it is important to remember that Western foreign policy is a fickle and easily exhausted beast. NATO’s persistent backing for Ukraine is an outlier. And as the war edges towards its fourth year, questions about how this ends will grow louder.

Is there any real merit to Ukraine fighting and dying with no real prospect of retaking occupied territory from Moscow? Does Russia want an indefinite grind forward, in which it loses thousands of men for hundreds of yards’ advance, and sees its wider military capability slowly worn down by longer-range Ukrainian strikes?

With the prospect of a negotiated settlement now less distant, both sides will scramble to improve their battlefield position before sitting down at the table. It is unclear if Ukraine’s move into Kursk is motivated by that, or a simple move to inflict damage where the enemy is weak.

But it marks a rare and substantial gamble with Kyiv’s limited resources, and so may herald the Ukrainians’ belief that greater change is ahead.

In Israel’s northern city of Nahariya, a sense of anxiety lingers among residents as they struggle to maintain daily life with the threat of war with Lebanon’s Hezbollah edging closer to their doorsteps.

The coastal city of 77,000 residents sits just 6 miles (10 kilometers) from the border with Lebanon, where the Israeli army and Hezbollah fighters have been exchanging fire for nearly 10 months.

Unlike many other communities at the Israel-Lebanon border that have become ghost towns since October, Nahariya stands out as one of the cities that has not been depopulated as it doesn’t fall within the evacuation zone.

Almost 62,000 residents of border communities have been displaced since Hezbollah and Israel started exchanging fire in October after Israel launched its war in Gaza. Forty-three Israelis have been killed and another 250 injured, according to the Israeli prime minister’s Office.

Across the border in Lebanon, at least 400 people have been killed since October 8 and more than 94,000 have been displaced, according to the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health.

Tommy Lowenstein, 67, said the situation is “tense” in the north. “We feel it. We see it in the streets, we see less people.”

Nahariya has declared a state of emergency, according to an official at the city’s municipality. Residents can hear everything from outgoing artillery fire over the border to rockets that land nearby on a daily basis, the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity as he was not authorized to speak to the media.

The sound of rockets that fall in nearby towns and kibbutzim (agricultural communes) are regularly heard in Nahariya.

On Tuesday, an Israeli interceptor missile malfunctioned amid a Hezbollah drone attack, causing an impact on the Route 4 highway near Nahariya. Several people were injured, according to the IDF.

While the city’s residents have been accustomed to cross-border attacks, the conflict has escalated in recent days after Israel assassinated Hezbollah’s top military commander Fu’ad Shukr on July 30.

The next day, former Palestinian prime minister and Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh was killed in Tehran in an attack Iran blamed on Israel. Israel hasn’t confirmed or denied involvement.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah said Tuesday that the group will attack Israel but is keeping the country waiting as “part of the punishment.”

Feels like war is ‘getting closer to us’

Liz Levy, 40, lives in Nahariya with her three children and says the war is taking a mental toll on her family.

Levy said she worries about bringing up her children in a climate of war, adding that her children cry whenever they hear blaring sirens warning of incoming rockets.

“My daughter, she is 7 years old, and she also had a panic attack,” she said.

Residents of the north say their experience with the conflict in the north is very different from other population centers that have been largely spared. While those living in Tel Aviv experience sporadic attacks, in the north that’s a daily occurrence, they say.

The Nahariya municipality has added more than 40 new shelters in the city since the war began and has conducted multiple training sessions to prepare medics and emergency workers for an attack, the municipal official said.

Asked whether the city will have to evacuate if the conflict escalates, the official said there is nowhere to move such a large population.

The Middle East, and indeed much of the world, is bracing for Iran to carry out a revenge attack on Israel over the assassination of Hamas’ political leader. But could Tehran instead be prepared to pull back in exchange for progress on Gaza peace talks? That was the hope among regional leaders gathered at an emergency summit in Jeddah.

It was Wednesday and the world was on edge. Flights across Iran and its neighbors were cancelled amid fears that missiles could fly any moment, triggering a much-feared escalation of Israel’s war in Gaza.

With his country on the brink of triggering a regional war, Iran’s Acting Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri whispered to an aid bending close to catch his words.

Cameroon’s foreign minister sat to Bagheri’s right, Yemen’s to his left, along with a room full of other foreign ministers from Muslim-majority countries, all there to help prevent the situation from spiraling into a wider conflict.

Since Hamas’s political chief Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in Tehran last week, the Islamic Republic’s leaders have vowed vengeance against Israel, whom they claim was responsible. Israel hasn’t confirmed or denied responsibility.

The unassuming venue for such a last-ditch effort to quell Iran’s seething rage was the headquarters of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation’s (OIC), modest by Saudi Arabia’s rapidly modernizing and glitzy standards. It sits in a dusty, nondescript corner of the Red Sea city of Jeddah.

The thrust, to convince Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to soften his stance in ceasefire negotiations with Hamas, isn’t new. But the payoff this time may be much more attractive than previous attempts.

United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken says the US and its allies have communicated directly to both Israel and Iran that  “no one should escalate this conflict,” adding that ceasefire negotiations have entered “a final stage” and could be jeopardized by further escalation elsewhere in the region.

Safadi was in Tehran over the weekend and met both Bagheri and Iran’s new President Masoud Pezeshkian, and appears to believe that Iran may be looking for an off ramp to escalation.

Iran needs diplomatic cover to back away from its hasty threats against Israel in the immediate aftermath of Haniyeh’s killing: a Gaza ceasefire that would allow Tehran to claim it cares more for the lives of Palestinians in the Palestinian enclave than it does for taking revenge would fit the bill. But the payoff needs to be big enough for Iran as its honor and deterrence are at stake.

France’s President Emanuel Macron is adding his diplomatic heft, declaring in a phone call with Pezeshkian Wednesday, retaliation against Israel “has to be abandoned”.

Pezeshkian’s response suggests he is listening. “If America and Western countries really want to prevent war and insecurity in the region, to prove this claim, they should immediately stop selling arms and supporting the Zionist regime and force this regime to stop the genocide and attacks on Gaza and accept a ceasefire,” he said.

Could Hezbollah act alone

Nearly ten months since Israel’s war in Gaza, triggered by Hamas brutal October 7 attack which saw around 1200 people in Israel killed and at least 250 others taken hostage, almost 40,000 Palestinians have been killed, according to Palestinian health officials – and there is still no end in sight to the conflict

The catch in the Gaza ceasefire escalation off-ramp play is that it is heavy on hope and short on substance.

For it to work, Netanyahu will have to buy in to it too.

Hamas just made this harder by replacing Haniyah with his tougher counterpart inside Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, an architect of the October 7 attacks, and anyway, right now they are in no mood for meaningful talks.

The change, if it’s going to come, according to the consensus at the OIC  has to be from the outside, from the only person who remotely has the clout to temper Netanyahu – US President Joe Biden.

But almost a year into the conflict, Biden refuses a showdown with Israel’s most hardline, right-wing government in its history, that also adding to the frustrations in Jeddah.

Riyad Mansour, Palestine’s Permanent Observer at the UN, was in the room with Bagheri and the others.

“The region does not need escalation,” he said  “What the region needs is a ceasefire. What the region needs to address legitimate rights. I have a feeling that Prime Minister Netanyahu wants to drag President Biden into a war with Iran”

What Bagheri did get in Jeddah was the kind of diplomatic support intended help get them off the ledge, with Mansour saying “With regard to what Iran wanted about, you know, the respecting its territorial integrity and its sovereignty, there was, you know, a strong support to this sentiment.”

As the acting Iranian foreign minister left for Tehran following the four-hour emergency meeting, focus shifted slightly back to Iran’s Lebanese proxy Hezbollah, which is also intent on retaliation for the assassination of its top military commander Fu’ad Shukr in Beirut hours before Haniyeh’s killing.

For Netanyahu this may look like semantics intended to blunt Israel’s desire for an overwhelming response against either aggressor.

He views Iran and Hezbollah as different hands of the same theological head.

With the exception of direct IranianIsraeli exchange of fire in April, Hezbollah has always landed the punches on Israel Iran hesitates to take, and may this time throw a double blow, one for Shukr and one for Hamas’s Haniyeh.

Were that the case Israel’s retaliation against Hezbollah could just as quickly become the regional escalation dragging in Iran that everyone fears.

What is clear, the Jeddah meet and the back channel diplomacy buys diplomatic space and time to develop an off ramp that has a least a little traction for now.

Both Iran and the US, to a degree, are buying in to it.

Whether this fizzles out to another false horizon is with Bagheri and his president.

A Belgian publisher has apologized but refuses to take down a column that has been accused of inciting antisemitic hatred. In the column, a writer lamented the humanitarian suffering of Palestinians in Gaza and said it made him want to “ram a sharp knife through the throat of every Jew I meet,” and later defended his words as being protected under free speech.

Herman Brusselmans, who is known for being controversial, recently wrote a column for Humo, a weekly Dutch-language magazine which, according to its publisher DPG Media Group, “provides in-depth background pieces to the news of the day” while doubling as a guide to arts and culture.

In his column on Sunday, headlined: “The Middle East will explode, a Third World War is coming,” Brusselmans described the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a “short, fat, bald Jew” who “for whatever reason wants to ensure that the entire Arab world is wiped out.”

He continued: “For every Hamas or Hezbollah fighter killed by that sh*tty Israeli army, hundreds of innocent civilians are killed, and we can’t help but keep repeating that many of those are children, and that we here in the so-called safe West cannot imagine that the same fate would befall our children.”

Brusselmans added: “I see an image of a crying, screaming Palestinian boy, completely madly calling for his mother lying under the rubble, and I imagine that boy is my own son Roman, and the mother is my own friend Lena, and I become so angry that I want to ram a sharp knife through the throat of every Jew I meet.”

The comments have sparked outrage both within and outside the Jewish community.

The Brussels-based European Jewish Association (EJA) said it was “nothing short of an incitement to murder.”

In a statement on the EJA’s website, its founder and chairman Rabbi Menachem Margolin said: “We know this is a shock-jock journalist, who pushes the boundaries. But publicly expressing his desire to stab the throat of any Jew he comes across is psychopathic. Given his popularity and infamy, it is also an invitation for others to do likewise. It is completely and utterly out of all bounds. It [is] nothing short of incitement to murder.”

“Jews feel the atmosphere is as it was in the 1940s,” he said. “Now again Jews are asking themselves: has the time come to run away from Europe when we see this kind of article?

“It’s clear incitement and part of a very worrying trend in Belgium and all over Europe, of expression of hatred against Jews,” Margolin continued.

Others beyond the Jewish community have also reacted with horror. Assita Kanko, a Belgian Member of the European Parliament (MEP), said on X on Tuesday that she was “completely flabbergasted and sad” after reading the article.

Describing it as “pure and open anti-Semitism,” she added: “This is not about freedom of speech or satire, it’s a call to violence. It’s a call to murder. Why is @Humo even publishing something like that?”

Reports of incidents of antisemitism have sharply risen since October.

On October 7, Hamas militants killed about 1,200 people in Israel and took more than 250 people hostage, according to Israeli authorities. Israel’s military response in Gaza has killed nearly 40,000 Palestinians and injured more than 90,000, the ministry of health in the strip says.

Yohan Benizri, president of the Coordinating Committee of Jewish Organizations in Belgium (CCOJB), the leading representative body of Belgian Jews, compared the article to Nazi propaganda.

What has made matters worse, said Benizri, is the response from Humo and Brusselmans to the backlash.

When asked about the reaction to his column by Flemish newspaper Nieuwsblad, Brusselmans said: “Incitement to violence? In my column I do a thought exercise about how I would react if it were my loved ones who were affected. In the conditional tense. That sentence about the sharp knife is purely figurative, to emphasize the message. And that falls under the right to freedom of expression.”

He added in a separate statement that the magazine is “bored with the matter” and does not intend to remove the article.

“I understand that people who are not sufficiently familiar with HUMO or Herman Brusselmans’ style and are confronted with this quote without context are shocked,” Vanderaspoilden said. “It was obviously never the intention to offend the Jewish community. If this has happened, we would like to apologize for it. Anyone who knows HUMO a little knows that it is certainly not an anti-Semitic magazine.”

Rick Honings, a professor specializing in Dutch literature at Leiden University in the Netherlands, published a monograph about Brusselmans in 2018 in which he examined his life, work and image.

He described him as a “shock author,” adding: “Brusselmans has been making politically incorrect jokes his entire writing career (since the 1980s), mostly about racist issues, but they are also often jokes about women.”

He continued: “At the same time, it is mostly meant as satire. In doing so, he manages to draw attention to himself time and again. It is not the first time that he makes jokes about Jews and the Holocaust, but his current comically intended comment goes pretty far even for Brusselmans.”

Research carried out by the Institute for Jewish Policy Research in 2022 said that almost half of Jews in Belgium reported that they had experienced antisemitic harassment over the previous 12 months, while around a third said they had experienced antisemitic discrimination over the same period.

In recent years, controversy has erupted over a carnival in Belgium which featured antisemitic imagery on one of its floats. The Aalst Carnival was removed from UNESCO’s Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity list in 2019 after officials found the “recurrence of racist and antisemitic representations” to be incompatible with its principles.

In 2014, four people were killed when a gunman opened fire at the Jewish Museum of Belgium in Brussels.

For over a week, Venezuela has been in suspense after a hotly contested presidential election left both the opposition and incumbent President Nicolas Maduro claiming victory.

How verifiable is the data presented by each of the parties? Although Venezuela’s electoral and judicial authorities announced the victory of Nicolás Maduro, they have not shown detailed results and electoral records to support it.

In contrast, the opposition published on a website the count of 83.50% of the voting records, a result that has also been verified by civil organizations and independent media outlets.

Here is the breakdown:

What the CNE says

Early in the morning of Monday, July 29, the president of the CNE, Elvis Amoroso, proclaimed Nicolás Maduro the winner of the race. According to the data of that organization, with 80% of the records counted, the president had obtained 51.20%, that is, exactly 5,150,092 votes. In that same first bulletin, the CNE gave second place to Edmundo González with 44.2%, exactly 4,445,978 votes.

According to CNE, the sum of the votes of all the other presidential candidates represented “462,704 of the votes, equivalent to 4.06%.”

But that is a highly unlikely breakdown, experts say. “There is about a 1 in 100 million chance that this particular pattern will occur by chance,” said Andrew Gelman, a professor of Statistics and Political Science at Columbia University, in a post analyzing the numbers collected from the CNE’s first report.

Gelman ran a mathematical simulation with a probability model and concluded: “A million simulations and not once does this rounding work.”

For John Magdaleno, political scientist and director of the public affairs consultancy Polity, the inconsistencies appear in what the CNE has presented — it has not yet published the electoral results of every polling station, as mandated by Venezuelan law — as well as in the figures.

Magdaleno highlighted four technical issues in the first CNE bulletin: First, the absolute and relative number of null votes was not announced; second, the votes of all presidential candidates other than González Urrutia and Maduro were totaled “instead of presenting them separately, as is usual”; and third, the frequencies were presented with a single decimal, “which is not common.” Fourth, with 80% of the votes counted, the agency declared an irreversible trend favor of Maduro, although the reported difference was just over 704,000 votes and at least 2,300,000 votes remained to be counted.

On Friday, August 2, the CNE published a second bulletin that stated that, after processing 96.87% of the votes, Maduro had obtained 51.95% of the votes while González Urrutia reached 43.18%. They also did not make public the data that supports this bulletin.

John Magdaleno pointed out that since the second bulletin announced a total of 12,335,884 valid votes, “it follows that in the first bulletin there were more than 2,300,000 votes left to be counted.” This, according to Magdaleno, confirms “the central inconsistency of the first bulletin”: there was not an irreversible trend.

The opposition numbers

On Friday, August 2, the opposition released a database that it has been updating.

As of Wednesday, August 7, when this article was written, the database contained 83.50% of the tally sheets (25,073) from a total of 30,026 polling stations. According to this data, Edmundo González would have won the election with 7,303,480 votes (67%), while Maduro would have come in second with 3,316,142 votes (30%) and the other candidates only obtained 267,640 votes (2%).

“If the database is downloaded, an analysis can be made of how they arrive at the global voting announcement that they make and that is why the opposition’s data is verifiable and that of the CNE is not,” said Martínez.

In effect, the data from the opposition website can be downloaded, and it contains the disaggregated voting data with links that direct to images of the scanned minutes.

To verify that an electoral record is valid, it must have a QR code, the votes broken down by candidate and the signatures of the representatives of the parties, a representative of the electoral body and another of the electoral witnesses who participated by lottery.

Professor David Arroyo Fernández, from the College of Economists of Madrid, made a statistical study of the data published by the opposition and concludes that “it is very unlikely” that they would have had enough time “to have created a distribution of votes with these characteristics in just a few days” if they were not the real data, so “mathematically and statistically the data [of the opposition] fit in terms of numbers and the accuracy shown.”

Analyst John Madgaleno points out that “the opposition has presented more detailed and verifiable information on the result of the presidential election than the body in charge of the administration of the electoral event.”

On Monday, August 5, the Public Ministry of Venezuela opened a criminal investigation against the candidate González Urrutia and opposition leader María Corina Machado for “the alleged commission of the crimes of usurpation of functions, dissemination of false information to cause anxiety, instigation to disobedience of the laws, instigation to insurrection, criminal association and conspiracy.”

The agency claimed that the accusation is linked to the call that opposition leaders made in a statement to the military and police to stand “on the side of the people.” But it also accuses them of “falsely announcing a winner of the presidential elections other than the one proclaimed by the National Electoral Council.”

Several media and international organizations analyzed the database offered by the Venezuelan opposition. One of them was the Colombian Electoral Observation Mission (MOE).

According to this organization, “the calculation of the electoral participation that is in the database is consistent with the data presented by the Venezuelan CNE.” After analyzing the information contained in the database, the MOE validates the results that give González Urrutia as the winner.

The Associated Press (AP) processed nearly 24,000 images of ballot papers released by the opposition, representing the results from 79% of the voting machines. Each coded sheet of votes counts in QR codes, which AP decoded and analyzed programmatically, resulting in tabulations of 10.26 million votes.

According to those calculations, opposition candidate Edmundo González received 6.89 million votes and Maduro obtained 3.13 million.

The same conclusion was reached by media outlets such as The Washington Post, The New York Times and El País, which made their own analyses of the data released by Venezuela’s majority opposition and concluded that the information supports González Urrutia’s victory over Maduro.

How did the opposition obtain these records?

Thousands of volunteers participated in the electoral process on July 28. The instruction, which Maria Corina Machado herself reiterated that Sunday after the polls closed, was to stay at the voting centers until they obtained a copy of the printed records. These were then transferred to a safe place, accompanied by members of the opposition party who sought to guarantee the safety of the witnesses.

What about the percentage of the records that the opposition could not access? Could they change the result? Even if 100% of the votes contained in the missing records were favorable to Maduro, the count, according to the data published by the opposition, would likely still give González Urrutia the victory.

“On the other hand, it would be necessary to see from which geographic areas (and with what sociodemographic characteristics) the missing votes are visible and counted. As can be seen from the data provided by the published votes, Maduro would have obtained more votes in those sectors that are more vulnerable in socioeconomic terms, as has been the case in past elections,” added Lacalle.

What will happen now?

The Supreme Court of Justice, the body that answers the ruling party, had given the CNE three days to present the votes. The deadline was met on Monday and according to the judicial body, the CNE delivered what was requested and began an expert process that includes summons for the 10 presidential candidates, including Maduro and González Urrutia. On Wednesday, González Urrutia announced on his social networks that he would not attend because he would be “in a situation of absolute defenselessness.”

Read the original story in Spanish here.

China has taken a major step forward in its bid to create a rival to SpaceX’s Starlink this week by launching the first of what it hopes will be a constellation of 14,000 satellites beaming broadband internet coverage from space.

Eighteen satellites were blasted into low Earth orbit (LEO) on Tuesday in the inaugural launch for the government-backed Qianfan, or Spacesail, constellation, state media reported.

The constellation – hailed in domestic media as China’s answer to US-based SpaceX’s Starlink – aims to join a handful of planned or operational large-scale space projects from providers in various countries offering broadband satellite internet services.

Leading that pack is Starlink, which has more than 6,000 satellites in orbit and ambitions to expand to as many as 42,000. It is widely expected to remain the dominant player in years to come, given its head start and advanced launch capabilities.

While most people accessing the internet do so through cables and other ground-based infrastructure, satellite internet connection has emerged as an important service for rural, under-resourced and disaster-hit areas. It’s also seen as key for expanding technologies like autonomous cars and other internet-enabled devices – industries that China wants to lead.

Qianfan, also known as G60 Starlink, is among three planned Chinese mega constellations that could see the country’s firms launching nearly 40,000 satellites into low Earth orbit (defined as no more than 1,200 miles above the planet) in the coming years. So-called mega constellations refer to networks of hundreds or thousands of orbiting satellites.

The launch comes as China ramps up its commercial space sector as part of Beijing’s broader bid to cement its place as a dominant power in outer space. The country has already made tremendous strides in its ambitious national space program, which aims to put astronauts on the moon by 2030, while also launching military-linked satellites for navigation, communication and surveillance.

Controlling LEO broadband satellite constellations could be a boon for China, experts say, enabling its firms to offer services domestically and around the world – while bolstering Beijing’s diplomatic sway, control over data flow and national security.

The rollout of Qianfan, which is run by Shanghai government-backed Shanghai Spacecom Satellite Technology (SSST), will also be a test of China’s ability to produce and launch satellites at scale and on a tight timeline.

The constellation is slated to grow to more than 600 satellites by the end of 2025 with plans to reach more than 14,000 satellites providing broadband internet globally by 2030, according to state broadcaster CCTV.

That number would be “sufficient to provide coverage for most human population centers,” Zhu Xiaochen, deputy director of the project, told CCTV.

‘Informational superiority’

China’s foray into broadband mega-constellations comes as governments and companies across the world are increasingly eyeing satellites for everything from communications to military operations.

The war in Ukraine, where access to Starlink has been a key asset for the Ukrainian military, has also moved LEO broadband satellites into the spotlight for its security implications.

Chinese researchers have on several occasions raised national security concerns about the SpaceX-run constellation – including one military scholar who said in January that it had the potential to support US “ground forces” and strike capability in “regional conflicts.”

While the launch of Qianfan is part of Beijing’s broader push to boost space capabilities and commercial applications, its launch also shows China is “recognizing the dual use … potential of these capabilities from the standpoint of informational superiority or data flow control,” said Tomas Hrozensky, a senior researcher at the nonprofit think tank European Space Policy Institute in Vienna.

Constellations like Qianfan, once operational, could also yield diplomatic benefits for Beijing, experts say. For example, China could offer access to its internet and communications services as part of deals with governments within its Belt and Road Initiative, a global infrastructure scheme widely seen as a vehicle for China to build its overseas influence.

Chinese companies’ role in global telecommunications has been a fractious subject in recent years, with the US government raising alarms about alleged security risks for countries using ground-based Chinese infrastructure and equipment.

Some experts warn of related concerns if countries start getting online via Chinese satellites.

“As China begins deploying G60 and other planned LEO broadband constellations, we’ll see them extend their telecommunications model to space – a model based on surveilling and censoring the flow of information,” said Kari Bingen, director of the Aerospace Security Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington.

‘A national priority’

The Qianfan constellation’s launch comes as China’s top leaders have signaled that developing the commercial space sector – including satellites, launch capabilities and tech production – is an economic priority.

The 18 satellites sent into orbit this week appears to put Qianfan ahead of two other planned Chinese communications constellations in LEO. State-owned China Satellite Network Group’s Guowang constellation project aims for nearly 13,000 satellites, and leading private space firm Landspace’s Honghu-3 has plans for 10,000, according to information released in state-linked media.

Plans for the Qianfan project were announced in 2021 as part of a state-backed technology innovation scheme across China’s prosperous Yangtze River delta. Its operating company, the Shanghai-government backed SSST, raised $933 million earlier this year, Reuters reported in February, citing an investor.

Preparing for the launch has included efforts to streamline satellite production, using what Qianfan’s chief designer Cao Caixia recently described to state broadcaster CCTV as “an intelligent satellite manufacturing platform” to speed up production times.

There are likely to be hurdles as SSST and other Chinese firms seek to rapidly scale-up their constellations. China is opening its first commercial launch pad this year, even as state media says roughly half of the satellites launched last year were commercial ones.

A number of Chinese companies are working to enhance launch capabilities, but those are still significantly behind the kind of technology powering SpaceX’s Starlink, which is expected to further expand its launch capacity once its Starship vehicle comes online.

“Like any spacefaring nation, China will undoubtedly encounter technical and operational challenges,” said CSIS’s Bingen, pointing to the need to establish and scale satellite production lines and launch rockets at a frequent cadence.

“But space is a national priority for Beijing, with these commercial entities receiving top-down support from the (Chinese Communist Party), large tracts of funding, municipal government support, and regulatory leeway, so I would expect China to continue its rapid progress in space.”

An 18-year-old Iraqi national was detained in Vienna in connection with investigations into an alleged plot to strike a Taylor Swift concert in the Austrian capital, the interior ministry said on Friday.

The Iraqi national is said to have come from the same circle as the main suspect, a 19-year-old Austrian with North Macedonian roots, according to the ministry.

The main suspect, who had vowed loyalty to Islamic State (IS), was planning a lethal assault among the estimated 20,000 “Swiftie” fans set to gather outside Vienna’s Ernst Happel Stadium.

The US popstar had planned concerts in Vienna on Thursday, Friday and Saturday. All three were canceled late Wednesday over security concerns.

Two other Austrian youths aged 17 and 15 were detained on Wednesday over the reported plot.

The 15-year-old has meanwhile been released and is being treated as a witness, the Kurier newspaper reported on Friday.

The Iraqi suspect is reported to have sworn allegiance to IS on Aug. 6, but it remains unclear whether he had anything to do with the planned attack, the newspaper reported.

This is a developing story and will be updated.