Friday, December 05, 2025

Allies at odds: Yemen’s Hadhramaut has become the latest front in the Saudi–Emirati struggle

On the axis from Port Sudan to the Empty Quarter, Hadhramaut has become the test ground for shifting Saudi–Emirati power. Their Yemeni proxies are redrawing the province through force, negotiation, and economic leverage – turning it into a barometer of a broader contest over ports, oil, and Yemen’s future.

Mawadda Iskandar

The Cradle 

At a tense moment of military escalation and repeated attacks around Hadhramaut’s eastern oil fields, the Hadhramaut Tribes Alliance (HTA) and the local authority announced the signing of a formal de-escalation agreement on 3 December in Mukalla. The deal came under the auspices of a senior Saudi delegation and a mediation committee of prominent sheikhs and local leaders.

The agreement calls for an immediate halt to all military, security, and media escalation, and stipulates the repositioning of tribal alliance forces one kilometer away from the state-owned Petro Masila oil company, while elite units withdraw three kilometers. It further mandates integrating the Hadhramaut Protection Forces with the Oil Companies Protection Force under a single command to secure installations and safeguard “national wealth.” The accord stresses the return of employees to their posts and the uninterrupted continuation of oil production.

The declaration followed a week of heavy tension across Seiyun, Gil Ben Yamin, and the surrounding plateau, where tribal fighters pushed back repeated attempts by the UAE-backed Southern Transitional Council (STC) to impose control. 

Despite the formal truce, the calm is brittle. Several armed formations – each tied to its own patrons and agendas – still operate across the province. The future of the plateau, and the oil beneath it, remains uncertain.

A military source in the HTA tells The Cradle that STC deputy chief Maj. Gen. Faraj al-Bahsani intends to undermine the agreement through new attacks on positions held by the Hadhramaut Protection Forces. Renewed fighting is expected, particularly around Al-Qabaa and the approaches to Wadi Mullin.

A manufactured pretext – and a familiar enemy 

As de-escalation efforts began, a parallel stream of political and military statements attempted to justify the latest operations in Hadhramaut and cast the withdrawn units as a security threat. Colonel Mohammed al-Naqib, spokesperson for the southern forces, described the “Bright Future” operation as an effort to secure the valley and desert and remove “terrorist” elements linked to the Muslim Brotherhood via the First Military Region.

Brigadier General Saleh bin Sheikh Abu Bakr, commander of the Hadhrami Elite, said the forces that were removed had been “breathing space for the Houthis, the Brotherhood, and extremist organizations” for years, and that the decision to enter Seiyun came after exhausting all other options to restore security and stability. 

The STC's statement described Seiyun and the districts of the valley and desert as strategic areas used as smuggling routes and staging points for attacks against southern and Saudi forces, describing the operation as the beginning of a new chapter for Hadhramaut. 

In contrast, media outlets aligned with the Brotherhood-affiliated Islah Party accused pro-Emirati formations of looting and retaliatory targeting, and accused Riyadh of abandoning Islah forces and striking a deal with Abu Dhabi over the plateau.

Journalist and human rights activist Maher al-Shami tells The Cradle: “What is happening today in Hadhramaut governorate is not a transient local conflict or tribal dispute, but a direct extension of the Saudi–Emirati conflict over Yemeni land and resources.”

The military and security movements of the coalition-linked factions and militias “aim to impose control over oil and maritime wealth, and turn the province into a base of influence that allows Riyadh and Abu Dhabi to consolidate their control in the south and east,” he says. The aim of these foreign projects, Shami explains, is to “impose the partition project to dismantle Yemen and weaken its ability to resist.”

Struggle for the plateau – a snowball gathering speed 

Fighting around the Hadhramaut plateau intensified sharply in recent hours. The STC, alongside fighters from Yafa and Al-Dhalea, pushed to seize key sites – including Hawk, a subsidiary of Total’s local branch. Sheikh Amr bin Habrish led the battles of the “Hadhrami resistance,” calling on local tribes and fighters to stand firm and defend the land. 

The HTA and Hadhramaut Protection Forces were able to repel the attack, recording deaths, injuries, and loot. On the other hand,  the STC quickly took control of Seiyun and the cities of Wadi Hadhramaut, without any real resistance from the First Military Region Brigades. 

Sporadic clashes broke out in areas such as Jathma and Wadi al-Ain, and the oil fields witnessed explosions caused by aerial bombardment by the STC forces of the positions of Hadhramaut Protection Forces and tribal alliance units.

In light of these developments, Saudi Arabia has begun extensive moves to contain the tension, as a high-level security and military delegation arrived at Al-Rayyan Airport in Mukalla to hold a meeting with all Hadhrami components and the local authority, headed by the governor. 

Riyadh’s proposals included the withdrawal of the tribal alliance forces from the oil sites and their replacement with the National Shield forces, and their deployment in the plateau to control security, while keeping the First Military Region in its current positions and operationally commanding the National Shield Forces. 

According to a source involved in the negotiations, these movements were not spontaneous. They followed quiet Saudi–Emirati consultations on dividing influence in Hadhramaut – including allocating zones of control and repositioning loyal units. 

Under this arrangement, the National Shield would secure areas central to Riyadh’s long-term interests, while the STC would expand further south. The tribal alliance would be left with limited, secondary territory so that no independent local force could challenge either regional power.

Who truly commands Hadhramaut? 

Hadhramaut’s strategic value is undeniable as it is Yemen’s largest province, home to much of its oil, and host to key ports. This has made it a battleground for Riyadh and Abu Dhabi – uneasy allies whose rivalry has shaped Yemen’s political map.

The north – the “valley and desert” – and the southern coast have long been divided in military terms. In 2013, the former ousted Yemeni president Abdrabbuh Mansour Hadi established the First Military Region in the north, dominated by Islah-aligned units. The Second Military Region, formed in the south, consisted of local forces rooted in the coastal communities.

As Emirati–Saudi competition deepened, Abu Dhabi created the Hadhrami Elite Forces in 2016 to secure the coast and ports. The following year, the UAE backed the establishment of the STC under Aidarous al-Zubaidi, which demanded secession and clashed repeatedly with the pro-Riyadh Aden government – most violently in 2018.

To counterbalance this growing Emirati-aligned structure, Riyadh supported the creation in 2023 of the Southern Majority Homeland Shield Forces under the Presidential Leadership Council's head, Rashad al-Alimi. These units were deployed across northern Hadhramaut and other strategic sites to curb the STC’s reach. 

Recently, the HTA led by Sheikh Amr bin Habrish emerged, asserting that Hadhramaut belongs to its people, and taking military and political steps to declare autonomy. Today, the STC controls Seiyun and the valley cities, and the Homeland Shield controls the camps of the First Military Region after its withdrawal, while the HTA maintains vital oil sites, stressing its rejection of any outside influence.

A spark becomes a fire: Riyadh turns on Abu Dhabi 

The latest escalation took shape at the end of November following the appointment of Salem al-Khanbashi as governor, replacing Mabkhout bin Madi – who was openly aligned with the Emiratis. The move signalled Riyadh’s intention to reset the balance inside the governorate.

The timing was telling; the appointment came days after STC forces intensified their deployments in Seiyun, and after STC commander Abu Ali al-Hadrami demanded control over the plateau and threatened the tribal alliance against any further expansion.

The alliance responded quickly, convening emergency meetings and declaring full mobilization. Its forces massed around the plateau and oil fields – Messila, Al-Alaib, Gil Bin Yamin – signaling readiness for confrontation.

The UAE countered by pushing major reinforcements from Aden, Abyan, Dhale, Lahj, and Shabwah, including Security Belt and Security Support units alongside the Hadhrami Elite. Far beyond a local conflict, it had become an extension of a broader regional competition that now stretches from Sudan’s coast to eastern Yemen.

Riyadh has been pressuring Washington to curtail Abu Dhabi’s role in the Sudan war, even calling for the US to designate the UAE-backed Rapid Support Forces (RSF)as a terrorist organization. Abu Dhabi’s reply came through the STC’s mobilization toward Hadhramaut – a province of enormous significance to Saudi Arabia.

Speaking to The Cradle, Adnan Bawazir, head of the Southern Rescue Council in Hadhramaut, says that the UAE’s posture may be retaliatory. Yet he also notes the possibility of Saudi coordination in handing the province to the National Shield – because the STC cannot move without Riyadh’s approval.

Bawazir believes that Saudi Arabia took advantage of the opportunity to weaken the Brotherhood and overthrow their last stronghold in the south, represented by the First Military Region in Seiyun, and push them towards Marib, laying the groundwork for any future partition plans.

On the ground, he describes the situation as foggy: 

“The statements of the Hadhramaut Tribal Alliance show a sense of bitterness and a sense that Saudi Arabia may have abandoned them, while they are aware of their military inability to confront pro-Emirati forces coming from inside and outside the governorate.”

According to Bawazir, the First Military Region responds directly to commanders in Riyadh and will surrender positions when ordered. He believes the tribal alliance issue will be resolved through a tribal settlement – a scenario he warns would be disastrous for Yemen’s unity and sovereignty. All outcomes remain possible.

For his part, Shami believes these developments coincide with Sanaa’s growing deterrence capabilities, and are part of Saudi-Emirati efforts to impose a new reality ahead of anticipated regional shifts. He sees the hands of a US-Israeli project intent on weakening Yemen and taking hold of its strategic corridors. 

The escalation in Hadhramaut “further complicates any political path for peace and opens the way for the exacerbation of internal conflicts, while the ongoing Yemeni deterrence from Sanaa confirms that the national will will not retreat in the face of aggression,” he says.

A province caught between patrons

Hadhramis who spoke to The Cradle express deep frustration over a conflict they see as entirely external to their interests. Local factions have become tools for regional agendas, and the province’s wealth (its oil, ports, and geography) has turned it into a bargaining chip in a struggle far larger than Yemen.

The UAE has emerged from this round with expanded territorial control for its militias across new strategic terrain. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, has used the situation to weaken the Brotherhood and restack the deck in favor of its own clients, particularly the Homeland Shield.

But the wider game remains one of “dancing on the heads of snakes.” And as always, the greatest losers are the people of Hadhramaut – standing on land coveted by allies who increasingly behave like rivals. 

Mehr Media Group shines in Moscow, named as international Expert of the Year 2025

TEHRAN- In a distinguished ceremony held in Moscow on Tuesday, the Mehr Media Group has been recognized among the top three international winners at the 14th edition of the Expert of the Year 2025 awards. 

This accolade underscores Mehr’s influential role in fostering media cooperation between Iran and BRICS member countries.

The award event, which gathered media experts, industry leaders, economic officials, and prominent figures from 12 countries including Iran, India, and Brazil, celebrated outstanding projects across 16 categories. The Expert of the Year Award honors specialists introducing innovative ideas and groundbreaking initiatives in economics, media, public management, culture, industry, and social activities—often operating behind the scenes but significantly impacting national development and international collaboration.

Supported by TV BRICS, the prestigious award has evolved from a national recognition into a prominent global platform, featuring participants from around the world. The event’s final statement is published in six languages, emphasizing its international scope and inclusivity. It has become a vital venue for showcasing professional excellence and fostering partnerships across borders.

This year, Mehr Media Group’s active engagement in enhancing media diplomacy, analytical content production, and truthful representation of Iran-Russia relations earned it a place among the top international contenders. The jury commended the group’s efforts in broadening the narrative of Tehran–Moscow cooperation and highlighting the cultural and economic ties between the two nations.

Mehr Media Group shines in Moscow, named as international Expert of the Year 2025

Mohammad Mahdi Rahmati, the CEO of Mehr Media Group (which consists of Mehr News Agency and English-language daily Tehran Times), expressed his satisfaction via a video message, emphasizing that the award reflects Iran’s effective media efforts to portray a realistic image of Tehran–Moscow relations. He highlighted the group’s role since 2023 as a media partner of TV BRICS, actively working to depict Iran’s rich cultural and historical bonds with Russia.

Rahmati also noted the strategic importance of media in countering Western narratives and stressed the significance of collaborative efforts supported by TV BRICS to deliver accurate portrayals of participating nations’ capacities and partnerships. "Our participation aligns with our social responsibility and our commitment to strengthening international understanding," he added.

In the International Projects category, one of the notable winners was Masoud Ahmadvand, Iran's cultural attaché in Russia, who was awarded for his project “Patterns of Friendship,” an exhibition that showcased Iran’s cultural heritage through artworks by Russian artists. This project received high praise from the jury for its role in fostering cultural diplomacy.

“First of all, I would like to thank the Expert Award team for their decision, as well as our wonderful colleagues from TV BRICS, who actively cooperate with the Embassy of Iran and the Cultural Representation,” said Ahmadvand accepting his award. 

“For us, receiving this award is of great value, and we are proud to have received it from a professional team. This will become an additional motivation for us to organize the second phase of the festival on an even larger scale and to put more effort into strengthening cultural ties between Iran and Russia,” he noted.

International laureates also featured Sonu Saini of Jawaharlal Nehru University, for bridging Russian and Indian cultural exchanges through translation projects; Nigerian documentary filmmaker Amazing-Grace Ajayi, recognized for promoting intercultural dialogue via cinema; and Amjad Othman, regional media advisor, for advancing objective regional coverage.

The Expert of the Year Award, established in 2012, aims to recognize individuals and projects that introduce innovative solutions across various sectors. Since 2024, TV BRICS has partnered as the official media supporter, further amplifying the award’s global reach.

As Iran continues to strengthen its media presence and international collaborations, Mehr Media Group’s achievement in Moscow affirms its vital role in shaping the narrative of Iran’s cultural and diplomatic engagement on the global stage.

Imam Reza (AS) Intl. Festival to showcase art, literature, scholarly works

TEHRAN- The 22nd edition of Imam Reza (AS) International Festival is scheduled to be held in various provinces in Iran in April 2026, featuring a diverse range of cultural, artistic, and scholarly programs.

In the forefront of this significant event, the International Imam Reza (AS) Foundation welcomes artists, writers, and enthusiasts from within Iran and beyond to participate and create works that honor this revered figure, the organizers announced. 

The festival’s call for submissions for 32 different programs has been officially announced, and the process of accepting artworks is now underway. This year's theme, “Iran of Imam Reza (AS),” aims to foster national and international cultural exchange and deepen the understanding of Imam Reza’s teachings.

The festival encompasses a wide array of activities, including poetry and literature competitions such as the international poetry, Arabic poetry, and Turkish poetry. There are also national contests for poetry and storytelling aimed at children and teenagers, promoting the literary talents of the younger generation. 

In the performing arts sector, the festival features theater festivals, puppet shows, street theater, and dramatic writing competitions, providing a vibrant platform for theatrical expression. Additionally, digital and virtual programs like storytelling campaigns and social media initiatives are part of the festival’s offerings.

Visual arts play a significant role, with exhibitions and competitions in calligraphy, painting, sculpture, photography, and modern art. Music and sound arts are also celebrated through composition and performance contests that highlight the rich cultural heritage associated with Imam Reza (AS). 

Academic and research conferences will be held to emphasize human excellence and promote cultural dialogue, with topics focusing on ethics, spirituality, and the teachings of Imam Reza (AS). 

Furthermore, the festival includes special programs for students at universities nationwide, fostering scholarly engagement and educational activities. By providing a comprehensive platform for cultural dialogue, artistic expression, and academic exchange, the 22nd Imam Reza (AS) International Festival aims to deepen the understanding of Imam Reza’s values and promote unity and cultural growth across the globe. Participants and interested artists are encouraged to submit their works and join this grand celebration of Imam Reza’s legacy.

The Imam Reza (AS) International Festival is held annually in various provinces of the country as well as in several other countries. 

This festival encompasses various fields such as articles, plays or screenplays, produced shows, stories, visual arts, books, literary texts, poetry, press and digital works, and radio and television productions. 

It aims at promoting artistic excellence rooted in spiritual and cultural values, inspiring artists and audiences alike.

UAE in Africa: Rise of Arab Neo-imperialist Power Worrisome to Traditional Powers

Alwaght- In recent months, verbal and media tensions between Algeria and the UAE have gone beyond normal levels, signaling a deep geopolitical competition in North Africa and the Sahel region.

What started as media attacks and identity accusations was in fact a reflection of a confrontation of two different approaches to regional order. On one side stands Algeria, which views itself as the inheritor of an anti-colonial, non-aligned tradition. Its geopolitical legitimacy is built on supporting liberation movements, championing the Palestinian cause, and staunchly opposing normalization with Israel.

On the other side is the UAE, which over the past decade has transformed into a pragmatic, economy-driven, and interventionist power, actively working to build a trans-regional network of economic and military influence.

The root of their tension is a direct clash of strategic interests. Algeria sees North Africa and the Sahel as its natural sphere of influence, a region where stability is inextricably linked to its own national security.

The UAE, however, has increasingly entered this very arena since the mid-2010s. It is investing in ports, partnering in defense industries, training security forces, and even backing non-state military actors in conflict zones. From Algeria’s perspective, this active engagement is far more than routine economic cooperation. It fuels suspicions of a project to reshape the regional order, a new power structure where smaller but wealthier states leverage capital and security networks to wield influence far exceeding their geographic or demographic size.

Disagreements over key regional cases, such as Libya and Western Sahara, have only deepened this divide.

In the Libyan crisis, Algeria backed the political process of the National Salvation Government, while the UAE backed General Khalifa Haftar. In the Palestinian case, the Emirati normalization with h Israel under what is called by the West Abraham Accords run counter to the red line of the Algerian foreign policy.

Additionally, media reports alleging the involvement of Emirati-linked networks in Algeria’s ethnic and identity debates have inflamed domestic sensitivities, bringing tensions into the public sphere. In essence, what now manifests as a war of words stems from Algeria’s fear of a geopolitical retreat in the face of a newly assertive power equipped with multi-layered instruments of influence.

But a more fundamental question is why the UAE is focusing so intensely on Africa. The answer lies in three primary drivers: economics, security, and international standing.

From an economic perspective, Africa represents both a burgeoning consumer market and a vast repository of critical resources. Through massive investments in commercial ports, logistics infrastructure, fossil and renewable energy, and the mining sector, the UAE is securing its role in global supply chains. Companies like DP World and AD Ports Group have secured concessions to develop or manage major ports in areas such as Egypt, Angola, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Tanzania, Senegal, Mozambique, and Somaliland. This creates a network effectively spanning maritime corridors from the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean.

From a security aspect, the UAE has found out that protection of its investments is impossible without indirect military presence and defense capacity building in the host countries. That is why, since 2010,the Arab country made military training and security cooperation as one of the main tools of its foreign policy. Obvious examples include training Somalian forces, funding and equipping the Puntland coast guard against piracy in the Gulf of Aden, training Ethiopian presidential guard, foundation of the Mohammed bin Zayed Defense College in Mauritania for training G5 countries’ officers in the Sahel region, and deploying training teams to Chad and Mali. Over the past eight years, the UAE has signed at least eight counter-terror agreements with African countries and has regularly involved in multilateral training programs.

From a geopolitical perspective, the UAE is leveraging these moves to transform itself from a peripheral Persian Gulf state into a mid-tier global power, an actor capable of protecting sea lanes, vital resources, and trade routes on a scale far beyond its immediate neighborhood. Within this framework, establishing a flexible network of military footholds in Africa becomes critical.

The Asabba base in Eritrea, which played a key logistical role in supporting the Yemen campaign, Al Khadim base in eastern Libya, used for drone operations backing Haftar’s forces, the use of Sidi Barrani in Egypt, and facilities established in Bossaso in Puntland or Kismayo on the Somali coast, all exemplify this flexible, mission-oriented strategy. Unlike traditional permanent bases, this model allows for rapid scaling up or down of military presence.

Furthermore, the UAE has turned to defense industry cooperation and arms sales as a tool for cementing alliances. Deals such as the sale of 71-meter corvettes to the Angolan navy, delivery of armored vehicles to the Democratic Republic of Congo to defend the city of Goma, light armored vehicle sales to Senegal, and the establishment of a joint armored vehicle production line in Uganda are key examples. These transactions not only boost economic returns but also create deeper security dependencies with host governments.

The UAE's primary areas of involvement can be summarized into four key vectors: ports and maritime logistics, military training and capacity-building, defense industry cooperation, and covert participation in regional conflicts.

In Somalia, the UAE trains government forces and conducted its first drone strike against al-Shabaab positions in the Galguduud region. In Sudan, UN reports confirm that the Um Jaras base in Chad has become a channel for logistical support to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). Its role in shaping the military balance on the ground in Libya and Ethiopia has also been undeniable.

The Emirati methods and tools of influence are combination of soft economic power and hard security force, major investment in infrastructural projects, giving loans and funding, military training, arms sales, abs providing logistics and drone support in critical conditions. This combination has enabled Abu Dhabi to ensure real impact on the field equations without inflicting the political costs of an open, large-scale military involvement.

The consequences of this new actor’s presence for Africa’s geopolitical order are also dual-edged. On one hand, by injecting financial resources and training capacity into countries grappling with pervasive threats like terrorism and piracy, the UAE has helped bolster the security capabilities of its partner governments.

On the other hand, this very pattern has made great-power competition in Africa more multipolar. Alongside traditional players like France, the US, China, and Russia, a small but wealthy power has now entered the arena, challenging the established rules of influence. This heightened rivalry risks fueling greater instability, as weaker states may be pushed toward expedient alliances and increased militarization in their quest for external patronage.

It is within this context that Algeria’s sharp reaction becomes more understandable. What appears on the surface as a media war is, at its core, a reflection of the fear of a power shift in its own backyard, a transition from an order dominated by classical powers or large regional players, to one where states like the UAE, through a network of ports, bases, and security agreements, can play a decisive role.

Finally, we can suggest that the UAE has stepped in a fundamental strategic shift; one whose signs are unmistakable. A country that before this was known for its petrodollars, skyscrapers, and malls is now on its way to becoming a neo-imperialist actor. Actually it is a reproduction of the 18th and 19th century formula: First establish economic interests, then take them under your control, and then protect them at any cost, even using force.

Opium Residue Found in Achaemenid-Era Jar Linked to Xerxes

NEW HAVEN, Connecticut (KI) -- Recent archaeochemical research on a finely crafted alabaster (calcite) vessel discovered in Egypt has brought renewed attention to the cultural reach and courtly habits of the Achaemenid Persian Empire under Xerxes I.
Although such vessels were long assumed to have contained perfumes or aromatic oils, chemical analysis has revealed unmistakable traces of opium alkaloids, including morphine and thebaine. 
This discovery reframes the function of these prestige objects and offers a rare glimpse into the medicinal and possibly recreational practices of elites linked to the Persian imperial court.
The vessel itself is remarkable: it bears a four-language inscription—Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian, and Egyptian—naming “Xšayāršā, King of Kings,” the familiar Xerxes I who ruled from 486 to 465 BCE. 
Such multilingual inscriptions were central to Achaemenid imperial ideology. They projected a vision of rule that unified diverse peoples under the authority of a single sovereign. 
The presence of these inscriptions on a luxury object found in Egypt, a satrapy administered by Persia at the time, also demonstrates how the empire’s administrative and ceremonial practices extended far beyond the Iranian plateau.
What makes this vessel particularly significant for understanding Persian court culture is the convergence of two elements: first, its clear connection to Xerxes through the royal titulature; second, the discovery that it contained substances far more potent than perfumed oils. 
The Achaemenid court was known for its elaborate banquets, ritualized gift exchange, and sophisticated use of luxury materials. 
The presence of opium within a jar inscribed for the Great King suggests that narcotics may have played a role in certain courtly settings—whether in medical treatment, ritual practice, or controlled elite consumption designed to enhance social or religious experiences.
Moreover, the vessel provides tangible evidence for the deep entanglement of Persian authority with local craftsmanship and materials. Although dedicated to a Persian ruler, the jar was likely produced in Egypt, drawing upon Egyptian artisanship while bearing inscriptions in the official languages of the Achaemenid chancery. 
This fusion underscores how Xerxes’ empire operated: not by erasing regional identities, but by harnessing them to project imperial presence.
In this light, the alabaster vessel becomes more than a container. It is a microcosm of the Achaemenid world—multilingual, multicultural, and steeped in luxurious materials—revealing how far Persian influence extended, and how intimately objects tied to Xerxes could travel, circulate, and even carry within them traces of ancient pharmacological practices previously unknown. 

Trump’s Africa posture is less about human rights though more about power politics

 By Patricia Esami-Lubba

ABUJA – When Donald Trump turns his attention to Africa, it is rarely for reasons African policymakers recognize as grounded in fact or consistent principle. His latest escalation of tensions with Nigeria and South Africa, framed as a moral crusade against human rights abuses, reflects a recurring pattern: selectively invoking the language of rights to justify punitive diplomacy that ultimately serves domestic politics more than international justice.

In Nigeria, Trump has warned of potential military action and suspended aid over what he describes as systematic persecution of Christians. 

In South Africa, he has gone further, barring the country from the next G20 summit under the claim that its government is engaged in discrimination against white farmers. 

Both accusations draw on contested narratives, many of which are heavily filtered through U.S. culture-war lenses rather than on-the-ground reality. Yet they form the basis for punitive actions with real diplomatic consequences.

The first layer of Trump’s motivations is domestic. His political base responds strongly to narratives of Christian victimhood abroad and to claims of “reverse discrimination” against white communities overseas. These are not accidental themes; they have been central to identity politics, the backbone of far-right movements globally. By positioning himself as the protector of these groups, Trump fortifies his standing among voters who see global affairs through cultural, not geopolitical, lines.

But domestic politics alone doesn’t explain the harshness of the measures. The second layer is coercive diplomacy, a strategic attempt to leverage American power to reshape African political behavior. By threatening Nigeria, one of the continent’s largest democracies, with military intervention, Trump signals a willingness to use force in a region where U.S. influence has been slipping. 

His exclusion of South Africa from a major multilateral forum is even more striking: it weaponizes an international platform traditionally used to cultivate cooperation, not to settle scores.

Yet such tactics carry risks, particularly when they rest on shaky factual ground. Nigeria’s religious violence is tragically real, but it does not follow the simple Christian-persecution narrative Trump promotes; Muslims, Christians, and traditional communities have all suffered in complex, overlapping conflicts. In South Africa, the “white genocide” narrative has been debunked repeatedly by independent analysts, including many conservative experts. Reanimating a fringe myth to justify diplomatic punishment not only distorts reality, but it also undermines Washington’s credibility at a time when the U.S. can ill-afford diplomatic missteps on the continent.

More troublingly, the moral selectivity of Trump’s Africa posture exposes the deeper issue: rights talk is being used as a geopolitical tool, applied where it aligns with domestic messaging and ignored where it doesn’t. That inconsistency is noticed. In capitals across Africa, policymakers read Trump’s moves not as principled advocacy but as transactional pressure masquerading as moral concern.

For African nations already navigating a multipolar world, this approach is likely to accelerate an existing trend: the search for partners who engage without politicizing internal affairs. If the U.S. wants to remain influential, it must offer something more stable than threats, exclusions, and ideologically charged narratives.

What Africa needs from Washington is engagement rooted in reality, not rhetoric tailored for American campaign rallies. What multilateral institutions need is leadership grounded in principle and not political theatrics. And what the United States risks, if this trend continues, is the erosion of its standing in a region whose geopolitical significance is only growing.

Trump’s posture on Nigeria and South Africa tells us less about human rights and more about how power, perception, and domestic politics now shape America’s global actions. Africa has seen this before, though this time, the costs and the consequences may be far higher.

(Patricia Esami-Lubba is a Nigerian journalist and foreign-affairs correspondent whose incisive reporting explores global power dynamics, U.S.–Africa relations, and the nexus of international policy and human-rights diplomacy.)

News from Nowhere: Church, King and Country

Alex Roberts 

Source: Al Mayadeen English

Prince Andrew’s downfall, triggered by renewed scrutiny over his links to Jeffrey Epstein, overshadowed two historic religious milestones in the UK, exposing the contradictions of monarchy, power, and accountability.

One of the biggest pieces of news to come out of the UK in the last few years came in October, with the announcement that Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, brother to the King of England, was to be stripped of the title of "Prince".

The news was big and unprecedented in recent times – that is, really, since the forced abdication of King Edward VIII in 1936, after less than a year on the throne, officially (and in romanticized versions of the story) because he wanted to marry a divorcee (hardly a great crime for the governor of a church established five centuries ago to permit divorce), but actually because he was a Nazi sympathiser.

But at the same time as being a massive news story, the incomplete fall of Mr. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor was also something of an insignificant or irrelevant one, one which came far too late and which pretty much missed the point.

The Andrew-Formally-Known-As-Prince (as the papers put it) had already lost his other honours and titles (including the Dukedom of York)… all except for the honorary rank of Vice Admiral in the Royal Navy, a rank which Buckingham Palace was swiftly said to be arranging to remove (though some wits noted that the job of admiral of vice was one which suited him pretty well).

The straw which perhaps had at last broken the king's last shreds of patience with his morally errant younger brother had perhaps been the fact that the latest claims as to Andrew's personal connections with – and activities in collaboration with – the notorious sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein had distracted public and media attention from a truly historic event: a meeting between Charles III – not only the King of England but also the Supreme Governor of the Church of England – and Pope Leo XIV, during which they prayed together in the Vatican's Sistine Chapel.

This was the first time that a British king had prayed with a leader of the Roman Catholic church since around the sixteenth century – when Henry VIII had broken with Rome and had established the Church of England, as a breakaway protestant sect led by the monarch, so that his archbishop might then have the power to end his marriage to his then wife, the Catholic Catherine of Aragon, an annulment which the Vatican had refused to grant.

This year's act of religious reconciliation represented a profoundly symbolic moment which sought to heal half a millennium of animosity between these two branches of the Christian faith – an animosity which has fuelled political violence on the streets of Belfast and which continues to provoke violent clashes around the football grounds of Glasgow.

That this momentous event was wiped off the front pages by the latest allegations against Andrew must have irked a monarch who was at the same time facing outraged cries from media critics and public hecklers asking how long he'd known about his brother's relationship with Epstein and why he'd taken so long to do so very little about it.

And asking why his mother, the late Queen Elizabeth II, had paid Andrew's most prominent accuser a princely sum of £12 million to drop her case against her son.

It even reached the point that the BBC was reporting that officials at Buckingham Palace themselves were quoting a variation on a popular nursery rhyme which ridiculed Andrew's protestations of innocence: "The grand old Duke of York, he had twelve million quid. He gave it to someone he never met, for something he never did."

But the loss of his princedom was all of course barely relevant, and, as far as many British people have been concerned, was very far from enough.

Will Andrew go to the United States to testify as to his connections with Epstein, as American Democrats have demanded? Will he ever face justice for the crimes of which he is accused – sanctions greater than losing his titles and having to move out of a hugely luxurious house into a slightly less luxurious house? Will Epstein's victims ever see Andrew – or others among Epstein's most prominent associates (such as the current US president) – in court?

Almost certainly not.

In the same month as the prayers shared between the Pope and its Supreme Governor, the Church of England saw another historic event – the appointment of its first female Archbishop of Canterbury, as the relatively liberal Sarah Mullally was elevated to its most senior clerical position.

And the news of her own appointment, and of the prayers shared by the heads of the English and Catholic churches – these two events of great religious and historic weight – were eclipsed by the ongoing allegations of similar abuse perpetrated by the brother of the Supreme Governor of the Church of England, the King of England himself.

Yet Andrew will no doubt continue to live his life of luxury, sustained and sponsored by his wealthy associates, and justice (earthly justice at least) will never be done.

As for justice beyond this world… well, Charles, Leo and Sarah might have their own private thoughts about that.

The Eternal Script of Iran: Artistic Soul Etched in Ink

TEHRAN -- For Emad Ahmad Falsafi, calligraphy is not merely a form of artistic expression—it is the written voice of the Iranian soul. 
In a conversation reflecting on centuries of Persian artistic tradition, Falsafi positions calligraphy as the mirror of Iran’s cultural and aesthetic identity, as enduring and evocative as its poetry. 
“Just as poetry preserves Iranian thought, calligraphy reflects the aesthetic and cultural face of our land across generations,” he asserts.
Falsafi situates Persian calligraphy within a historical and philosophical framework. He notes that the flourishing of the art has always been tied to societal stability and support: in times of war or economic hardship, the craft naturally wanes. 
Periods of patronage, conversely, have allowed calligraphy to reach its pinnacle. The late Qajar and early Pahlavi eras, with the advent of mass printing and industrialization, displaced traditional handcrafted art, weakening centuries-old practices. Yet, the cultural lineage persisted through devoted students who carried forward the flame.
Modern Iranian calligraphy owes much to the pioneering efforts of artists such as Gholam-Hussein Amirkhani, who revitalized the production of authentic works after decades of decline. Post-revolutionary cultural shifts further opened space for traditional arts to re-enter the public sphere, allowing calligraphy to harmonize with national and religious identity. Today, associations, schools, and exhibitions sustain the transmission of skill and knowledge across generations.
Falsafi also highlights a significant cultural shift: the emergence of calligraphers as collectors of historic works. Over the past four decades, this practice has reinforced a living memory of the art, while books and visual reproductions of master calligraphers like Mir Emad, Darvish, and Mirza Gholamreza have made the heritage accessible to a new generation of students and enthusiasts.
While the contemporary scene boasts technical mastery and museum-quality output, Falsafi stresses that calligraphy must retain spiritual and intellectual depth. 
“Technique alone is not enough,” he explains. “A work must carry the soul; it must resonate within the viewer.” The challenge for today’s artists is to ensure that each line, curve, and flourish conveys meaning, emotion, and cultural resonance.
Persian calligraphy continues to captivate audiences internationally, appearing in major museum collections and global auctions. Its appeal transcends centuries, from early Western collectors to today’s connoisseurs. 
Among all figures, Mir Emad remains the universal benchmark of excellence, embodying the mastery of Nastaliq under challenging historical conditions. Other luminaries, including Mir Ali, Darvish, and Mirza Gholamreza, continue to hold esteemed positions in collections worldwide.
Falsafi reflects on the contemporary valuation of the art, noting that while modern naghashi-khat has become prominent in international auctions, traditional Persian calligraphy, particularly authentic Nastaliq, carries greater cultural significance, historical endurance, and civilizational weight. 
“Our traditional art is rooted in the soul of the nation,” he concludes. “No change can sever that connection.”