Latest News
- Rips appear in new sealant of Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool amid algae bloom
- Drone strike on football team bus raises concerns over Belarus’s role in Ukraine conflict
- Bruno Le Maire advocates core European coalition of six countries
- Supreme Court limits gun bans for marijuana users in landmark ruling
- Ukrainian drones attack Moscow refinery causing significant fire damage
- Dozens of countries warn of potential atrocities as violence escalates in Sudan’s el-Obeid
- Shoppers welcome Zellers’ return to Toronto with nostalgia and excitement
- Trump criticises opponents of Iran deal amid bipartisan backlash
LIVE German 2025 Election Results as they come in and analysi on who will be the next German Chancellor.
Knowledge Hub
Global Reaction to DE Elections
Rips appear in new sealant of Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool amid algae bloom
2:00 am
Get you up to speed: Rips appear in Reflecting Pool’s new sealant, chosen by Trump, after algae turn water green
Algae turned the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington, D.C. a fluorescent green while a tear was spotted in the recently applied sealant. Workers were seen removing algae, and the Department of the Interior confirmed the water is now “crystal clear.”
Workers have initiated clean-up operations using hydrogen peroxide and a “nanobubbler” to control future algae growth in the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, which recently underwent renovations costing more than $14 million. A spokesperson from the Department of the Interior acknowledged the algae bloom as part of the normal startup process following eight weeks of construction and indicated that additional details regarding the tear in the sealant used are still forthcoming.
The Department of the Interior stated that the algae outbreak in the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool is “part of the normal startup process” and is being addressed, with workers currently using hydrogen peroxide and a “nanobubbler” to maintain water quality. Following reports of a tear in the sealant, further inspection and potential repairs will be necessary to ensure the longevity of the recent renovations.
What remains unclear — The Department of the Interior has not disclosed the cause of the tear in the recently applied sealant on the Reflecting Pool floor.
Rips appear in new sealant of Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool amid algae bloom
President Trump’s efforts to spruce up the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool faced a snag this week, with algae turning the water a fluorescent green hue while rips appeared in an “American Flag Blue” surface handpicked by the president.
The century-old Reflecting Pool has long faced problems with leaks, algae and faulty plumbing. In April, the president launched an effort to address the pool’s “terrible” condition, part of a slate of spring cleaning projects in Washington, D.C., ahead of the nation’s 250th birthday — as Mr. Trump seeks to put his architectural stamp on the city.
Mr. Trump had the pool’s stone flooring coated with a sealant he called the “latest and greatest filament” and an “industrial-grade” variation of swimming pool liner. He told reporters he personally chose the sealant’s color: “American Flag Blue.” Federal contracts for the project were valued at more than $14 million.
But several days ago, after water was pumped back in, a sheen of green algae appeared.
Photo by Emily Alff/Sipa USA via AP Images 
A Department of the Interior spokesperson told WTX US News last weekend the algae outbreak was “part of the normal startup process” and would be cleaned out shortly.
“What you are seeing is residual algae from the supply lines which have been sitting dormant for eight weeks while construction has been taking place,” the spokesperson said. “President Donald J. Trump is an expert builder who has fixed the Reflecting Pool for good unlike the failed and extremely costly attempt by Obama and Biden.”
Workers were seen in recent days removing algae from the Reflecting Pool, and on Tuesday morning, crews dumped bottles of hydrogen peroxide into the water.
Mehmet Eser/Anadolu via Getty Images 
AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin 
The Department of the Interior said on social media Wednesday that the water is now “crystal clear,” and workers were “vacuuming up the dead algae.” Moving forward, the agency said it is using an advanced tool called a “nanobubbler” to prevent algae from reappearing in the Reflecting Pool.
Then, on Thursday, a tear was spotted in part of the material that was applied to the floor of the pool. WTX US News has reached out to the Department of the Interior for more information.
Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images 
The Trump administration’s renovations mark the second time in less than 20 years that the Reflecting Pool was overhauled, following a more than $30 million project early in the Obama administration. Despite those efforts, the pool still faced algae blooms and needed to be emptied out periodically to clean out algae, goose droppings and other detritus.
Mr. Trump vowed in April to make the Reflecting Pool “beautiful” and “the way it’s supposed to be.” At one point, when workers were installing the new sealant, the president rode in his motorcade onto the dried-out pool floor — which is the length of about 12 Olympic-sized swimming pools — and inspected the job.
It’s the latest renovation project in and around D.C. spearheaded by the Trump administration. The president’s team also repaired fountains throughout the city, tore down the White House’s East Wing to make way for a ballroom, attempted to close the Kennedy Center for renovations, and drew up plans for a gigantic triumphal arch across the river from the capital in Virginia.
The real estate developer-turned-politician has taken a personal interest in many of the projects, displaying mock-ups and speaking at length about the plans during White House events.
Mr. Trump and his administration have cast the renovations as much-needed efforts to beautify national landmarks they argue were neglected for years.
Critics, however, have called some of the projects self-aggrandizing and accused Mr. Trump of making dramatic changes without getting permission from Congress or input from the public. Several of the projects drew lawsuits, and a judge blocked the administration from closing the Kennedy Center or renaming it to add Mr. Trump’s name.
AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta 
Drone strike on football team bus raises concerns over Belarus’s role in Ukraine conflict
1:00 am
Get you up to speed: Drone strike on young football team bus could drag Belarus into Russia-Ukraine war | News World
A drone attack on a bus in Russia’s Bryansk region resulted in one woman dead and eight others injured, including six children. The bus was carrying young footballers from the Rechytsa Youth Sports School when the incident occurred, with Ukraine denying any involvement and Russia alleging a Ukrainian attack.
A significant investigation is underway to determine who ordered the drone strike on the Rechytsa Youth Sports School’s coach, with implications that could affect Belarus’s involvement in the ongoing Ukraine-Russia conflict. Belarusian officials have pointed to reported missteps by private contractors, alleging that the selected route for the trip was dangerously close to frontline areas.
Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko has called for an investigation into the drone strike, stating, “If someone is provoking us and trying to drag us into the war, I think it will end badly for those who are trying to do this.” Meanwhile, concerns are growing that the incident may exacerbate tensions between Belarus and Ukraine, as analysts suggest it could be a strategic move to disrupt their relations.
What remains unclear — Investigators have yet to determine who ordered the drone strike on the bus carrying young footballers.
Drone strike on football team bus raises concerns over Belarus’s role in Ukraine conflict
Ukraine today accused Russia of a cynical provocation over a drone attack on a bus that left one woman dead and eight people injured (Picture: social media / east2west news)
A crucial probe to find out who ordered a drone strike on a bus carrying young footballers could determine the fate of the Ukraine-Russia war.
Conspiracy theories are swirling as to who chose to destroy the Rechytsa Youth Sports School’s coach, an attack that could drag Belarus into the war raging across its border.
The football coach’s wife was killed with six of the young footballers hurt as they were travelling from their hometown of Homiel to Russia’s Gelendzhik on Wednesday.
A swarm of drones were reportedly spotted descending on the team bus carrying 88 people to a holiday camp close to the frontlines of the conflict between Kyiv and Moscow.
The President of Belarus, Aleksandr Lukashenko, who is in a delicate balancing act between his friend Vladimir Putin and Ukraine, has demanded to know the truth behind the strike.
‘If someone is provoking us and trying to drag us into the war, I think it will end badly for those who are trying to do this,’ he said.
Sign up for all of the latest stories
‘We are behaving calmly. Some people do not like that Belarus is a peaceful state, and that is why all this is happening.
An investigator works on the site of a ‘Ukrainian’ drone attack on a bus (Picture: REUTERS)
‘We hear statements, justifications, and various versions. But we need the truth. And we are waiting for this truth or a real, fair, honest answer from Ukrainian state officials, military personnel, and people.
‘In any case, we will establish the truth; it will not be a big problem,’ he said.
Although Lukashenko says he is not rushing to draw any conclusions, at least according to him, the drone is of Ukrainian origin. But he did suggest it could have been purchased by bad actors and suggested children shouldn’t leave Belarus without official permission.
Russia launched a terror investigation blaming Ukraine while Kyiv described the claim as ‘an information provocation by the Kremlin’.
Back home, Belarusian papers blasted Lukashenko’s 24-hour late response, which was seen as a move to assuage Ukraine.
Others even blamed the driver of the trip which had been privately organised by parents.
Dzmitry Aleinikau, deputy chairman of the Homiel Regional Executive Committee, blamed private contractors.
‘The carriers selected a dangerous route that ran practically through a frontline area,’ Aleinikau said.
Pro-government Telegram channel, the Belarusian Front, even suggested that independent media had known about the attack in advance, pointing to an article warning about the risks posed by drones in that area.
Is all what it seems?
Political analyst Vital Tsygankou posed the thought the strike may have been a political move intended to worsen relations between Minsk and Kyiv something the Kremlin will benefit from.
He added the strike will rock Belarusians who have been ignoring the conflict just outside its border.
‘The people will realise that the war is actually very close’, he said. ‘And it is clear that the Belarusian authorities want to avoid fueling panic above all else.
‘The entire message of Belarusian propaganda is: “We have peaceful skies; nothing is happening here.” But in this case, something is happening to Belarusians who have ventured only a little beyond the country’s borders.’
Russia accused Ukraine of another drone attack on a bus which it said killed eight civilians and wounded 11 more in occupied Donetsk.
Russia blamed Ukraine for an earlier strike on a bus in occupied Donetsk on June 3
(Picture: REUTERS)
Vladimir Putin is said to be ‘actively pressuring’ Belarusian dictator Lukashenko to enter the war on his side, according to UK Defence Journal editor George Allison.
At the same time, work on infrastructure which would be key to an invasion, like roads and artillery positions, has been ongoing in the former Soviet state along its border with northern Ukraine for months.
All this has sparked fears that Belarus, whose leader has been closely aligned with Putin for decades, is prepared to go beyond vocally supporting Russia to take an active part in the conflict.
Speaking from around 50 miles (70km) from the Belarusian border, Allison told WTX: ‘Ukraine has warned repeatedly this year that Russia is building up military infrastructure in Belarus, including new roads and artillery positions along the northern border.
‘Kyiv says Moscow has been actively pressuring Lukashenko to commit Belarusian forces to the conflict, and claims to have details of direct conversations between Putin and the Belarusian leader.’
Allison said Russia had already been using Belarusian territory to ‘enhance’ its drone operations against Ukraine.
Comment now
Comments
Add WTX as a Preferred Source on Google
Bruno Le Maire advocates core European coalition of six countries
11:00 pm
Bruno Le Maire advocates core European coalition of six countries
New Coalition
The finance ministers of Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and Spain have formed a coalition, dubbed the “E6”, to drive decisive action in key strategic areas.
The finance ministers of Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and Spain have formed a coalition, dubbed the “E6”, to drive decisive action in key strategic areas.
Strategic Coalition
The formation of the “E6” coalition aims to enhance decision-making efficiency among six of the EU’s largest economies, facilitating swift responses to geopolitical challenges and economic initiatives.
The formation of the “E6” coalition aims to enhance decision-making efficiency among six of the EU’s largest economies, facilitating swift responses to geopolitical challenges and economic initiatives.
Le Maire’s Vision
“If we want to resist that kind of threat, the six strongest European member states must stand united,” stated Bruno Le Maire at the G7 summit.
“If we want to resist that kind of threat, the six strongest European member states must stand united,” stated Bruno Le Maire at the G7 summit.
An EU of six, not 27, best way to ‘reinforce Europe’, Bruno Le Maire tells EU News
Working with a coalition of six core European countries instead of 27 is the best way to reinforce Europe, former French Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire told EU News on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Évian, France.
His comments come as the European Union looks for ways to streamline its decision-making process and become more agile on key issues from defence to foreign policy.
“The single lesson that all the European leaders must draw from the past months, and I would say from the last two years, is that if they want to be relevant and strong, they need to be united. And they don’t need to unite with 27 member states,” he said in a EU News interview.
“They need to give a new impetus to the European construction by building a European [project] with six core countries,” Le Maire, who was the longest-serving economy and finance minister since World War II and the shortest-serving minister for armed forces, note
Le Maire listed France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Poland, and the Netherlands — the EU’s six largest economies — as the states that should band together to discuss key issues facing the bloc, ranging from the Iran conflict and support for Ukraine to chip manufacturing on European soil and nuclear energy.
“Six countries instead of 27 countries is the best way of reinforcing Europe, of facing the threats posed by many empires around the world, and getting some concrete results,” he said.
Le Maire pointed to the pressure from the US administration against the EU, including tariffs and threats over regulatory standards, in response to Brussels‘ antitrust fines and digital regulations targeting American tech giants like Google and Amazon.
“We can no longer accept being blackmailed […]. The way President Trump and the US administration are saying, ‘You should get rid of the taxation of Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Microsoft, otherwise, I will hit you with new tariffs,’ is 100% unacceptable among allies,” he said.
“If we want to resist that kind of threat, that kind of blackmail […] the six strongest European member states must stand united […]. If we are divided, you cannot resist that pressure,” he said.
“If you stand united, explaining that it will be difficult for the US to gain access to the European market if they do not respect Europe as a partner, that is the best way of getting some concrete results.”
Too much talk, too few decisions
Often held up by a principle of unanimity, Le Maire told EU News that involving 27 countries to form a consensus on EU decision-making means “long talks and very few decisions”, while what is needed now is “strong decisions and fewer talks.”
He envisioned a structure in which the six core countries move forward on matters, and “then the 21 other member states, if they want to join, they will join,” adding, “first of all, let’s move on.”
The idea of this coalition is not new. In fact, it already exists in some shape or form.
Earlier this year, the finance ministers of Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain launched a new coalition, dubbed the “E6”, to push for “decisive action and swift progress” in four strategic areas: defence, supply chains, the Savings and Investments Union, and strengthening the euro internationally.
“We are providing the impetus, and other countries are welcome to join us,” German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil said at the time. The President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, endorsed this two-speed Europe concept as a way of bolstering the European economy.
In May, the E6 signed a joint letter calling for an acceleration of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) in an attempt to get a deal through a politically stagnant Brussels.
The CMU aims at creating a single, integrated market for capital across all 27 member states to service companies, investors and consumers.
Supreme Court limits gun bans for marijuana users in landmark ruling
10:02 pm
Media Lens: Supreme Court limits gun bans for marijuana users in landmark ruling
Supreme Court limits gun bans for marijuana users.
The Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot restrict gun ownership for marijuana users. This decision was reported in various outlets including USA Today and CNN.
What happened
The Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot restrict gun ownership for individuals who use marijuana, changing the legal landscape regarding gun rights and drug use. This decision highlights the Court’s stance on balancing Second Amendment rights with regulations concerning substance use.
This ruling comes amid broader discussions on the intersection of gun rights and drug laws, as various states have differing regulations regarding marijuana use. The case underscores ongoing debates about individual rights and federal authority in the context of firearm ownership and drug policy.
Key facts
- The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot restrict gun ownership for marijuana users.
- This decision narrows previous laws intended to disarm drug users.
- The ruling emphasizes individual rights regarding gun ownership under the Second Amendment.
- The case highlights ongoing debates around gun laws and drug policy in the U.S.
- The ruling was documented by multiple news outlets including The Washington Post and CNN.
Where coverage differs
- The Washington Post emphasizes the Supreme Court‘s decision as a limit on government power regarding gun ownership for marijuana users, while CNN focuses on the implications for federal authority over drug users’ rights.
- USA Today foregrounds the changes to the Second Amendment test, rather than the aspect of gun ownership rights directly.
- The New York Times prioritizes the broader implications of the ruling on drug users’ rights over the specific legal frameworks involved in gun ownership.
One story, four angles
The Washington Post – Government can’t restrict gun ownership over marijuana use, Supreme Court rules
Publication: The Washington Post | Primary framing pattern: Political | Tone: Neutral | Intensity: 5/10 | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: The Washington Post details the US Supreme Court ruling that prohibits the government from enforcing gun restrictions based on marijuana usage. The article emphasizes the legal implications of this decision, reflecting the court’s view on personal rights amidst the ongoing debate around gun control and recreational drug use.
Publication emphasis: The article focuses on the intersection of gun rights and drug legislation.
Framing analysis: Foregrounded is the ruling itself and its implications for gun ownership. Secondary considerations include broader societal impacts and historical context.
Bias: Selection: Focus on the implications of the ruling without extensive discussion of potential negative outcomes. Language: Uses legal terminology to present a clear view of the court’s position. Omission: Limited exploration of public opinion regarding dual legality of marijuana and gun ownership.
Assessment: This outlet presents the ruling in a straightforward manner, focusing on legal consequences rather than moral implications.
CNN – Supreme Court limits power of federal government to disarm drug users
Publication: CNN | Primary framing pattern: Legal | Tone: Informative | Intensity: 6/10 | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: CNN reports on the Supreme Court’s decision, pointing out its restriction on federal authority over gun ownership concerning drug users. The article assesses the broader implications for federal versus state law, focusing on issues of authority and individual rights.
Publication emphasis: The tension between federal and state law regarding drug and gun issues is highlighted.
Framing analysis: This piece foregrounds the power dynamic between state and federal governments, presenting it as a central theme. Secondary elements include potential societal impacts.
Bias: Selection: Primarily focuses on the ruling’s legal aspects rather than public reaction. Language: Employs accessible legal jargon to ensure clarity. Omission: Lacks in-depth discussion of public sentiment around gun use among drug users.
Assessment: CNN’s article effectively informs readers about the legal context while emphasizing the implications of governmental power dynamics.
USA Today – Supreme Court justice wants to scrap ‘failed’ Second Amendment test
Publication: USA Today | Primary framing pattern: Moral | Tone: Critical | Intensity: 7/10 | Sentiment: Slightly negative | Legal precision: Moderate
Expand
Espresso Shot: USA Today critiques the Supreme Court’s handling of gun laws, spotlighting a justice’s call to reassess existing Second Amendment frameworks. The article communicates concern over the implications for public safety and gun control.
Publication emphasis: The focus is on the perceived failure of current legal frameworks to adequately address gun control.
Framing analysis: The piece foregrounds moral obligations regarding public safety and questions the efficacy of existing laws. It’s critical of both the judicial system and gun legislation.
Bias: Selection: Emphasizes critical viewpoints rather than supportive ones. Language: Utilizes charged language to express concern and urgency. Omission: Minimal exploration of the legal justifications for the current Second Amendment interpretation.
Assessment: USA Today takes a critical stance, raising ethical questions about the adequacy of gun legislation in light of shifting societal norms.
The New York Times – Supreme Court Narrows Law Banning Drug Users From Owning Guns
Publication: The New York Times | Primary framing pattern: Legal | Tone: Analytical | Intensity: 6/10 | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: The New York Times provides an analysis of the Supreme Court’s ruling that limits existing laws preventing drug users from owning firearms. The article addresses the complexities of the ruling and its potential ramifications on state laws and gun control.
Publication emphasis: Focus on legal intricacies and implications for gun rights and public policy.
Framing analysis: Foregrounded is the legal analysis and interpretation of the ruling, while secondary are broader societal implications and public safety concerns.
Bias: Selection: Primarily focuses on legal ramifications without highlighting public reactions. Language: Uses precise legal terms to convey detailed insights. Omission: Lacks significant commentary on the moral implications of the ruling.
Assessment: The New York Times offers a thorough legal interpretation, emphasizing analytical depth but limited societal or ethical discourse.
Food for thought
The Washington Post employs the strongest legal framing by emphasizing that the Supreme Court’s ruling clarifies the limits of government authority to disarm drug users, underscoring the constitutional implications involved. In contrast, CNN adopts a more escalatory framing by suggesting that this ruling significantly restricts federal power regarding gun ownership, which may heighten tensions around firearm regulations. Meanwhile, USA Today introduces the issue with a focus on the broader implications for Second Amendment rights, reflecting an urgent concern over potential overreach. The New York Times notes the narrowing of existing laws, indicating a shift in the legal landscape.
Ukrainian drones attack Moscow refinery causing significant fire damage
9:00 pm
Media Lens: Ukrainian drones attack Moscow refinery causing significant fire damage
Ukrainian drones set a Moscow refinery ablaze in a major attack on the Russian capital. The incident occurred recently, highlighting ongoing hostilities between Ukraine and Russia.
Quick links: What has happened | Status quo | Confirmed facts | Preconceptions | Elisions | One story, four angles | Related links
What has happened
Ukrainian drones launched an attack on a refinery in Moscow, resulting in significant damage and igniting a fire in the capital. This incident marks one of the major offensives aimed at Russian infrastructure amid ongoing tensions between Ukraine and Russia.
The attack occurred early on October 18, with reports indicating that emergency services were mobilized to manage the blaze. This event underscores the intensifying conflict and the use of drone warfare in the region.
Status quo
Ukrainian drones launched a significant attack on Moscow, targeting a refinery in the city. The event, reported by various news outlets, marks one of the more aggressive assaults on the Russian capital since the onset of the ongoing conflict. This incident highlights the evolving capabilities of Ukrainian forces in the conflict with Russia. The attack emphasizes the ongoing tension and instability in the region.
Confirmed facts
- Ukrainian drones attacked a refinery in Moscow.
- The attack was characterized as a significant strike on the Russian capital.
- The incident occurred recently, as reported in multiple news sources.
Preconceptions
- **AP News** prioritizes direct updates on specific incidents, such as “Ukrainian drones set a Moscow refinery ablaze,” focusing on immediate, impactful events in the ongoing conflict.
- In contrast, **The Guardian** tends to place broader context and analysis at the forefront, emphasizing the implications of such attacks on international relations and public sentiment.
- While **AP News** highlights the timeline and specific details of the strike, **The Guardian** reduces focus on minute details, instead providing overarching trends and historical context.
- **Reuters** often emphasizes geopolitical reactions and military strategy, whereas **CNN** might focus more on human interest stories, including the civilian impact of military actions.
Elisions
- AP News highlighted the physical damage at the refinery due to the drone attack but did not elaborate on the strategic implications for Moscow’s energy security.
- The Guardian reported on the political ramifications in Ukraine but lacked details regarding civilian impact or reactions from local populations in affected areas.
- Reuters covered military responses following the attack but omitted any analysis on potential international repercussions or responses from foreign governments.
One story, four angles
AP News – Ukrainian drones set a Moscow refinery ablaze in a major attack on the Russian capital
Publication: AP News | Intensity: (7/10) | Sentiment: Neutral | Legal precision: High
Expand
Espresso Shot: The first focus is on the significant impact of the drone attack with “major attack on the Russian capital,” emphasizing its seriousness.
Key differences:
1. **Comparison with Soviet Era:** AP contrasts the drone usage as a modern battlefield strategy, akin to the Soviet tactics, evidenced by “set a Moscow refinery ablaze.”
2. **Geographic Placement:** The headline positions “Moscow” prominently, potentially intensifying the sense of threat felt domestically.
3. **Tone of Alarm:** Utilizing the adjective “major” suggests urgency which is amplified through its placement at the beginning of the headline, drawing immediate attention.
Bias: Selection: Focuses solely on the military aspect of the conflict. | Language: “Major attack” implies severity while omitting civilian impact. | Omission: Does not mention retaliatory responses or broader context of the conflict.
Assessment: Readers may initially believe that Ukraine’s military capabilities pose a direct existential threat to Russia.
AP News describes the recent drone attack on a Moscow refinery as a significant event, highlighting its implications for ongoing tensions. In contrast, the framing escalates in other publications, focusing predominantly on the potential retaliation and military ramifications following the incident. While AP grounds the narrative in factual reporting, other narratives opt for alarmist tones, suggesting an imminent escalation in hostilities. Thus, AP offers a more restrained take compared to its counterparts’ sensationalism.
The facts do not change. What changes is where scrutiny lands.
Related links
AP News
Ukrainian drones set a Moscow refinery ablaze in a major attack on the Russian capital
Dozens of countries warn of potential atrocities as violence escalates in Sudan’s el-Obeid
8:00 pm
Get you up to speed: Dozens of countries warn of atrocities amid escalation in Sudan’s el-Obeid
An international coalition of countries has raised alarms at the United Nations about the potential escalation of violence by Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in el-Obeid. The coalition reported that drone strikes in the area have killed at least 50 civilians and caused significant damage to civilian infrastructure.
The coalition, which includes Norway, Britain, and 21 other countries, emphasised the need for maximum pressure on both the RSF and the SAF to ensure civilian protection and humanitarian access. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, noted that el-Obeid has been experiencing siege-like conditions for over 18 months, heightening the urgency of the situation.
An international coalition led by Norway has expressed grave concern over the potential escalation of violence by Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in el-Obeid, urging all states to apply maximum pressure to safeguard civilians. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, warned that existing siege-like conditions could lead to preventable atrocities and called for urgent measures to protect civilians and halt further violence.
What remains unclear — It is uncertain how the international community will enforce measures to protect civilians amid ongoing atrocities.
Dozens of countries warn of potential atrocities as violence escalates in Sudan’s el-Obeid
News|Sudan warDozens of countries warn of atrocities amid escalation in Sudan’s el-Obeid
UN and allies warn of grave rights violations in North Kordofan; urge maximum pressure on RSF and SAF to not harm civilians.
Published On 18 Jun 202618 Jun 2026
An international coalition of countries has warned at the United Nations Human Rights Council that Sudan’s paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) could imminently escalate an assault on the central city of el-Obeid.
The statement, delivered by Norway, was presented on behalf of the Coalition for Atrocity Prevention and Justice for Sudan, comprising Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands and Sierra Leone, which said they were also joined by 21 other countries.
“We are gravely alarmed by the urgent risks of atrocities and deliberate killings in Sudan,” the statement warned on Thursday, adding that some 500,000 civilians are “at risk of falling victim to large-scale atrocities”.
El-Obeid is one of Sudan’s largest cities and the capital of North Kordofan state, the scene of the heaviest fighting in recent months of a war that has displaced nearly 14 million people, triggered rounds of ethnic bloodshed and spread famine and disease.
The coalition of countries urged all states to apply maximum pressure on the RSF and its foes, the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), to prevent atrocities and protect civilians. It also reiterated the need for unhindered humanitarian access.
“Ten consecutive days of drone strikes have killed at least 50 civilians across El Obeid and North Kordofan, and have caused significant damage to civilian infrastructure,” the statement continued.
“Widespread credible reports of ethnically targeted violence, including sexual and gender-based violence, are deplorable,” it added.
After more than three years of war in Sudan, the Sudanese army has control of central and eastern regions, while the RSF has solidified its control of Darfur in the west. The two sides are fighting over the vast Kordofan region that lies between, which is crucial to agriculture.
In October, the RSF took over el-Fasher, a large city in the Darfur region. The famine-stricken city, once home to some one million people, had been under siege for 18 months before the final RSF offensive, which began on October 25.
‘Seen this playbook before’
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Turk also issued a stark warning that an imminent offensive risked potential violations of international law, and warned that people living in el-Obeid had already been suffering siege-like conditions for more than 18 months.
“We have seen this playbook before. We cannot allow the repeat of the preventable atrocities we documented in al-Fasher and Zamzam IDP camp in North Darfur last year,” Turk said in a statement on Thursday.
“Let this be a stark warning to the world about an impending human rights disaster and worsening humanitarian situation. The States with influence have the duty to exercise it now to stop this madness in its tracks,” he added.
The US and rights groups have accused the RSF of committing genocide against in West Darfur during the conflict, in an extension of long-running violence stemming from disputes over land.
The RSF has denied responsibility for ethnically charged killings and has said those responsible for abuses will be held to account.
“The people of Sudan need peace – urgent measures must be taken to protect civilians and prevent further atrocities, including sexual violence, as well as further displacement and civilian suffering,” Turk urged.
Local insights
Related Election News
© 2026 WTX News.