Another ethnic Hungarian has been killed in Ukraine’s forced mobilization drive, Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said
Another ethnic Hungarian man living in Ukraine has died as a result of forced mobilization, Budapest’s Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto has said, describing the situation as an “open manhunt” for conscripts.
The recruitment drive has grown increasingly brutal amid Kiev’s military setbacks and manpower shortages, with hundreds of cases being documented of draft officers using excessive force to snatch men from the streets. There have been multiple reports of deaths among these conscripts.
Szijjarto said in a post on X on Saturday that another “tragedy” has happened in the Beregovo District of Transcarpathia Region in the western part of Ukraine, where a significant ethnic Hungarian minority is based.
”A Hungarian was forcibly taken from the streets, they wanted to conscript him, but he became ill at the training center, given that he had a heart disease and, unfortunately, he died.”
Budapest authorities previously reported the death of a man with dual Ukrainian and Hungarian citizenship at the hands of Kiev’s draft enforcers last July. According to Magyar Nemzet newspaper, the 45-year-old was beaten with metal rods at a conscription center in Transcarpathia Region and died three weeks later.
In November, Budapest accused Kiev of detaining and attempting to illegally conscript a group of ethnic Hungarian students in the town of Beregovo. Ukrainian students under 25 are generally exempt from the draft under martial law. Local authorities denied the claim, saying that the young men had been summoned by the recruitment officers to confirm their personal data.
Szijjarto described the Ukrainian conscription drive as “an open manhunt taking place on the streets,” insisting that it’s time for the international community to take action against it. He repeated Budapest’s call for a diplomatic solution to the Ukraine conflict and urged an “end [to] the war-mongering policy of Brussels,” which keeps supporting Kiev militarily and financially.
Moscow has repeatedly accused the Kiev government and its backers in the EU and UK of being willing to fight “until the last Ukrainian.”
Donald Trump is not looking to destabilize the country, Matthew Whitaker has said
The US does not want a Libya-style collapse in Iran as it weighs possible military action against the country, Washington’s ambassador to NATO, Matthew Whitaker, has stated.
Libya remains divided and unstable more than a decade after a NATO-backed uprising toppled longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, leaving rival administrations competing for power.
In recent weeks, Washington has dispatched what US President Donald Trump described as a “beautiful armada” to the Middle East, led by the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, to pressure Tehran into accepting a new nuclear deal.
Whitaker told Fox News on Saturday that Trump “has been very clear on Iran, and that is that you can’t have a nuclear weapon and you need to stop killing protesters in your streets.”
The US buildup is “a show of strength, but it also is an off ramp for Iran,” which can “deescalate very easily” by agreeing to Washington’s terms, he added.
“President Trump has given them an ultimatum. Obviously, he does not want to see this spit out of control. We don’t want to destabilize a country like Iran the way Libya was by the [Barack] Obama administration when Gaddafi was taken out and there was no plan for the day after that,” the envoy explained.
Because of this, Washington will “be judicious in how we use our power” against Iran, Whitaker stressed.
Tehran maintains that its nuclear program is purely peaceful and that it has no plans to develop a bomb. The Iranian authorities also announced in mid-January that they were able to restore calm after a wave of violent protests, which they claimed had been instigated by the US and Israel with a goal of a regime change.
The head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Larijani, who held talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Friday, said that progress was being made toward negotiations with Washington.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov also urged dialogue between the sides, warning that “any forceful actions can only create chaos in the region and lead to very dangerous consequences.”
Growing Jewish extremist attacks in the West Bank are testing the boundaries between law enforcement, intelligence, and political influence in Israel
While Israel’s security forces are celebrating a dramatic collapse in Palestinian terror attacks, a different and far more uncomfortable trend is taking hold in the West Bank. Jewish extremist violence against Palestinians has surged to its highest level in years, leaving villages burned, civilians injured, and the security establishment grappling with a threat that is harder to define.
Only a week ago, a mob of Jewish settlers stormed the Bedouin village of Mukhamas in the West Bank, injuring at least six Palestinians and setting houses and cars ablaze. Videos from the scene showed masked men moving freely for hours, vandalizing property and torching vehicles before security forces arrived.
For Israel’s Central Command, the incident was not an anomaly but another data point in a deeply troubling trend. Only days earlier, the military had released its annual summary for 2025 – figures that point to a dramatic surge in Jewish extremist violence, even as Palestinian terror attacks have declined sharply.
According to Central Command data, 2025 saw a more than 50% increase in the number of serious incidents defined by the security establishment as Jewish terror against Palestinians. The number rose to 128 incidents in 2025, compared with 83 in 2024 and 54 in 2023. These were not marginal acts of vandalism but severe crimes: arson attacks on homes and villages, shootings, and physical assaults resulting in injuries.
The rise is even more pronounced when examining the broader category of “nationalist crime,” which includes stone throwing, agricultural vandalism, and intimidation. In this wider framework, 682 incidents were recorded in 2024, rising to 867 in 2025, a significant spike within a single year.
The question of how many settlers are involved remains contested. Addressing the issue publicly, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the perpetrators as “70 boys from broken families.” However, according to the Israel Defense Forces internal assessments, the phenomenon is far broader. Military intelligence estimates that around 300 individuals, largely associated with the so-called “hilltop youth,” have been involved in violent incidents in recent months.
Geographically, the violence is concentrated in specific areas. The most dramatic increases were recorded in Gush Etzion and the Judea region, where incidents more than doubled in some sectors. According to Central Command, roughly 90% of violent acts originate from illegal outposts, rather than from agricultural farms that operate in coordination with the military.
Terror – or something else?
Among Palestinians and Israeli human rights organizations, there is little hesitation in labeling these attacks as terrorism. But not everyone within Israel’s security establishment agrees with that definition.
Amit Assa, a former operative of Israel’s internal security agency, the Shin Bet, says he struggles with the terminology.
“I call it self-defense to the point of extreme activity which may break the law,” Assa explains.
“It must be remembered that 2025 is only the second year since the [October 7, 2023] war, and the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria are much more vulnerable to rising [Palestinian] attacks.”
His view reflects a broader debate inside Israel: whether Jewish extremist violence should be framed as terrorism or as a radicalized, unlawful response to prolonged insecurity.
At first glance, statistics appear to support Assa’s argument, but only partially.
According to Shin Bet data, attempts by Palestinians to carry out attacks against Israelis have actually increased. In 2025, the agency recorded 1,374 attempted attacks, up from 1,040 in 2024 and 1,032 in 2023.
Yet, the number of attacks that were successfully carried out – and resulted in deaths, injuries, or damage – dropped dramatically. In 2025, there were 54 such incidents, compared with 231 in 2024 and 414 in 2023.
This gap between intent and execution highlights the effectiveness of Israel’s counterterrorism apparatus when it comes to Palestinian militancy. And it also underscores a striking asymmetry in how different threats are handled.
The Shin Bet’s unequal focus
Since its establishment in 1949, the Shin Bet has devoted the overwhelming majority of its resources to combating Palestinian terror. This includes a substantial share of the agency’s budget, thousands of operatives, interrogators, intelligence analysts, cyber units, and a dense network of informants. Daily coordination with the IDF, police, and foreign intelligence services further amplifies its reach.
The logic is clear: Palestinian terror organizations are hierarchical, externally funded, ideologically motivated, and capable of executing mass-casualty attacks. They pose what the security establishment defines as a strategic threat.
Head of the Shin Bet domestic security service Major General David Zini (L) speaks with Israel’s army chief Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir in the the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, on October 13, 2025 in Jerusalem.
By contrast, Jewish extremist violence is handled by a single, relatively small unit within the Shin Bet, commonly referred to as the Jewish Department. Its manpower and budget are minimal when compared with divisions focused on Palestinian militancy.
The reasoning, again, is strategic. Jewish extremist groups lack formal organizational structures, foreign sponsorship, or the capacity to destabilize the state militarily. But this is also where the tension begins. While the threat may be smaller in scale, it is far more politically and socially explosive.
Is the Shin Bet doing enough?
Assa agrees that only one department handles Jewish extremism, but he rejects the notion that the Shin Bet is neglecting the issue.
“Over the past few years, the Shin Bet has put much of its focus on illegal radical right-wing Jewish activity,” he says.
“I can assure you that all the different bodies – the police, the intelligence agencies, the politicians, and the heads of the communities – cooperate and aim to handle the radical activists.”
According to Assa, the surge in violence stems less from institutional failure and more from emotional dynamics. “The younger generation feels vengeance toward rising terror attacks in general, and October 7 in particular,” he says. For him, this is not strategic terror. It is a reaction.
Not everyone shares this assessment. In 2024, Arik Barbing, a former Shin Bet officer, published an article arguing that Jewish extremist groups are flourishing because they enjoy implicit political backing, specifically from Israel’s National Security Minister, Itamar Ben Gvir.
Ben Gvir himself has a long history with the Shin Bet, having been arrested and interrogated multiple times in the past for extremist activities in the West Bank. As a politician, he has repeatedly voiced support for settlers involved in confrontations with Palestinians. Arrests are rare, indictments rarer still, and convictions almost nonexistent.
At the same time, Israeli activists, both Jewish and international, who document settler violence have reported increasing harassment, detentions, and legal pressure, often under directives issued by the ministry Ben Gvir oversees.
Assa firmly rejects claims that the Shin Bet operates under political pressure.
“In my professional opinion, the Shin Bet is not controlled or dictated to by any ministerial body or politician when dealing with extremist activity, whether left-wing or right-wing Jewish extremism,” he says.
Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir
Where Assa sees a clear failure is not in intelligence or enforcement, but in perception.
“I think the international community has very little understanding of what Israel is up against,” he argues. “The discussion must start with the fact that we are continuously attacked by radical Islamic terror. We are forced to focus on self-defense.”
Israel’s greatest challenge, he says, is narrative rather than security.
“We cannot compete with the well-oiled, state-sponsored propaganda machine funded by countries like Qatar and amplified by outlets such as Al Jazeera.”
Yet, as the village of Mukhamas smolders and the statistics continue to climb, Israel faces a dilemma that cannot be solved by messaging alone. While Palestinian terror has been suppressed with remarkable efficiency, Jewish extremist violence is rising – unchecked, politically charged, and increasingly visible.
For Israel’s security establishment, the danger may no longer lie only across the lines, but uncomfortably within them.
Things are looking “very bad” for the Caribbean nation now that it has lost access to Venezuelan oil, the US president has said
The Cuban authorities would have to reach an agreement with Washington if they want to avoid a humanitarian crisis, US President Donald Trump has warned.
Earlier this week, Trump signed an executive order to impose tariffs on goods from any countries that sell oil to Cuba, further strengthening an embargo against the Caribbean nation which dates back to the 1960s.
The move comes after last month’s kidnapping by Washington of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro; his country had served as Havana’s primary source of oil.
Mexico had increased oil deliveries to Cuba in recent weeks; Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum warned on Friday that the US president’s order could “trigger a large-scale humanitarian crisis, directly affecting hospitals, food supplies, and other basic services for the Cuban people.”
When asked about Sheinbaum’s comment by journalists aboard Air Force One on Saturday, Trump said: “Well, it doesn’t have to be a humanitarian crisis. I think they probably would come to us and want to make a deal. So Cuba would be free again.”
“We have a situation that’s very bad for Cuba. They have no money. They have no oil… They lived off Venezuelan money and oil, and none of that’s coming now,” he said.
The US President has expressed confidence that the sides will work out a deal and that Washington would be “kind” to Havana.
Trump did not explain which specific concessions he wants from the Cuban government, only saying that “we have a lot of people in the US right now that would love to go back to Cuba and we’d like to work that out.”
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova accused Washington of the “economic suffocation” of Cuba on Saturday. She reiterated Moscow’s opposition to unilateral sanctions not endorsed by the UN, expressing confidence that Havana would be able to overcome its economic difficulties.
The Cuban authorities have declared an “international emergency” over Trump’s pressure campaign, which they are describing as an “extraordinary threat” originating in “the US anti-Cuban neo-fascist right wing.”
The Tesla and X owner reacted to a US jury verdict in favor of a woman who underwent a mastectomy at 16
US surgeons who perform ‘gender transition’ procedures on minors could face thousands of lawsuits, Elon Musk has said. He likened them to Nazi doctor Josef Mengele, who carried out sadistic medical experiments on prisoners at the Auschwitz II-Birkenau concentration camp during the Second World War.
The Tesla and X owner was reacting to news that Fox Varian, who had a double mastectomy at age 16, won what is described as the first detransitioner malpractice lawsuit in the United States. Now 22, Varian said New York doctors had compelled her to undergo the surgery while she was still a minor.
Both a psychologist and a surgeon approved the procedure. A jury later found them liable for malpractice. Varian was awarded $1.6 million for pain and suffering and another $400,000 for future medical costs.
“There will be thousands of court cases of children who were mutilated by evil doctors, modern day Mengeles,” Musk wrote on X on Saturday, sharing a post about the ruling.
“The schools, psychologists/psychiatrists and state officials who facilitated this will pay dearly too,” he added.
Musk has previously spoken publicly about his own family’s experience with the radical ‘gender transition’ movement. One of his children, Xavier, came out as transgender at 16 and later changed his name to Vivian Jenna Wilson.
The billionaire has claimed he was “essentially tricked into signing documents” by doctors, calling the practice “incredibly evil.”
“I lost my son, essentially. They call it deadnaming for a reason,” Musk said in earlier remarks, adding that Xavier had been figuratively killed by what he described as the “woke mind virus,” which he vowed to “destroy.”
Since returning to office, President Donald Trump has rolled back several policies introduced under his predecessor Joe Biden, including federal support for medical gender transition procedures for individuals under the age of 19. Several US states have also moved to restrict or ban such treatments for minors.
The US president has said the agents will only protect federal property
US President Donald Trump has ordered the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to stay away from protests in Democrat-run cities amid nationwide demonstrations against US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
The “National Shutdown” was called on Friday, with organizers urging Americans to abstain from work, school, and shopping in a mass strike aimed at pressuring the government to end immigration raids. In Los Angeles, the demonstration escalated into clashes with police and federal agents, with protesters taking over an ICE facility. A similar incident was reported in Eugene, Oregon, where demonstrators breached a federal building and refused to leave.
In a post on Truth Social on Saturday, Trump said he had “instructed Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, that under no circumstances are we going to participate in various poorly run Democrat Cities with regard to their Protests and/or Riots unless, and until, they ask us for help.”
“We will, however, guard, and very powerfully so, any and all Federal Buildings that are being attacked… I have instructed ICE and/or Border Patrol to be very forceful in this protection of Federal Government Property,” he added.
Trump also argued that the primary responsibility for protecting both local and federal assets lies with state authorities, saying the federal government would step in only as a backup.
“If local governments are unable to handle the Insurrectionists, Agitators, and Anarchists, we will immediately go to the location where such help is requested and take care of the situation very easily and methodically,” he said, warning that federal agencies – and “if necessary, our Military” – would respond forcefully if federal property is threatened.
The latest wave of protests was fueled by growing outrage over the fatal shootings of two US citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, by federal agents during recent enforcement operations in Minneapolis.
Earlier this week, US House Democrats called for Noem’s removal, arguing that the violence “must end forthwith.” Trump defended the DHS chief, saying she is only being targeted because she “has done a really GREAT JOB.”
The US Department of War has reportedly clashed with contractor Anthropic over the ethical limitations built into its tech
The US Department of War is locked in a dispute with artificial intelligence developer Anthropic over restrictions that would limit how the military can deploy AI systems, including for autonomous weapons targeting and domestic surveillance.
The disagreement has stalled a contract worth up to $200 million, as military officials are pushing back against what they see as excessive limits imposed by the San Francisco-based company on the use of its technology, Reuters reported, citing six people familiar with the matter.
Anthropic has raised concerns that its AI tools could be used to carry out lethal operations without sufficient human oversight or to surveil Americans, sources told Reuters.
Pentagon officials, however, have argued that commercial AI systems should be deployable for military purposes regardless of a company’s internal usage policies, as long as they comply with US law.
The dispute comes amid a broader push by the Trump administration to rapidly integrate artificial intelligence across the armed forces. Earlier this month, the Department of War outlined a new strategy aimed at transforming the US military into an “AI-first” fighting force.
The Pentagon believes it must retain full control over how AI tools are employed on the battlefield and in intelligence operations, with US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth vowing not to use models that “won’t allow you to fight wars.”
An Anthropic spokesperson said the company’s AI is “extensively used for national security missions by the US government” and that it remains in “productive discussions with the Department of War about ways to continue that work.” The Pentagon has yet to comment on the reported rift.
Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has repeatedly warned about the dangers of unconstrained AI use, particularly in mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons systems. In a recent essay, he argued that it should support national defense “in all ways except those which would make us more like our autocratic adversaries.”
The standoff poses risks for Anthropic, which has invested heavily in courting government and national-security clients and is preparing for a potential public offering. The company was one of several major AI developers to be awarded Pentagon contracts last year, alongside OpenAI, Google and Elon Musk’s xAI.
