Category: 2. World

Discreet, high-stakes negotiations between Washington and the Taliban burst into public view last week when US President Donald Trump declared that America was “trying” to regain control of Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan.

Bagram was quietly abandoned in the weeks leading up to the chaotic US withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021 as the Taliban swept into Kabul.

Trump described the base not only as a lost military asset but as a strategic vantage point to monitor China, underscoring how US ambitions in Afghanistan remain tied to wider geopolitical rivalries.

“One of the biggest airbases in the world, we gave it to them for nothing. We’re trying to get it back, by the way. That could be a little breaking news,” Trump told reporters at a joint press conference with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. He linked the demand directly to Beijing, saying: “One of the reasons we want the base is it’s an hour away from where China makes its nuclear weapons.” He warned the Taliban: “If Afghanistan doesn’t give Bagram back to those that built it, the United States of America, bad things are going to happen.”

Less than 50 miles from Kabul, Bagram has long been central to foreign campaigns in Afghanistan. Built by the Soviets in the 1950s, it served as their main hub during the Soviet–Afghan war. After 2001, it became the largest US installation in the country – capable of hosting thousands of troops, heavy aircraft, and detention facilities. Its location, near key highways and passes into Central Asia, gave it unmatched strategic value. For the Taliban, its capture after the US withdrawal in August 2021 was both a military windfall and a symbolic victory.

Trump’s remarks raise a question that goes beyond nostalgia for American power projection: could Washington realistically regain access to Bagram?

The record suggests otherwise. The 2020 Doha Agreement, struck under Trump, promised a US withdrawal in exchange for Taliban commitments on terrorism. It said nothing about future access to bases like Bagram. When US troops left in 2021 during the Biden administration, they abandoned billions in equipment, some of which the Taliban later displayed from the base itself.

Since then, the Taliban have been explicit: no foreign troops. Spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid has urged Washington to adopt “realism and rationality,” citing the Doha Agreement’s pledge that the United States would not threaten Afghanistan’s territorial integrity. Taliban defence officials, such as Chief of Staff Fasihuddin Fitrat, have flatly ruled out surrendering territory, calling Bagram “out of the question.”

For the Taliban, holding Bagram is proof of victory, while for Washington, reclaiming it would require concessions or risks far greater than the base itself is worth.

The Taliban’s confidence reflects both their military control and their new international partnerships. Russia has moved closer, granting the group legitimacy by welcoming their diplomats. China has deepened economic engagement, signing energy and mining deals and eyeing infrastructure projects near Bagram’s region. With these ties, the Taliban have little incentive to trade away sovereignty for US favour.

For Washington, the base’s strategic logic is clear. From Bagram, the United States could oversee counterterrorism operations, track regional militancy, and monitor Chinese and Russian activity. But the operational feasibility of returning is slim. Militarily seizing Bagram would mean re-invasion, with all the troop deployments, logistics, and costs that toppled three empires before. Diplomatically, the price would be high: recognition of Taliban rule, lifting of sanctions, or large-scale aid – concessions that are potentially toxic in Washington.

History also cautions against optimism. From the British retreats of the 19th century to the Soviet defeat in the 1980s and the US exit in 2021, foreign powers have learned the same lesson: Afghanistan cannot be held without local consent.

Bagram’s strategic importance is unquestionable, but in Afghan politics, symbols matter as much as runways. For the Taliban, ceding the base would be a humiliation, undermining the sovereignty they fought to reclaim.

Trump’s call, then, seems more rhetorical than practical. It signals a desire to reassert US influence in a region increasingly shaped by Chinese and Russian engagement. It may also be a way of further prodding the record of the Biden administration. But the Taliban’s rejection, coupled with their international backing, makes a negotiated return highly unlikely. The alternative – military force – would be prohibitively costly and politically untenable.

In the end, Bagram represents the tension between American strategic desire and Afghan political reality. It is valuable ground, but no longer US ground. For the Taliban, holding it is proof of victory; for Washington, reclaiming it would require concessions or risks far greater than the base itself is worth. Trump’s blunt remarks highlight the enduring allure of Afghanistan as a geopolitical prize – but also the stubborn truth that history, geography, and Afghan resistance still constrain even the most powerful of foreign actors.

Denmark’s defence minister says the country has been the victim of a professional hybrid attack after drones flew over four airports overnight in the second such incursion in a matter of days.

The drone sightings began shortly before 10pm on Wednesday and ended just before 1am on Thursday. Flights were halted for several hours at Aalborg airport, which also serves as a military base, and airports in Esbjerg, Sønderborg and Skrydstrup were also affected. Skrydstrup is home to some of the Danish military’s fighter jets.

On Monday night Copenhagen airport was forced to close as a result of the presence of three drones.

“There can be no doubt that everything points to this being the work of a professional actor when we are talking about such a systematic operation in so many locations at virtually the same time,” the defence minister, Troels Lund Poulsen, said at a press conference. “This is what I would define as a hybrid attack using different types of drones.”

He added: This is an arms race against time because technology is constantly evolving.”

He said Denmark was considering activating Nato’s article 4, for the first time in Danish history, but a decision had not yet been made. Denmark contacted Nato on Thursday morning, he said, adding: “In addition to article 4, there are other things that can be done through Nato.”

Poulsen said that although the Danish armed forces had “a number of capabilities”, they would like to have more. The government has come under criticism in recent days for not shooting down the drones.

Denmark’s minister of justice, Peter Hummelgaard, said the goal of the flyovers was to sow fear and division and that the country would seek additional ways to neutralise drones, including proposing legislation to allow infrastructure owners to shoot them down. He said Copenhagen was “not ruling out anything in terms of who is behind this”.

Map of affected airports

The drone flights follow similar incursions in Poland and Romania and the violation of Estonian airspace by Russian fighter jets, which have raised tensions in light of Russia’s continuing invasion of Ukraine.

“The threat from hybrid attacks is here to stay,” said Hummelgaard, describing recent events as “deeply worrying incidents across Europe”.

A joint EU meeting has been called on Friday to discuss Europe’s drone defence and the establishment of a “drone wall”.

Danish police said the sightings on Wednesday night followed a similar pattern to the ones that shut down Copenhagen airport on Monday.

According to North Jutland police, “more than one drone” was seen near Aalborg airport flying with lights on. The first was seen at about 9.44pm local time and drones were still in the airspace after midnight.

Esbjerg, Sønderborg and Skrydstrup airports remained open despite the drone sightings.

The Danish prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, said the drone incursion that shut down Copenhagen airport for several hours was the “most serious attack on Danish critical infrastructure to date”.

Authorities are still investigating who was behind the flyover, but Frederiksen said she could not rule out Russia. Moscow has denied any involvement.

Barack Obama has said Donald Trump’s claims linking paracetamol to autism in infants is “violence against the truth” that could harm pregnant women if they were too scared to take pain relief.

Obama, who was being interviewed by David Olusoga at the O2 Arena, told the audience that Trump’s claims about paracetamol – branded as Tylenol in the US – had been “continuously disproved” and posed a danger to public health.

“We have the spectacle of my successor in the Oval Office making broad claims around certain drugs and autism that have been continuously disproved,” he said. “It undermines public health … that can do harm to women.”

On Monday Trump had said: “Taking Tylenol is not good … All pregnant women should talk to their doctors about limiting the use of this medication while pregnant.”

The comments were criticised by the UK health secretary, Wes Streeting, who encouraged women to ignore the president’s comments.

Obama argued there was a “tug of war” between two visions for the future of the US and humanity. On one side the progressive view where change came through democracy, the other driven by populists including Trump wanting a return to an older, more conservative worldview.

He said: “My successor has not been particularly shy about it. That desire is to go back to a very particular way of thinking about America, where ‘we, the people’, is just some people, not all people. And where there are some pretty clear hierarchies in terms of status and who ranks where.”

Obama was also critical of progressives who he said became “complacent” and “smug” in the 90s and 00s, “posturing that we believe in all these values because they were never tested. Now they’re being tested”.

The former president has generally kept a low profile after leaving office. But he has made increasingly frequent interventions as the political landscape in the US becomes more violent, restive and divided along partisan lines.

In London, Obama did not refer to Trump by name, only as “my successor”.

The evening started with Olusoga welcoming the London mayor, Sadiq Khan, who had been criticised by Trump on Tuesday during his speech at the UN in New York. Khan had responded by saying Trump had “shown he is racist, he is sexist, he is misogynistic and he’s Islamophobic”.

Obama is in London as part of a European speaking tour, which includes another date in Dublin on Friday. He is due to receive the Freedom of Dublin on Thursday.

China announced its plans for future cuts to greenhouse gas emissions on Wednesday, producing a scathing response from experts who said they were much too weak to stave off global catastrophe.

The world’s second-biggest economy is also the biggest source of carbon dioxide by far, and its decisions on how far and how fast to shift to a low-carbon model will determine whether the world can stay within relatively safe temperature bounds.

China’s plans are to cut emissions by between 7% and 10% of their peak by 2035 – a long way from the 30% cut that experts said was feasible and necessary.

Xi Jinping, the president of China, made the announcement at a summit of world leaders to discuss the climate crisis at the UN general assembly on Wednesday afternoon in New York.

The US president, Donald Trump, who made a sometimes rambling speech on Tuesday in which he dismissed the climate crisis as a “con job”, was not present.

Xi made an oblique reference to the US, saying “some countries” were not rising to the climate challenge. “The international community should stay focused on the right direction,” he added. “[Countries] must live up to their responsibilities. The rights of developing countries must be fully respected.”

But experts said China was failing to show leadership in its climate commitments. Kaysie Brown, associate director for climate diplomacy and governance at the E3G thinktank, said: “China’s 2035 target falls critically short of what is needed. It’s neither aligned with China’s economic decarbonisation, nor its own 2060 carbon neutrality goal.

“Without stronger near-term ambition, China risks undermining its claim to upholding multilateralism and its clean economy leadership, and sending mixed signals to global markets.”

However, others noted privately that China had a longstanding habit of setting unambitious targets but then substantially exceeding them. “Underpromising and overdelivering is what we expect from China,” said one person involved with climate diplomacy.

Bernice Lee, distinguished fellow at the Chatham House thinktank, said the business world and other governments would take their cue from China’s clear direction of travel, rather than the finer points of its plans.

“There are UN targets, and then there’s reality,” she said. “The reality is the country invested $625bn in clean energy last year – 31% of the global total. Its clean energy surge is reshaping the global economy and displacing coal at home. My bet is that other countries will read the writing on the wall and recognise that China is fully committed, and be reassured as they seek to shift off fossil fuels.”

China’s national plan, known as a nationally determined contribution (NDC) under the Paris agreement, will also contain measures to boost the share of non-fossil fuels to more than 30% of its energy consumption and to expand its wind and solar capacity to 3,600GW, more than six times 2020 levels.

Clean energy already makes up more than 10% of China’s GDP, and about a quarter of its economic growth, while its sale of components such as solar panels has driven down the cost of renewables by about 90% around the world in the last decade. The country has revolutionised electric vehicle and battery technology, fuelling their adoption around the world.

But China, whose emissions may be reaching a peak, is also still highly dependent on coal power, which enjoys strong political support within Xi’s government. New coal-fired power plants are still in development, despite a promise made in 2021 to “phase down” coal.

Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate adviser now with American University in Washington, told the Guardian: “China’s new commitment is a good sign that their clean energy economy is beginning to help them lower emissions, but it’s not [moving] quickly enough. China could reach these goals much sooner, by the end of this decade.

“In particular, China must also commit to shutting down many of its antiquated coalmines, which are responsible not only for the largest single source of CO2 emissions globally, but also 20% of the global methane emissions from fossil fuels.”

China’s commitments will help to shape the Cop30 UN climate summit taking place in Brazil in November. There, all countries are supposed to unveil their NDCs, in line with the Paris agreement.

The UN’s climate chief has already admitted to the Guardian that the commitments to be made in Belem will fall short of the emissions cuts needed to limit global heating to 1.5C above preindustrial levels, the pledge made in the 2015 Paris climate agreement.

The task for the UN, Brazil and countries hoping to avoid the worst ravages of the climate crisis will be to show how those inadequate national targets can be improved on, and set out a global plan that allows the Paris agreement to be fulfilled.

Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

Your guide to what Trump’s second term means for Washington, business and the world

US President Donald Trump has promised Arab and Muslim leaders that he will not allow Israel to annex the occupied West Bank, a move Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is considering in response to a number of countries formally recognising a Palestinian state this week.

Trump made the pledge on Wednesday at a meeting on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, where Arab and Muslim leaders expressed their growing alarm at Israel’s actions across the Middle East and pressed him to rein in Netanyahu and help end the war in Gaza.

His comments helped alleviate concerns that Netanyahu would push ahead with annexation, said one of the people who attended the meeting. “Netanyahu doesn’t do anything in the Middle East without a green light from the US,” the person said.

A second person who attended confirmed the president made the commitment, which was first reported by Politico.

Leaders and officials from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Jordan and Pakistan were present at the meeting.

As well as annexation, they discussed their fears that Israel could occupy or construct settlements in Gaza or forcibly displace Palestinians from the besieged enclave. They also raised concerns that the Netanyahu government could alter the legal and historical status of holy sites in Jerusalem, said a person briefed on the meeting. 

“Trump responded positively to the meeting and the points raised by the Arab leaders,” the person said. 

The UK, Canada, France and Australia were among a number of Israel’s traditional allies that formally recognised a Palestinian state this week in a rebuke to Netanyahu amid mounting international outrage over Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza.

Their leaders said the move was necessary to preserve the possibility of a two-state solution to the decades long Israeli-Palestinian conflict as Israel widens its control over Palestinian territory.

Trump administration officials have until now described Palestinian statehood as a “gift” to Hamas, echoing the Israeli government’s position.

The recognition of a Palestinian state triggered a furore in Israel, where far-right ministers in Netanyahu’s cabinet reiterated demands for the immediate annexation of the West Bank, which has been under Israeli occupation since 1967.

The Israeli prime minister has said he will announce his decision on annexation after he has held talks with Trump on Monday.

If Netanyahu moves ahead with annexation it could jeopardise the Abraham accords that led to four Arab states normalising relations with Israel in 2020.

The UAE, the first and most influential Arab state to sign the accords — a signature foreign policy success of Trump’s first term — has warned annexation would be a “red line”.

One of the attendees said the White House did not seem to fully grasp the seriousness of regional repercussions of West Bank annexation until this week.

Arab and European leaders have used this week’s UNGA meeting to press the Trump administration into doing more to end Israel’s war in Gaza, which was triggered by Hamas’s October 7 2023 attack.

US secretary of state Marco Rubio told Gulf officials on Wednesday that the administration understood “very clearly” that “the situation with Israel in Gaza is a key concern for everyone in this room here today.” He did not mention the West Bank, however.

An airport in northern Denmark was forced to close because of unauthorized drones in its airspace, police said early Thursday, the second drone-caused shutdown of a Danish airport this week as Europe grapples with a rise in cyberattacks and suspected Russian airspace violations.

“More than one drone” was seen flying near Aalborg airport, which is also an active military base, at about 9.45 p.m. local time Wednesday, and remained nearby until just before 1 a.m. Thursday, police said, according to Reuters. The drones are no longer in the area, police confirmed.

Police have not yet determined who is behind the latest incident but are investigating several theories, Denmark’s National Police Commissioner Thorkild Fogde told CNN.

The drone sighting comes two days after sightings of two or three large drones halted all takeoffs and landings for nearly four hours at the airport in the capital Copenhagen, in what the prime minister called a “serious attack on Danish critical infrastructure” according to Reuters.

It also follows a major cyberattack at a provider of check-in and boarding systems over the weekend, which disrupted operations at several of Europe’s busiest airports, including London’s Heathrow.

It’s unclear if the drones near Aalborg and Copenhagen are linked, but the pattern was similar, Fogde said. Both are cases of “unauthorized drones over-flying the airport area, breaking airport security, violating the airspace.”

In a separate incident this week, Norwegian authorities were forced to close Oslo Airport for around three hours after a drone sighting, causing more travel chaos.

In comments to Danish public broadcaster DR on Tuesday, Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen suggested Russia could be behind the disruption in Copenhagen, which she linked to other drone incidents in Poland and Romania, Reuters reported.

“I certainly cannot deny in any way that it is Russia,” Frederiksen told the broadcaster.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov called suggestions of Russian involvement “unfounded.”

Europe has been on high alert after a series of Russian breaches of NATO airspace. Last week, NATO intercepted three Russian jets that entered Estonian airspace, forcing them to flee, Tallinn’s foreign ministry and an alliance spokesperson said.

Three Russian MiG-31 fighter jets entered Estonian airspace over the Gulf of Finland without permission and remained there for a total of 12 minutes, the Estonian foreign ministry said.

Italian F-35 fighters that were stationed in Estonia as part of NATO’s Eastern Sentry operation, in addition to Swedish and Finnish aircraft, responded to the intrusion, NATO Allied Command Operations headquarters said. Estonian Prime Minister Kristen Michal said the Russian jets were subsequently “forced to flee.”

Russia later denied its jets had entered Estonian airspace, insisting the flight was carried out “in strict accordance with international rules” and “without violating the borders of other countries.”

In separate incidents earlier this month, NATO fighter jets shot down what the alliance said were Russian drones which had violated Polish and Romanian airspace during an attack on neighboring Ukraine.

The operation marked the first time that shots were fired by NATO since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which began in February 2022. The military alliance denounced Moscow’s “absolutely dangerous” behavior, and pledged to beef up defenses on its eastern flank.

Days later, Romania said a Russian drone breached its air space, prompting Bucharest to scramble fighter jets.

The two F-16 jets came close to downing the drone but pilots decided not to open fire after assessing the collateral risks.

After the Copenhagen incident Tuesday, Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, said on social media that “while the facts are still being established, it is clear we are witnessing a pattern of persistent contestation at our borders.”

“Our critical infrastructure is at risk,” she said. “And Europe will respond to this threat with strength and determination.”

This story has been updated.

Reuters

Reuters

Reuters

Donald Trump is facing a simmering Republican backlash over the policies of Robert F Kennedy Jr, the health secretary, amid unease over the administration’s pronouncements on the causes of autism and changes to children’s vaccine policy.

Republicans in Congress are threatening to “break ranks” after this week’s White House announcement by Trump – flanked by Kennedy – claiming a link between autism and Tylenol, an over-the-counter medication, also known as paracetamol, that is widely used to relieve pain experienced by pregnant women.

Medical experts and autism specialists say there is no scientific evidence to support the claim.

Leading the rebellion is Bill Cassidy, a Republican senator for Louisiana and chair of the Senate health committee, who previously voted to confirm Kennedy to become secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), despite having voiced misgivings about his anti-vaccine views.

“HHS should release the new data that it has to support this claim,” Cassidy, a medical doctor, wrote on social media. “The preponderance of evidence shows that this is not the case. The concern is that women will be left with no options to manage pain in pregnancy.”

Cassidy, who is up for re-election to the Senate next year, expanded on his comments in an interview with the Hill.

“You’re going to change a medical guideline without science?” he told the site, referring to last week’s Senate testimony by Susan Monarez. She said during a hearing that she was sacked as head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention after Kennedy pressed her to approve new childhood vaccination recommendations regardless of scientific data.

“I mean, you’re going to build a bridge without physics? You’re going to fly a plane without engineering?”

Other Republicans supported Cassidy’s critique, including Susan Collins, a senator for Maine.

“It appears that [Monarez] was under a lot of pressure to approve recommendations that may come from the [vaccine advisory] committee that may lack scientific basis, so that is disturbing and would undermine our public health efforts,” Collins told the Hill.

“I’m very pleased that Chairman Cassidy is having these hearings.”

Lisa Murkowski, a senator for Alaska, called Monarez’s description of the workings of Kennedy’s vaccine policy committee “very unsettling and very concerning”.

Others said Kennedy threatened to become a political liability for Trump.

“You see a lot of Republicans starting to break ranks here, and there’s a lot of noise. I think it will come down to Trump and what his tolerance level is for all this noise around [Kennedy],” one unnamed senator told the Hill.

“I don’t think he likes all the noise. He hasn’t liked that previously. He has a really low tolerance level for that, but Bobby Kennedy is different. He’s not like anyone else in the cabinet.”

Medical bodies including the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have endorsed the use of acetaminophen – a principal ingredient of Tylenol – as a treatment for fever and pain during pregnancy after Trump advised women during Monday’s press conference to avoid taking the drug and instead “tough it out”.