Category: 2. World

ABU DHABI, United Arab Emirates — A top United Arab Emirates official warned Israel on Tuesday that annexing the West Bank would cross a “red line” that would “end the vision of regional integration,” just two days before Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was slated to hold a major ministerial consultation on whether to advance the highly controversial move.

“Annexation would be a red line for my government, and that means there can be no lasting peace. It would foreclose the idea of regional integration and be the death knell of the two-state solution,” Emirati special envoy Lana Nusseibeh told The Times of Israel in an interview conducted in the UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Abu Dhabi.

It was a shocking alarm bell from Abu Dhabi ahead of the fifth anniversary of the Abraham Accords, which the UAE initiated by becoming the first Arab country to normalize relations with Israel in over a quarter-century.

Since then, Emirati officials have insisted that the move was an all-but-irreversible strategic choice, making Nusseibeh’s warning particularly dramatic, as it highlighted how averse the Gulf country is to Israel again considering annexation.

For every Arab capital you talk to, the idea of regional integration is still a possibility, but annexation to satisfy some of the radical extremist elements in Israel is going to take that off the table

The carefully crafted Emirati message about the potential “strategic loss” was voiced on the record for the first time since the Abraham Accords were signed. It came as Netanyahu geared up to discuss the matter of annexation with a small group of ministers on Thursday, in response to the plans of several major Western countries to recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly later this month, an Israeli official told The Times of Israel.

The decision to speak directly to an Israeli audience harked back to an op-ed UAE Ambassador to the United States Yousef Otaiba had published on the front page of a top Israeli newspaper just two months before the two countries signed a normalization agreement.

Then too, Abu Dhabi laid out a choice for Israelis as a previous Netanyahu government threatened to annex large parts of the West Bank within weeks.

“Recently, Israeli leaders have promoted excited talk about normalization of relations with the UAE and other Arab states. But Israeli plans for annexation and talk of normalization are a contradiction,” Otaiba wrote in June 2020.

The op-ed proved critical in laying the groundwork for the Abraham Accords, resonating overwhelmingly with Israelis — 80 percent of whom were shown to back forgoing annexation in favor of a normalization deal.

Netanyahu ultimately walked back from the annexation threat in exchange for diplomatic ties with Abu Dhabi in a deal brokered by US President Donald Trump’s first administration.

But The Times of Israel later revealed that the UAE only secured a US commitment not to back Israeli annexation until the end of Trump’s term.

Apparently recognizing the move would carry less weight without US backing, Netanyahu hasn’t gone ahead with it since.

The US commitment’s expiration coincided with the start of the Biden administration, which restored traditional US policy in favor of a two-state solution and adamantly against annexation.

With Trump now back in office, though, Netanyahu’s far-right coalition partners are increasingly adamant that a potential historic window has opened to declare Israeli sovereignty over West Bank settlements, given that the new administration appears either indifferent or supportive of the move.

Those hardliners have identified the recently announced plans of France, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and Belgium to recognize a Palestinian state as a unique opportunity to finally annex the West Bank, as Jerusalem weighs its response to the unilateral steps, which it deems a “reward” for Hamas’s October 7 onslaught. On Wednesday, indeed, Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich issued a proposal to annex 82% of the West Bank, and urged Netanyahu to adopt it.

Accordingly, Nusseibeh also voiced a not-so-subtle message directed at the Trump administration, with which her government has quickly cultivated a close relationship.

We trust that President Trump will not allow the Abraham Accords tenet of his legacy to be tarnished, threatened or derailed by extremists and radicals

“We believe that President Trump and his administration have many of the levers to lead the initiative for a wider integration of Israel into the region,” said the Emirati official, who serves as assistant minister for political affairs and special envoy for UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed.

Nusseibeh most recently was the UAE’s ambassador to the UN. She is seen as a particularly influential Emirati diplomat with close ties to the royal family.

“We trust that President Trump will not allow the Abraham Accords tenet of his legacy to be tarnished, threatened or derailed by extremists and radicals,” she added.

Like Otaiba, the Emirati special envoy appeared to try to direct her message toward the Israeli public, not the government, which polls indicate only has the support of a minority.

Arguing that annexation would effectively amount to a rejection of the Abraham Accords, Nusseibeh maintained “that choice should be put directly to the Israeli people.”

While the senior Emirati official warned about what Israel stood to lose if it proceeded with annexation, she also made a point of highlighting what Jerusalem could gain if it again shelved the plan.

Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, are still open to normalizing ties with Jerusalem, she indicated.

But they are conditioning such a move not just on the withdrawal of annexation plans but on Israel agreeing to establish a credible, irreversible pathway to a future Palestinian state. Still, they haven’t foreclosed the idea entirely, despite massive opposition to Israel’s prosecution of its nearly two-year war against Hamas.

“For every Arab capital you talk to, the idea of regional integration is still a possibility, but annexation to satisfy some of the radical extremist elements in Israel is going to take that off the table,” Nusseibeh said.

She asserted that Abu Dhabi did not come to this conclusion lightly.

“When Hamas tried to derail the Abraham Accords vision of regional integration with the October 7 terror attacks, we were firm in our response,” the special envoy said, highlighting the UAE’s immediate condemnation of the assault and recognition of Israel’s security concerns, while also “closely coordinating” to deliver more aid to Gaza than any other country.

“Over the last two years… our view was that the vision of the Abraham Accords remains pertinent — that you can’t let extremists set the trajectory of the region,” she said.

But with Israel taking increasingly far-reaching steps to entrench its presence in the West Bank and Gaza, she said, “we are worried that all of us in the Middle East are moving toward a point of no return” and that now is the time to reach out to Israelis before efforts to maintain Israel’s ties to regional partners are “irreparably damaged.”

“The Abraham Accords’ tenets of prosperity, coexistence, tolerance, integration and stability” have “never looked more under threat than [they are] today,” she said.

Nusseibeh assured Israelis that an off-ramp exists. “There is an outstretched hand, despite all of this misery, in the region to Israel. But, “annexation would withdraw that hand,” she said.

Israel is stepping up efforts to take over Gaza City this month, calling up tens of thousands of army reservists and planning to order 1 million Palestinians from their homes, despite widespread global opposition.

While global outcry soars at the war’s toll on Palestinian civilians and a recent United Nations body’s declaration of famine in the enclave, opposition is also growing within Israel, where the strain on the military has compounded concern that troops, as well as hostages, will be endangered. Soldiers are already operating on the Gaza City periphery, but they will storm its center in mid-September, according to an Israeli official who requested anonymity discussing military strategy.

Published on: September 3, 2025 5:16 PM

Russia has pledged to fully support China in its quest to surpass the United States in nuclear energy dominance. The statement came from Alexey Likhachev, head of Russia’s state nuclear agency Rosatom. He said China aims to overtake the US in the total capacity of nuclear reactors and is working aggressively toward that goal.

According to international reports, the United States currently leads the world in nuclear reactor capacity, with around 97 gigawatts. China ranks second, with 53.2 gigawatts as of April 2024. However, China plans to expand its capacity to 100 gigawatts, which would make it the new global leader.

Likhachev confirmed that Russia has already helped China build four nuclear reactors. He also said that four more are in the works, requiring large quantities of uranium and nuclear fuel. Russia will continue supplying its technology and expertise to support China’s nuclear expansion.

He emphasized that this cooperation will help China establish an entirely new nuclear fuel cycle. The development is based on Russian technology and material support. This signals deepening strategic cooperation between Moscow and Beijing in the energy and defense sectors.

Analysts view this move as part of a broader geopolitical alignment between Russia and China. It also reflects their shared ambition to challenge US dominance in critical global sectors, including nuclear technology.

The majority of the sweeping tariffs President Donald Trump imposed during his second term face one final litmus test that will determine whether he can continue to levy them – and also whether businesses are eligible for massive refunds.

That potentially dramatic turn in the tariff saga comes after a federal appeals court ruled on Friday that Trump unlawfully leaned on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose across-the-board duties on countries. Trump had used those powers to push import tax rates as high as 50% on India and Brazil – and as high as 145% on China earlier this year.

American businesses have paid over $210 billion as of August 24 to cover the tariffs that US courts have determined are illegal. On Tuesday, Trump acknowledged that the court’s decision, if upheld by the Supreme Court, could result in the US Treasury having to “give back” tariff revenue collected.

Trump told reporters Tuesday that his administration is readying an appeal to the Supreme Court, perhaps as soon as Wednesday. He is urging swift action to keep his tariffs in place beyond the October 14 deadline the appeals court set for when its ruling will take effect.

“It’s a very important decision, and frankly, if they make the wrong decision, it would be a devastation for our country,” Trump said.

The nation’s highest court may decide it isn’t willing to hear the Trump administration’s appeal, instead deferring to the lower court’s decision. If that’s the case, American businesses could have that money back in their pockets. But it won’t necessarily be an easy or quick process.

The Supreme Court will probably take on the case during the upcoming term, which begins next month; and the tariffs in question will likely remain in effect while the appeal is heard, said Ted Murphy, an international trade lawyer at Sidley Austin.

If the Supreme Court also finds Trump didn’t have the legal authority to impose tariffs under IEEPA, the administration will immediately have to cease those collections. However, it’s an open question how potential refunds would be handled, Murphy said.

It’s possible that the government could decide to refund the invalid tariffs to all importers who paid them, he said. Another possibility: “The government could also take the position that the court decision only applies to the named plaintiffs, thereby requiring importers to file their own court action.”

Or, what Murphy believes is most likely: “The government could also try to get the court to approve an administrative refund process, where importers have to affirmatively request a refund.”

Representatives from the Treasury Department, the government agency tasked with holding on to tariff revenue until its use is designated, declined to comment on how possible tariff refunds would be administered.

When a three-judge panel at the US Court of International Trade initially ruled in May that Trump’s use of IEEPA to levy tariffs were illegal, Thomas Beline, a trade attorney and partner at Cassidy Levy Kent, said he immediately began fielding calls from clients who asked him “When can I have my money back?” His response: Don’t hold your breath.

Instead, he’s been working with clients in advance of a final verdict to keep filing administrative protests with US Customs and Border Protection for tariff payments. This essentially prevents the entries from fully settling and could make it easier down the road to potentially get a refund, he said.

Many of his clients have been approached by investment firms trying to buy their stake in potential refunds.

It’s a bit of a gamble because, on one hand, many businesses making hefty tariff payments remain anxious for some immediate liquidity. They don’t want to wait for a refund that may not even happen. On the other hand, it would mean they aren’t able to get their full tariff payment refunded.

While businesses may be elated by the prospect of tariff refunds, it wouldn’t necessarily be a win-win for the economy.

The hundreds of billions of dollars of tariff revenue that Treasury has held on to in its general fund means the government has borrowed less money than it otherwise would have. Reversing the tariffs would necessitate more borrowing to pay its bills.

That could mean selling more Treasury bonds, which could push yields – and borrowing costs across the economy – higher.

An increase in the supply of bonds to cover the unanticipated shortfall in tariff revenue means the government could have to offer higher yields to attract investors.

The yield on the 30-year Treasury bond on Wednesday briefly hit 5%, its highest level since July, as investors demanded more compensation to hold US debt.

“If this ruling is upheld, refunds of existing tariffs are on the table, which could cause a surge in Treasury issuance and yields,” Ed Mills, a Washington policy analyst at Raymond James, said in a note.

Refunds could also spark concerns of runaway inflation, Gary Hufbauer, a nonresident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, told CNN.

“During the Biden administration, huge budget deficits plus loose monetary policies unleashed the inflation genie,” he said.

Under the Trump administration, the nation’s budget deficit has continued to grow, even with the influx in tariff revenue. Trump’s strategy to lower interest rates has been to attack the Federal Reserve, especially Chair Jerome Powell, and put the Board in his crosshairs by attempting to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook and replace her with a Trump loyalist who could influence the rate-setting committee to cut borrowing costs.

If he’s successful in getting the central bank to lower interest rates while there are possibly massive tariff refunds being distributed, “that would refresh investor memories about the Biden years,” Hufbauer said, referring to higher inflation.

All but two Western leaders shy away from Xi’s paradepublished at 08:44 British Summer Time

08:44 BST

Paul Kirby
Europe digital editor

Image source, Reuters

Most Western leaders have chosen not to attend China’s “Victory Day” parade.

The two who have gone, Slovakia’s Robert Fico and Aleksandar Vucic of Serbia, are no strangers to controversy but they have very different reasons for being there.

Both attended Russia’s Victory Day parade last May, and both have met Russia’s Vladimir Putin in Beijing, just as they did in Moscow.

But Vucic’s Serbia, although a candidate to join the EU, has cultivated close economic ties with China and he has sought to steer a neutral course with Russia, despite condemning its war in Ukraine.

Fico is in a very different position.

His country is a member of both the EU and Nato, and yet he has called for relations with Russia to be normalised.

While the EU wants a halt to Russian oil and gas imports by the end of 2027, Fico wants his Russian energy supply increased and Ukraine has sought to disrupt the pipeline providing it.

Putin may compliment the Slovak leader on his “independent foreign policy”, but Slovakia’s European allies don’t see it quite that way.

Image source, SPUTNIK/KREMLIN/EPA/Shutterstock

Asked whether Fico was representing the EU in Beijing, a European Commission spokeswoman gave a terse “no”, pointing out that China was a “key enabler” of Russia’s full-scale war in Ukraine.

His opponents at home accuse him of serving Russian propaganda and betraying his country.

Fico argues he’s in Beijing “as a new world order is being formed” and says that after talks with Putin he has come to several conclusions and has a “serious message” for Zelensky when they meet on Friday.

What we’re looking into after Trump says US attacked drug-carrying boat off Venezuelapublished at 10:42 British Summer Time

10:42 BST

Thomas Copeland
BBC Verify Live journalist

US President Donald Trump says the US has carried out a strike against a vessel in the southern Caribbean killing 11 people he called “narcoterrorists”.

Our team at BBC Verify is looking into what we know about the strike and its legality.

The president posted on social media that a military operation on Tuesday had targeted members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua – which the Trump administration has designated a terrorist organisation.

The post was accompanied by a grainy aerial video showing a boat speeding across choppy waters before it bursts into flames.

Trump said the vessel was in international waters and was transporting illegal narcotics bound for the US.

We’re speaking to experts about the legality of the strike with reference to maritime, international and US law.

We’re also looking into an unsubstantiated claim by Venezuela’s communications minister that the video shared by Trump was made using artificial intelligence.