Category: 2. World

The news: President Donald Trump said that he has found “very wealthy people” to buy TikTok and would reveal more in the coming weeks, further chipping away at fears that the app will be banned in the US after he extended the forced sale deadline multiple times.

Meanwhile, TikTok’s swath of new features and presence at Cannes Lions signaled that the platform isn’t overly worried about the potential of a US ban. TikTok is currently testing “bulletins,” an Instagram Channels-like feature that lets creators and brands directly message their followers. Chatter about the ban was muted at Cannes, overshadowed in part by high profile AI feature announcements.

The damage: After much anxiety at the start of the year, TikTok’s looming ban still hasn’t gone away—but concern that the app could be permanently blocked is beginning to fade. While that’s obviously good news for TikTok, the uncertainty has still left an impact on its business.

TikTok CPMs fell by as much as 80% in January 2025 as the first ban took hold, per AdRoll estimates. Its two biggest short-form video competitors, YouTube and Meta, stood to gain as much as 50% of ad dollars reallocated from TikTok. While advertisers are unlikely to abandon TikTok entirely, uncertainty has driven spending and user activity to its competitors.

U.S. President Donald Trump speaks as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu waves following a meeting in the White House, in Washington, U.S., April 7, 2025. File
| Photo Credit: Reuters

“Amid ongoing Israeli military operations, scores of people have reportedly been killed and injured, including while waiting for food,” the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said.

“Over the weekend, there were numerous reports of attacks hitting homes, as well as schools hosting displaced people,” it added.

Catastrophic hunger

OCHA noted that amid the “heavy constraints” on bringing in supplies and carrying out humanitarian operations across Gaza, people are going hungry.

“The World Food Programme (WFP) reports that one in five people faces catastrophic hunger, and more than 90,000 women and children urgently require treatment for malnutrition,” it said.

WFP has about 130,000 metric tons of food positioned in the region, ready to serve people in Gaza if improved access is granted.

Call for access

OCHA reiterated calls on Israel to facilitate the access and entry of essential supplies into Gaza, through the available crossing points and corridors, to address people’s desperate needs. Fuel, in particular, is urgently needed.

“The UN and its partners call on the Israeli authorities, with utmost urgency, to allow the entry of fuel into Gaza. This is critically needed for life-saving operations – including hospitals, water and sanitation equipment, telecommunications, moving cargo from crossings, and operating community kitchens,” it said.

Displacement continues

Mass displacement continues in the war-torn enclave.

On Sunday, the Israeli military issued new evacuation orders for parts of Jabalya and Gaza City, impacting around 150,000 people. Those forced to flee join thousands already crowded into shelters lacking water, sanitation, and medical care. Shelter materials such as tents and timber have not entered Gaza in 17 weeks.

Most of the territory remains under displacement orders, OCHA said, and Israel, as the occupying power, has a legal obligation to protect civilians.

Search for the missing

Meanwhile, in war-torn Gaza, thousands of families remain trapped in a spiral of anxiety and despair as they search for their missing loved ones.

Among them is Anwar Hawas, a young woman in her twenties, searching desperately for Hadi, her 17-year-old autistic brother who has been missing for weeks.

“Every day I go out in the morning and return in the evening, hoping to find him,” she told UN News.

The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics reports that more than 11,000 individuals are missing in Gaza since the war started on 7 October 2023, the majority among them women and children. 

New York
CNN
 — 

After months of speculation and multiple bids from would-be American buyers, TikTok may finally be getting a new owner.

President Donald Trump teased over the weekend that there is a buyer for TikTok, whom he will announce in two weeks, which could secure the app’s long-term future in the United States.

“We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I’ll need probably China approval, and I think President Xi will probably do it,” President Donald Trump said on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo.” He added: “It’s a group of very wealthy people.”

TikTok’s parent company ByteDance is on the clock to spin off the popular short-form video app’s US operations by September 17 or face a ban in the United States. Trump has repeatedly delayed enforcement of the TikTok sale-or-ban law signed by then-President Joe Biden last year — which was originally set to go into effect in January — in hopes of making a deal for an American owner to acquire the app.

The app is used by about 170 million Americans to find news, entertainment, community and, in some cases, to make a living.

It remains unclear whether the Chinese government would bless the sale of TikTok by its China-based owner.

In April, a deal that would have transferred majority control of TikTok’s US operations to American ownership was nearly finalized. But it fell apart after Trump announced additional tariffs on China, forcing the White House to announce another 75-day delay to keep the app operational in the United States. Trump extended the deadline again by 90 days earlier this month.

“Discussions with China regarding the sale of TikTok have been ongoing at the highest level, and they will continue,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a briefing Monday. “As you know, we have another 90-day extension, and it’s just to continue to work out this deal and make sure that TikTok stays on for the American people — that’s the president’s main goal in this, while protecting their privacy and their security.”

ByteDance and TikTok did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Monday.

Here’s what we know about who could buy TikTok.

Perhaps the most likely buyer for TikTok is a group of investors primed to acquire it in April before tariffs caused negotiations to stall.

Under that deal, a number of venture capital firms, private equity funds and tech giants were set to invest in a company that would control TikTok’s US operations, with ByteDance retaining a 20% stake in the spinoff company, a source familiar with the deal told CNN at the time.

For the deal to comply with the law, ByteDance can own no more than 20% of the platform. The law also states that the app’s US operations cannot coordinate with ByteDance on the app’s algorithm or data-sharing practices.

At the time of Trump’s April extension, the White House did not name the parties with whom it had been discussing a TikTok takeover deal. But the source familiar with the discussions told CNN that new and existing US TikTok investors, ByteDance and the Trump administration had all agreed to the deal.

Earlier this year, multiple news outlets, including Politico, NPR and Bloomberg reported that Oracle — TikTok’s current US technology partner — was a top contender to take over the app’s US operations, potentially in partnership with the app’s American investors, such as private equity firm General Atlantic and investment firm Susquehanna International Group.

Oracle and Susquehanna did not immediately respond Monday to CNN’s requests for comment. A representative for General Atlantic declined to comment.

There are several other prominent bidders who have also raised their hands to acquire the platform’s US operations.

They include a group led by billionaire former Los Angeles Dodgers owner and Project Liberty founder Frank McCourt and “Shark Tank” star Kevin O’Leary, with backing from Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian. That group, which calls itself the “The People’s Bid for TikTok,” has said it would aim to update the app’s technology to give users and creators more control over their data and experience on the platform.

“Every day that passes without a qualified divestiture of TikTok puts Americans at greater risk of manipulation and surveillance,” a spokesperson for Project Liberty said Monday in a statement to CNN. “The People’s Bid remains the only solution under consideration that fully satisfies the law and moves TikTok to a made-in-America tech stack. We look forward to working with members of the Administration, policymakers, and our many outstanding partners in The People’s Bid to achieve this goal.”

Another potential buyer group includes social media influencer Jimmy Donaldson, better known as MrBeast, and Employer.com founder Jesse Tinsley. A representative for the group declined to comment on the status of the group’s bid on Monday.

The artificial intelligence firm Perplexity said in March that it was seeking to acquire TikTok. In a statement at the time, the company said it was “singularly positioned to rebuild the TikTok algorithm without creating a monopoly, combining world-class technical capabilities with Little Tech independence.” Perplexity did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Monday.

Trust in the UN nuclear inspectorate is broken inside Iran, the country’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has told Emmanuel Macron, as European nations issued a statement in defence of its head.

The two men spoke as Iranian officials said the total number of Iranian deaths during the 12-day air war with Israel and the US had risen to 935 people, including 38 children and 132 women.

Pezeshkian criticised Rafael Grossi, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director general, in the call, according to an Iranian account, saying he had not condemned the Israeli and US attacks even though they had been in flagrant breach of the UN charter and the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT). His language was more constrained than others in Iran, where the conservative newspaper Kayhan said if Grossi came to the country he should be put on trial and sentenced to death for links to the Israeli spy agency the Mossad.

A joint statement on Monday from the UK, France and Germany said they condemned threats against Grossi “and reiterate our full support to the agency and [Grossi] in carrying out their mandate”, calling on Iran to cooperate with it.

“We call on Iranian authorities to refrain from any steps to cease cooperation with the IAEA. We urge Iran to immediately resume full cooperation in line with its legally binding obligations, and to take all necessary steps to ensure the safety and security of IAEA personnel,” it said.

But the sense in Iran of western double standards is fuelling a deep feeling of grievance, as well as a refusal to give the IAEA access to make an independent assessment of the damage to Iran’s nuclear sites, leaving such assessments to highly politicised reports emerging from the US.

According to the Iranian account of the Sunday evening call, Pezeshkian told the French president: “What guarantee is there that our facilities won’t be attacked again, even if we cooperate?” He also questioned why Israel, which is not a member of the NPT, had been allowed to become a source of evidence for IAEA reports.

Despite persistent reports that Iran and the US are using back channels to set up further indirect talks under the mediation of Oman, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Majid Takht-Ravanchi, said no such dates or times had been agreed.

A compromise being floated by the US special envoy Steve Witkoff suggests that Iran be entitled to enrich uranium, a key Iranian demand, but in a consortium on the Iranian island of Kish under severe constraints.

Speaking at a seminar hosted by the UK defence thinktank the Royal United Services Institute, Nicholas Hopton, a former UK ambassador to Iran, said huge damage had been done to the Iranian regime, but questioned whether any of Israel’s key objectives had been met including regime change. He said: “There was little evidence that Iran was rushing to a bomb three weeks ago and apparently now 400 kilos of highly enriched uranium are unaccounted for.

“It will be a long time before the IAEA can comment authoritatively on the extent to which Iran’s nuclear programme has even degraded.”

Ali Ansari, a professor of Iranian history at St Andrews University, said: “There is a lot of shouting about nationalist solidarity that may subside as the dust settles. The official narrative that Iran has scored a major triumph against Israel is a classic case of when George Orwell talks about nationalism and indifference to reality.”

He claimed that in reality serious discussions were going on within the state about what went wrong, its air defences, the lack of civil defence and the shocking and profound levels of infiltration of the security forces. “People are saying the one thing we thought the Islamic Republic can do is defend us and they cannot even do that. The Islamic Republic that went into this conflict will not be the Islamic Republic that comes out,” he said.

The White House said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney “caved” to pressure from President Donald Trump in rescinding a tax on big US technology firms.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Monday Canada had made a mistake in trying to levy the tax, and that Carney called Trump on Sunday evening to say he would drop it.

Since Trump returned to office, the two countries have been fighting over trade. In response to the tax, which he called a “blatant attack”, Trump on Friday called off trade deal negotiations and threatened to raise tariffs.

Canada then said it would halt collection of payments, which were due on Monday, and introduce legislation to scrap the tax.

“President Trump knows how to negotiate, and he knows he is governing the best country and the best economy in this world,” Leavitt said in response to a question from a reporter.

“Every country on the planet needs to have a good relationship with the US,” she said, and called removal of the tax a “big victory for our tech companies and our workers here at home”.

Canada’s digital services tax (DST) would have meant US tech giants including Amazon, Meta, Google and Apple faced a 3% charge on Canadian revenue above $20m (£15m).

On Sunday, Canada’s finance minister, François-Philippe Champagne, issued a statement saying the tax would be rescinded.

“The DST was announced in 2020 to address the fact that many large technology companies operating in Canada may not otherwise pay tax on revenues generated from Canadians,” he said.

“Canada’s preference has always been a multilateral agreement related to digital services taxation,” the statement added.

Pierre Poilievre, the leader of Canada’s opposition Conservative Party, criticised scrapping the tax at the “11th hour”.

In a post on X, he said the prime minister had “put his elbows down” – in reference to the “elbows up” phrase used by Carney and his Liberal Party when campaigning in this April’s election to signify they were prepared to defend Canadian interests against the US.

Poilievre urged Carney to “insist that the US immediately rescind softwood lumber tariffs” in exchange, adding that “we need to make gains for our workers in these talks”.

Many countries, including the UK, are changing how they tax large multinational technology firms, which have millions of customers and advertisers around the world, but high corporation tax bills due to the way their businesses are structured.

It was estimated that Canada’s tax would cost the tech giants more than C$2bn ($1.5bn; £1.06bn) in its first year as the tax was being applied retroactively to January 2022.

Last year’s federal budget estimated the tax would bring in C$5.9bn in total over the next five years.

The Middle East has in recent weeks witnessed one of its most intense military confrontations in decades: a full-scale war between Iran and Israel that has transformed regional dynamics in ways few could have predicted. This conflict, which was designed to weaken the Iran-led “Axis of Resistance” and consolidate Israel’s regional hegemony, has produced outcomes entirely contrary to what its planners in Washington and Tel Aviv envisioned. Israel’s military superiority, intended to strengthen its geopolitical position, has not only failed to achieve that goal but has also pushed Arab states away from normalizing ties with Israel and toward diplomacy with Iran. These developments are the direct result of unilateral, short-sighted policies that relied on military power instead of diplomacy and ignored the complex geopolitics of the Middle East. This report argues that the new Middle East, contrary to American and Israeli expectations, is being reshaped to the advantage of their rivals—revealing the strategic failure of their aggressive policies.

Military superiority, diplomatic defeat

In its recent war with Iran, Israel once again demonstrated its military capabilities. Precision strikes on Iranian military infrastructure, backed by US logistical and intelligence support, did achieve a relative weakening of the defensive stronghold of the Axis of Resistance. At first glance, this military success seemed like a major victory for Israel. However, this superiority, which was expected to reinforce Israel’s position in the region and advance the process of normalisation with Arab states, has had the opposite effect. The scale of the attacks and their human toll—including widespread destruction and civilian casualties—sparked a wave of anger and resentment among Arab publics. Countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, which had previously taken steps toward normalization with Israel under the Abraham Accords, now find themselves under domestic pressure to reassess these policies.

Analysts argue that this outcome stems from the Israeli and American policymakers’ disregard for the social and political realities of the region. They assumed military dominance would break resistance to normalization, but this assumption does not align with today’s complex Middle Eastern realities. Instead, this display of force has pushed Arab countries closer to Iran, which, by leveraging its role as a supporter of the Palestinian cause, has managed to garner more regional sympathy. This paradox shows that military victories without diplomatic foundations not only fail to achieve political objectives but can also lead to diplomatic isolation.

Arab states pivot toward diplomacy with Iran

One of the most unexpected consequences of the war has been the growing inclination of Arab states toward diplomacy with Iran. Following the conflict, reports emerged of secret talks between Iran and several Arab countries—including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Oman—aimed at restoring diplomatic relations and expanding economic cooperation. This shift, particularly among Gulf Cooperation Council members, reflects a new understanding of the need to balance regional relationships. Arab states, having witnessed the failure of military-centered policies to bring regional stability, now see engagement with Iran as a way to reduce tensions and bolster their standing in a reshaped Middle East.

This diplomatic pivot is especially notable in the case of Saudi Arabia. After years of fierce rivalry with Tehran, Riyadh has concluded that continuing hostile policies could lead to its diplomatic isolation. Talks to restore bilateral ties, which had repeatedly stalled in the past, are now moving forward with renewed momentum. These developments indicate that US and Israeli aggressive strategies have not weakened Iran but rather enhanced its diplomatic position in the region. Iran, seizing these new opportunities, has positioned itself as a reliable partner for Arab states seeking to lessen their dependence on Western powers.

The limits of America’s unilateralism

As Israel’s main backer in this conflict, the United States played a central role in planning and executing military operations against Iran. But this support—intended to consolidate U.S. regional hegemony—has yielded paradoxical results. Instead of reinforcing America’s standing in the Middle East, Washington’s unilateral policies have eroded its influence among traditional allies. Arab countries that once depended on US military and economic support are now actively diversifying their foreign relations to reduce this dependence. This trend is particularly evident in countries like Egypt and Jordan, long-standing US partners.

America’s short-sighted policies, which focused on unconditional support for Israel, have come at the cost of its diplomatic credibility. Ignoring the humanitarian consequences of the war and dismissing Arab calls for mediation have severely undermined trust in the US as an impartial broker. This vacuum has opened the door for other actors—including China and Russia—to play a more active role in regional diplomacy. These shifts underscore America’s strategic failure in the Middle East, where an overreliance on military power over diplomacy has, in the final analysis, diminished its influence.

Rebuilding a new Middle East: Opportunities and challenges

The new Middle East emerging from the Iran–Israel war is taking shape in ways very different from what the United States and Israel anticipated. The region is moving toward multipolarity, where no single player can impose its hegemony. Iran, through active diplomacy and its championing of the Palestinian cause, has managed to strengthen its role as a key regional actor. Meanwhile, Israel, despite its military superiority, faces increasing diplomatic isolation.

A major feature of this new Middle East is the rise of regional diplomacy. Arab states that once depended heavily on external support are now working to build alliances more independent of Western powers. Although this process faces challenges such as historical disputes and economic rivalries, it holds the potential to ease regional tensions. For the US and Israel—who had expected the war to solidify their dominance—this amounts to a strategic defeat.

A critique of the hegemonic illusion

The recent war between Iran and Israel has laid bare a harsh truth: the illusion that military superiority can deliver geopolitical hegemony has not only failed to achieve American and Israeli goals but is actually strengthening their rivals and reshaping the Middle East against their interests. The unilateral, aggressive policies of Washington and Tel Aviv—crafted with little regard for the region’s social, political, and cultural complexities—have ended up boosting Iran’s diplomatic standing and drawing Arab states closer to Tehran. This strategic failure is the direct result of prioritising hard power over diplomacy and ignoring regional realities.

The new Middle East, contrary to US and Israeli expectations, is a multipolar region where diplomacy and regional cooperation take precedence. Arab countries, recognizing the futility of militarized approaches, are redefining their ties with Iran and reducing their reliance on Western powers. These developments serve as a stark warning to American and Israeli policymakers: continuing down the current path, built on the illusion of military victory, will only lead to greater isolation and weakened influence. This new Middle East is not a product of Washington and Tel Aviv’s designs, but rather the outcome of regional resistance to their short-sighted, unilateral strategies.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.