Is Caribbean unity at a turning point? Since the brazen and horrific US attack on Venezuela in January, the Caribbean’s regional trade bloc CARICOM has been in crisis. What has been left out by much of the media is the assistance that some Caribbean countries like Trinidad and Tobago gave the United States in its imperialist attack on the South American country.

Trinidad and Tobago support of the US

The Dominican Republic and Guyana all played a role in providing the US with bases and logistical support. However, more than any other country, Trinidad and Tobago provided temporary radar surveillance and the airbase that the US could use to launch its criminal attack that killed at least 80 Venezuelans.

Since then, Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar has defended the strikes and launched her own verbal attacks on CARICOM member states. She has even gone as far as to question CARICOM’s viability and failure to reflect the economic and geopolitical interests of Trinidad and Tobago.

These tensions have brought into sharp focus the growing challenges in working to bring about regional integration in the Caribbean.

Caribbean collaboration

The region has a long history of regional integration attempts going back almost 70 years with the most recent — the short-lived West Indies Federation — collapsing in 1962.

This latest division will likely test the resilience of CARICOM at a critical time when US imperialism is particularly volatile and a threat to the entire region. As small island states, Caribbean countries have managed to survive the post-independence period through regional cooperation and negotiating as a single bloc.

However, beneath this resilience hides an elite-driven, state-centric approach to development that reproduces economic dependency and creates the conditions for wealthier member states, like Trinidad and Tobago, to pursue unilateral agreements with larger powers.

T&T’s grievances are a decade in the making

To understand how we got here, we have to look at what is motivating the Trinidad and Tobago government to take the position it has against CARICOM.

For months, Persad-Bissessar has been questioning CARICOM’s effectiveness on maintaining regional security, challenging the idea of Trinidad and Tobago’s place within the bloc — especially as the country contributes up to 20% of CARICOM’s annual budget, which amounts to $20 million.

She has since demanded that CARICOM’s secretary general, Carla Barnett, step down once her five-year term ends later this year.

Persad-Bissessar has also repeatedly defended the US’ controversial actions in the lead up to its attack on Venezuela. Between September and December 2025, the US murdered 115 people in the Caribbean Sea on the unproven pretext of “drug smuggling”.

Since then, many fishermen across the region have been reluctant to go out to sea for fear of a US strike, which has had adverse effects on people’s livelihoods.

In September 2025, Roosevelt Skerrit, Prime Minister of Dominica, asserted that the Caribbean Sea should remain a “zone of peace” in response to the increased US military build up against Venezuela.

However, Persad-Bissessar also defended the US’ presence, stating:

CARICOM has chosen to support the Maduro narco-government through the fake zone of peace narrative.

Demographic shock

For Trinidad and Tobago, the position on the US strikes on Venezuela is different from other Caribbean countries. This is in part due to the proximity of the island nations, which is only 11-12km (7 miles) away from Venezuela, making the Caribbean country the closest to South America.

This is important because, for over a decade, migration from Venezuela to Trinidad has steadily increased, due in part to the economic mismanagement of the Maduro government, and the brutal and coercive US sanctions that were designed to cripple the Venezuelan economy. As a result, more than 30,000 Venezuelans have settled in Trinidad and Tobago, adding to the population of 1.5 million people in a short space of time.

This demographic shock has produced familiar anti-immigrant rhetoric around integration, crime, housing and competition for jobs that often emerge in migration discourse in the West. However, in Trinidad and Tobago, this migration wave has exacerbated existing issues, including public service provision for citizens and general unpreparedness for refugees outside of the Caribbean.

Persad-Bissessar’s frustrations stem from what she and other Trinidadian elites view as the disproportionate humanitarian focus that CARICOM has prioritised in relation to the Venezuelan migration.

For Trinidad and Tobago, the priority is to militarise its border as a measure against what it sees as the threat of drug trafficking. These priorities have found a perfect synergy with the US’ refocus on controlling the Caribbean on the dubious basis of security.

Whether Persad-Bissessar knows it or not, she is positioning her country as a key node of US imperialism in the Americas, which will continue to increase tension within CARICOM itself.

CARICOM and the global economy

It could be argued that the tensions between CARICOM and Trinidad and Tobago are structurally rooted in the roles that both polities play in the global economy.

For CARICOM, its state-centric and elite-driven structure means that a lot of its decision making is dominated by heads of government, senior technocrats and private sector lobbies.

It has been said that CARICOM is designed to manage capitalism in the Caribbean. Many critics, such as Jamaican economist Norman Girvan, have argued that such a structure ensures that narrow interests centred around attracting foreign investment, harmonising tax incentives for multinationals and maintaining a tourism-focused development model, deepens the Caribbean’s position at the periphery of the global economy.

To-date, regional integration through CARICOM has failed to include workers or unions in regional decision making, develop plans for regional public ownership in energy, transport and food systems — all of which could strengthen state and regional systems.

Defenders of CARICOM would argue that, as small island states, CARICOM was created to strengthen and amplify the diplomatic power of individual Caribbean countries through collective action. This allows them to better resist absorption into US foreign policy and economic interests.

CARICOM’s foreign policy machinery, the Council for Foreign and Community Relations (COFCOR), was designed specifically for this. It creates coordinated foreign policy positions for CARICOM member states to act as a collective in drafting and creating treaties and trade agreements outside of the US sphere. The aim being to reduce dependence on the United States.

The consequences of foreign dependence

For Garvin and earlier thinkers (prior to CARICOM’s inception) like Walter Rodney, the issue is that Caribbean elites reproduce and maintain Caribbean dependency on foreign investment, remittances, extractive industries and trade with global powers like the US and European Union (EU). This is because they benefit directly from those structures in terms of having access to those markets. They are more inclined to compromise on policy in order to enjoy the benefits that they as a class could access from the developed world.

As a result, we have a region with a weak industrial policy, limited economic diversification and low wages.

It is a region also beholden to EU development funds, IMF frameworks and WTO rules. Even if CARICOM resists US imperialism in a limited context, the elite structure ensures that this resistance will never go far enough in creating full economic and political self-determination.

The bloc’s limitations in assisting Cuba as it faces economic strangulation by the US is an example of this. This weakness cascades into its relationship with wealthier members like Trinidad and Tobago, which clashes with CARICOM regionalism when it starts to obstruct its own attempt to align with global capital.

There is a perception among wealthier Caribbean countries that CARICOM holds them back from acting with full autonomy. Trinidad and Tobago policymakers increasingly question why they must go through their lower-income CARICOM counterparts to craft foreign policy given the country is significantly more industrialised than its neighbours.

As such, Trinidad’s own elites seek to assert their country’s ability to form independent agreements with the US and dictate their own migration policy. Trinidad and Tobago’s elites do not feel as dependent on regional integration as less developed Caribbean countries. Meanwhile, CARICOM does not have any real mechanism to enforce regional integration and cooperation of member states.

Is CARICOM at risk of collapse?

The unilateral foreign policy positions taken by Trinidad and Tobago are concerning for the long term viability of the bloc.

Last year, as US military build-up was increasing, Trinidad’s foreign affairs minister stated there was “no need to consult CARICOM”. Her comments indicate that at least in this moment, Trinidad and Tobago’s government is prepared to move the country away from multilateralism.

The effect is that distrust and suspicion have increased among other CARICOM member states towards Trinidad which could have an effect on regional cooperation in other areas.

However, Trinidad and Tobago is one of the biggest beneficiaries of CARICOM, accounting for a significant share of Trinidadan manufactured goods, energy products and financial services.

If Trinidad and Tobago was to leave CARICOM, it could incur trade losses of up to $3 billion. As such, a sudden Brexit-style departure would be unlikely, even with the current tensions.

The effects of CARICOM hostilities

Nonetheless, a departure is not impossible, but Trinidad and Tobago’s issues, if left unresolved, could weaken CARICOM in the long term.

Trinidad and Tobago doe not have to formally leave CARICOM to undermine the bloc and its neighbours. It could simply reduce or cease engagement altogether over time if the government determines the bloc is unable to serve its interests.

As CARICOM lacks the regional mechanisms to enforce unity, there is space for Trinidad and Tobago to undertake this. However, Trinidad and Tobago’s lack of engagement would weaken CARICOM.

This is the threat that Trinidad and Tobago’s position poses, and it has already started.

The Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, urged governments across CARICOM to negotiate as a single bloc since historically, the US has taken Caribbean states and interests more seriously when they negotiate together. The actions of Trinidad and Tobago sets a greater precedent for the US to expect bilateral negotiations going forward for other Caribbean countries.

Regional shifts

These changes are not without their consequences. Venezuela, in response to Trinidad and Tobago’s US assistance, has cancelled a number of key oil and gas deals. Relations with the two countries have remained cold, even with Venezuela’s new President, Delcy Rodriguez.

Rodriguez, on her first foreign visit in April, skipped past Trinidad and Tobago and went to Grenada and then to Barbados to discuss partnerships on a range of issues, such as food and energy security. Unlike Trinidad, both Caribbean countries resisted US pressure to install a radar system and to allow their territories to serve as launch points for an attack on Venezuela.

This signals another trend going forward: if CARICOM continues to pull away from each other, many other countries will see the opportunity to form partnerships with individual states rather than the collective bloc. In the short to medium term, this could seem like an opportunity. But over time, as small island states, this builds dependency and locks the region into internal competition with each other.

For regional integration to work, the Caribbean must rethink how CARICOM functions. It faces too many internal contradictions that will undermine it. This is the challenge facing the Caribbean: how can it create and maintain regional integration that accommodates all the economies in the region?

An alternative to CARICOM?

Perhaps a completely different model is needed to resolve the tension between national and regional interests with a goal of liberating the Caribbean from the divergent and competing capitalist priorities that CARICOM operates under.

The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) demonstrated the possibility in 2004. Both Cuba and Venezuela founded ALBA to challenge neoliberal blocs like CARICOM, and the US-led Free Trade Area of the Americas. They did this by implementing a different economic model of regional integration that does not foment competition amongst its members.

ALBA prioritised solidarity through shared development plans, joint public enterprises, mutual aid during crises and energy integration through barter arrangements as opposed to market determinants. It was deliberately post-capitalist by design and sought to empower Caribbean countries to delink from US-led capitalism.

Countries like Grenada, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Dominica and Antigua and Barbuda joined ALBA at the time, benefiting from Cuban doctors and engineer exchange, as well as public ownership in the development of regional institutions like the development bank.

But ALBA would go into decline in 2014, due to Venezuela’s economic crisis and the devastating US sanctions imposed.

However, it represents the most recent attempt at creating a regional integration alternative in the Caribbean that resolves the internal contradictions of regional integration in its current form. It shows that such alternative models of regional integration are possible.

What does the Caribbean need now?

If models that prioritise public ownership over elite control are implemented, then the tensions between regional integration and national self determination that define the conflict between Trinidad and Tobago and CARICOM can be mitigated. And in time, completely dissolved.

Solving the conflict is essential for the Caribbean not only to meet the challenges presented by US imperialism but on other issues, such as the climate crisis and growing food and energy security.

Featured image via Roberto Schmidt/ Getty Images

By Lyndon Mukasa

Source link

The seat-warmer-in-chief squirms…

Source link

British Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court (ICC), Karim Khan, sat down with Analyst News to discuss the punitive state actions levelled towards him by Russian leader Vladimir Putin and US President Trump.

Khan opened up about the coercive agenda at play to intimidate him as he pursues justice and accountability for the tens of thousands of victims of flagrant war crimes and crimes against humanity.

In response, Khan defiantly centered those who have lost everything as a result of imperialist aggression, saying:

.. it’s not about us. It’s about victims and their right to justice.

They’re not worthless. They’re not numbers. They’re not abstract concepts.

Advertisement

They’re people that have lost their babies, their wives, their husbands, their grandparents.

'It's painful, it's difficult, it's meant to coerce … but it's not about us, it's about the victims' right to justice.'

In an exclusive interview with Analyst News, the International Criminal Court's Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan details the threats and sanctions against him,… pic.twitter.com/afFHn4E5qq

— Analyst News (@AnalystNews_) June 2, 2026

Advertisement

ICC prosecutor: ‘you go against Israel, we’ll come after you and your family’

ICC prosecutor Khan has faced no end of abuse from corrupted officials as a result of his determination to uphold the rule of international law. The decision to issue arrest warrants for political leaders involved in numerous war crimes and crimes against humanity no doubt fuels the ongoing sanctions

Moreover, the US has expanded its punitive and intimidating sanctions beyond Khan himself and extended them to his wider family, revoking his children’s US visas. All the while, there has been no meaningful condemnation from its allies. In fact, David Cameron joined these corrosive efforts, threatening Khan that the UK would withdraw from the ICC itself if warrants against Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant were not withdrawn.

Despite these silencing efforts to obstruct accountability for the genocide in Gaza, which the US and the UK have materially supported through the provision of bombs, bullets and the UK’s spy planes, Khan has remained inspiringly defiant.

As Chief Prosecutor, he makes clear that he will continue to pursue justice and uphold the independence of the court in the face of significant political pressure.

In the interview, he spoke about the threats and warnings he has received from US officials:

Karim Khan: You go against Israel, we’ll come after you and your family. You have been warned. Marco Rubio, Mitch McConnell, I mean, quite powerful individuals, wrote a public letter. They wrote to me and they said, you have been warned. That’s how it ended. You have been warned. Yes, we have faced threats. I’ve been convicted by the Russian Federation to a 15-year sentence for the audacity they think of applying for warrants that judges independently gave in relation to the aggression against Ukraine. And President Trump has sanctioned me and my family because of Palestine.

Analyst News Journalist: You had your email disabled, your bank account’s frozen. Is that still the case?

Khan: Yes, I don’t have any credit card in the world. I mean, all those types of things. You know, travel bans, my children’s visas, revoked to the United States.

Advertisement

The journalist then highlighted how Khan’s family are not prosecutors or involved in decision making yet have equally faced this abuse of power.

Well, this is the question. I mean, even Magnitsky sanctions for human rights violations don’t apply to family. But as the senator said, you know… They would come after me and my family. They’ve done that.

The Magnitsky sanctions mentioned by Khan refer to a bipartisan US federal law enacted in 2012, which:

allow the United States to freeze assets and ban travel for foreign individuals and entities involved in serious human rights abuses or significant corruption, regardless of their nationality.

 Khan: “It’s meant to coerce. It’s meant to make us change course.”

We have all witnessed countless severe abuses of the human rights of Palestinians and Iranians. But the US and its allies appear prepared to inflict this kind of punishment on anyone who challenges their sick agenda or seeks to hold Israel accountable.

Activists aboard the latest aid flotilla travelled towards Gaza in an attempt to deliver humanitarian assistance and show solidarity with Palestinians. Before long, Israeli forces once again intercepted the flotilla and detained those on board, an action many have condemned as illegal under international law. Subsequently, several activists reported that Israeli occupation forces subjected them to violent assault, rape, and multiple methods of torture.

Nevertheless, despite a depressingly huge volume of mounting evidence, the US has not applied Magnitsky sanctions against any Israeli officials.

Instead, they have chosen to weaponise those measures against a respected international lawyer for pursuing accountability under international law – and have even targeted his children in the process.

The Chief Prosecutor isn’t having any of it through and makes it clear that he will continue to fight for the people who have paid the price of Western imperialist aggression and Zionist settler colonialism:

But again, this is painful. It’s difficult. It’s meant to coerce. It’s meant to make us change course.

We can’t. And I think that’s a testament to the many women of the office that it’s not about us. It’s about victims and their right to justice.

Advertisement

Khan: ‘what’s liberating is accepting mortality’

This interview will undoubtedly reinvigorate advocates across the world. After all, millions of people have been calling out Israel and its crimes since the Israeli genocide escalated against Palestinian men, women and children after October 7th.

Whether it be the IOF leaving babies to starve to death in neonatal units, the bombing of hospitals and schools, or the kidnapping of thousands of Palestinians without charge or conviction, Israel’s crimes are far-reaching, morally depraved, and prolific.

When asked about whether he has feared for his own life and those of his family due to his principled professional stance, Khan powerfully stated:

What’s liberating is accepting mortality. You know, the cause of death is life.

So, once you accept that, actually these things don’t become very important.

Advertisement

Featured image via Getty/Michael M. Santiago

By Maddison Wheeldon

Source link

Richard Venga, Strategy Director, Commercial Products
| Mitsubishi Electric

Advertisement

As the UK government continues to pursue economic growth in the midst of a global energy crisis, could the decarbonisation of commercial buildings be a part of the solution to tackling both – reducing energy costs and supporting business to grow?

The Warm Homes Plan and the Future Homes and Buildings Standards set out clear objectives for decarbonising homes. Likewise, the Energy Security Bill, announced last month in the King’s Speech, will help to bring down energy costs in the long term.

But there are approximately two million non-domestic buildings in the UK. We now need a plan to retrofit these properties, which have so far been overlooked. Any plan should include a time-bound target for when existing fossil fuel systems must be replaced with a low-carbon system. While new non-domestic buildings will need to electrify under the Future Buildings Standards, ensuring existing buildings adopt low-carbon technologies is critical to the UK’s decarbonisation efforts.

Advertisement

The environmental benefits are clear, but a plan would also bring three key economic benefits:

• helping businesses to navigate volatile fossil fuel prices and plan for the transition
• addressing regional disparities
• strengthening the UK’s clean heat industry

Here’s how a plan for the decarbonisation of commercial buildings can drive energy security and economic growth:

1. Protecting business owners from fossil fuel volatility

The conflict in Iran and the ensuing energy shock have led to volatile gas prices, putting enormous pressure on businesses across the UK. Already stretched, many businesses are having to make difficult decisions on investment and jobs.

Currently, take-up of technologies such as heat pumps, solar panels and batteries among businesses lags behind the domestic sector. We need to see incentives for commercial building retrofit to help address this gap and provide businesses and landlords with the direction to invest.

Advertisement

By adopting these technologies, businesses will benefit from more efficient, modern heating. This will also shield businesses against price shocks in the future.

While there will be upfront costs for business and the government, the investment will prove extremely valuable in the event of any further energy price shocks and create a more secure economy.

2. Addressing regional disparities in the energy efficiency of commercial buildings

Large businesses, which are often based in major cities, are more likely to require high sustainability standards for their buildings, particularly as tenants increasingly seek buildings that meet higher sustainability standards as part of their own environmental commitments. This creates impetus for landlords to ensure their buildings meet these standards. As a result, we have seen successful retrofitting in business hubs – such as the Exchange Quay office campus in Manchester.

However, outside of major cities and existing business hubs, the demand for this technology is lower. This creates a vicious cycle, where businesses increasingly look to base themselves in cities with more modernised commercial buildings, and landlords focus their investments on these same places.

Advertisement

Regional disparities will continue to be reinforced unless the government acts. In addition to investment in retrofit, we also need clarity on timelines and a commitment to increasing minimum energy efficiency standards. Raising requirements for non-domestic buildings will raise the floor for commercial buildings and help improve supply across the UK.

3. Bolstering the UK’s clean heating sector

A stronger commitment to clean heating for commercial buildings will strengthen this growing sector of the green economy.

A key barrier to expanding the rollout of clean heating is having the right workforce to deliver it. However, 24 per cent of UK contractors say that there is not enough demand for heat pumps to justify training for installation.

A plan for the decarbonisation of commercial buildings would help create this demand and give workers the confidence to invest in skills.

Advertisement

More demand for clean technology also means more opportunity for manufacturers, increasing UK production, creating jobs and opening up new export opportunities – supporting the government’s ambitions for economic and industrial growth.

The logical next step for clean heating

The first few months of this year have seen significant progress on the government’s plans for decarbonising homes and promoting the adoption of clean heating.

The government has made it clear that the UK cannot rely on fossil fuels forever and has made vital steps to address this in the King’s Speech.

The next logical step is investment in clean heating for commercial buildings, which will give stability to business owners, raise standards across the UK, and help grow the green economy.

Advertisement

Now is the time to push forward and put forward a plan that gives equal backing, both in regulation and incentives, for non-domestic buildings.

Advertisement

Source link

On 1 June, the UK banned two prominent American leftists from entering the UK. The men in question were Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur, who are both Turkish Muslims. In response to this, the Labour Muslim Network has now spoken out.

Labour Muslim Network alarmed

The response from the network reads:

The Home Office’s decision to cancel the visas of Cenk Uygur and Hasan Piker, preventing them from speaking at events in the UK, is alarming.

Given the significant public interest surrounding this case, the Government should provide a clear explanation of the basis on which this decision was made and the factors that led to the cancellation of their travel permissions.

Support for Palestinian rights, criticism of the actions of the Israeli government, and advocacy for international law and human rights must never be grounds for exclusion from public debate in the United Kingdom.

Advertisement

Muslim communities, and all those who speak out on matters of human rights and international justice, must have confidence that decisions of this nature are applied fairly, consistently and transparently.

Piker and Uygur have both attributed the ban to their criticism of Israel:

the uk has revoked my visa as well. all at the behest of israel. the west is betraying "liberal values" for a genocidal fascist foreign government. soon we will all become israel. https://t.co/UqQG1dogOI

— hasanabi (@hasanthehun) May 31, 2026

Advertisement

Featured image via Kris Connor (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

Reform UK MP Robert Jenrick is spreading blatant misinformation in relation to the Henry Nowak case. And despite legal experts and social media users highlighting his lies, the post remains up:

Henry Nowak’s murderer will be out of prison in just over 20 years.

Why did he not get longer? Because the judge ruled that – as a Sikh – he had a “good legal reason” to carry a 21cm “Shastar” knife on the streets of Southampton.

This sentence is a joke. Two-tier justice… pic.twitter.com/LtBkIyStYF

Advertisement

— Robert Jenrick (@RobertJenrick) June 1, 2026

Oh, and to make matters worse, this guy used to be a solicitor. In other words, he should and does know better.

Reform lies

Former chief prosecutor Nazir Afzal is among those who criticised Jenrick, noting:

NO he won’t be “out in just over 20 years” – that’s the minimum term before he can apply for parole

N0 he didn’t get a lighter sentence because of the knife – he has deliberately cut out the bit that says he got a LONGER sentence

If he was still a solicitor he’d get struck off.

In recent days, a lot has been said about Sikhs’ right to carry ceremonial knives, known as ‘kirpans’. People are arguing Sikh people should not be permitted to carry these kirpans, but it’s not relevant in this case anyway, because the blade wasn’t a legally permitted kirpan. A kirpan must be blunt and a mere 8cm long; as Jenrick himself notes, this description does not match the murder weapon:

You’re a liar. The judge ruled the Sikh exemption did not apply to the 21cm murder weapon, it was not a kirpan and convicted him of unlawful possession. https://t.co/mF1khIqw4A

— Gilly (@GillysGuidance) June 2, 2026

CrimeLine – a “digital knowledge platform for criminal law” – quoted Jenrick’s words back at him:

“I will not let this lie”. Peak irony.

They added:

Cut and paste politics from another liar who also does know better but prefers hate and division.

This is possibly in reference to the fact that Reform is misquoting Kemi Badenoch for political clout:

Reform really are descending into the gutter now. This is a total distortion of what Kemi Badenoch actually said. It’s another example of their increasingly desperate efforts to neutralise Restore. https://t.co/RhXngXMXzc

— (((Dan Hodges))) (@DPJHodges) June 2, 2026

Grim

Reform is pushing out these distortions despite the father of victim Henry Nowak saying:

We do not want his death to be used to create further division, hatred or tension.

Ignoring these words completely, Nigel Farage said:

Henry Nowak’s family have responded to his murder with dignity.

I suggest the rest of us respond with pure cold hard rage.

He said “cold, hard rage”, but he could have said “cold, hard lies”, because that’s what Reform is pumping out. And it’s doing so to ensure scenes like those we saw last night in Southampton:

Dozens of bricks being thrown pic.twitter.com/VwPXkfZlmR

— Taj Ali (@Taj_Ali1) June 2, 2026

Politicians like Robert Jenrick know precisely what they’re doing when they post these lies. And it’s a terrifying sign of the chaos Britain will descend into should these self-serving liars form a government.

Featured image via Leon Neal (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

Nigel Farage’s Reform UK sells itself as an alternative to the British political establishment. Historically, said establishment consisted of the Labour and Conservative parties – both of which have significant ‘Friends of Israel’ groups. Now, a group mirroring these foreign influence orgs has emerged:

For anybody who believed Reform offered something different in UK politics… https://t.co/yS439cUHrV

— Craig Murray (@CraigMurrayOrg) June 2, 2026

Oh, and it gets worse:

This is ridiculous. pic.twitter.com/m92HKClgOi

— Aaron Bastani (@AaronBastani) June 2, 2026

Israeli Friends of Reform

In February 2026, Farage announced the creation of two new groups:

• Reform Jewish Alliance.
• Reform Friends of Israel.

The ‘Jewish Alliance’ is a group for British Jews within Reform; the latter group seeks to strengthen the already strong ties between the UK and Israel. As the Jerusalem Post reported:

Farage also announced the creation of Reform Friends of Israel, a parallel organization designed to strengthen ties between Reform UK and Israel. This organization will be led by Jason Pearlman, a British-born former international media adviser to President Isaac Herzog, who has also advised former president Reuven Rivlin, Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar, and former prime minister Naftali Bennett.

At the same time that Reform is spearheading initiatives to strengthen ties with British Jews and Israeli Zionists, it’s harbouring antisemites within its own ranks. In the past few months alone, we’ve reported on the following:

Mainstream media have spent days calling @ZackPolanski an antisemite; why are they silent on Reform's failure to suspend an actual antisemite?

By @willem_moore_uk https://t.co/VlrTrc7R3R

Advertisement

— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) May 4, 2026

Another Reform activist just got exposed for antisemitism, and once again there's crickets from mainstream journalists and politicians

By @willem_moore_uk https://t.co/Ye7wR92fkd

Advertisement

— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) May 7, 2026

Ben Rowe posted Islamophobic, antisemitic and racist memes. Reform said it was 'investigating', so how come he's now a sitting councillor?

Via @willem_moore_uk https://t.co/xKyGhLh6TI

Advertisement

— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) May 10, 2026

Farage also has his own history of antisemitism, as his Jewish ex-classmate Peter Ettedgui reported:

It was habitual, you know, it happened all the time. He would often be doing Nazi salutes and saying ‘Sieg heil’ and, you know, strutting around the classroom

Reform Friends of Israel

So we know that Reform is launching a ‘Friends of Israel’ group, but it’s a little difficult to tell if the X/Twitter account is really the ‘official’ account it claims to be.

We can’t see the list of who the account follows or is followed by, because Elon Musk removed that functionality. Twitter does display if you have followers in common, however, so we followed the main account for Reform UK, as well as several of its most senior politicians. Doing so suggests none of these accounts follow RFoI:

As Aaron Bastani of Novara highlighted, the account had accessed the internet via the Israel App Store. This would be conclusive evidence that someone behind the account was in Israel, although the account is currently accessed via the UK app store:

You’ll note it says the account is ‘based in’ Israel, but it also has a circled ‘i’ next to it. This ‘i’ indicates the use of a VPN which spoofs a person’s location – i.e. the account holder could be using a VPN to spoof being in Israel, or they could be in Israel while using a VPN for some other reason.

This account isn’t the first prominent account to be exposed for operating in Israel, anyway; it’s not even the most shocking:

So…X activated locations last night which showed US gov accounts like DHS opened and operating from Israel. Then 20 mins later, X deactivated the feature and today, Gov accts are “exempt” from the location feature. https://t.co/8kiU541EDg pic.twitter.com/3DvM2NkrEM

— GenXGirl (@GenXGirl1994) November 23, 2025

No surprises

The UK establishment’s cosy relationship with Israel is easy to explain, as we have done before:

• The UK profits from Israel’s actions through arms deals and partnerships.
• Israel is a key ally of America, and the UK is America’s foremost lapdog.
• The Israel lobby has proven to be very effective at influencing British politicians – particularly through the ‘Labour Friends of Israel‘ and ‘Conservative Friends of Israel‘ groups.
• Once enough people within the establishment hold an opinion, mirroring that opinion becomes the price of entry.

Reform UK is simply the British establishment rebranded, so of course it’s emulating the special relationship with Israel.

Featured image via Dan Kitwood (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

Henry Nowak’s murder has been used as a wedge to drive racial tensions in the UK, with Tommy Robinson putting himself front and centre.

It started with inflammatory comments from Nigel Farage, which predictably led to yet another race riot.

As anyone could have guessed, Tommy Robinson was on the scene to take what Farage had started and run with it. However, Robinson used the murder to incite hate against a different religious group than the murderer’s own — Muslims.

Massive nosher Tommy Turd Robinson showed up to the minute’s silence for Henry Nowak, wouldn’t shut up throughout the entire thing, then went on a racist rant about Muslims despite Nowak’s killer being a Sikh. https://t.co/lIJm1L1wfX

— thelefttake (@thelefttake) June 2, 2026

Tommy Robinson did what Farage wanted

Farage’s intervention followed Vickrum Digwa, a Sikh man, being convicted for the murder of Henry Nowak.

Digwa wrongly claimed that he had been the victim of a racialised assault, and responding officers attempted to arrest Nowak as he lay dying.

The police handcuffed Nowak despite the fact that he was laid out and claiming to have been stabbed. As we regularly report, the police in the UK is prone to incompetence, and frequently face accusations of gross incompetence.

In 2025, the Canary covered the following stats:

In the last five years, police forces in the UK have paid nearly £80m in compensation following claims against them. Figures obtained by Public Interest Lawyers found that 47,658 claims have been lodged against police forces since 2019.

…

Examples of claims against the police include malicious prosecution, wrongful arrest, sexual misconduct, assault, traffic accidents, and property damage.

What Farage did was take a textbook example of police incompetence and he turned it into a call for a white uprising.

Sure thing @policylaila. Nigel Farage knew precisely what he was doing, deliberately whipping up fury. It’s also telling that on race relations, he does no work whatsoever. In the fascist tradition, he just makes irresponsible populist comments that only cause hate and fear. https://t.co/hxn6b4Qn6E

— Major Harry Clark (@WinstonsButler) June 3, 2026

It’s important to note, this is something Farage did despite Nowak’s family asking him not to do. And it’s a call Tommy Robinson gladly picked up.

Fash mob

Before the riots, Robinson released a video, shared by Mukhtar, in which he said he’d be turning up to “report” on events. Alarm bells should have begun ringing for anyone watching because Robinson isn’t a journalist; he’s a shit stirrer.

In 2019, the Canary published this about Robinson:

Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (AKA Tommy Robinson) encouraged “vigilante action” against defendants in a criminal trial when he filmed them and broadcast the footage on social media, High Court judges have found.

The former English Defence League (EDL) founder was found to have committed contempt of court at the end of a two-day hearing at the Old Bailey.

As Mukhtar highlighted on X, Robinson got rushed to the front of the crowd after arriving.

Mukhtar also noted:

He initially pretended he didn’t want to speak, saying, “No, I’m fucking not”.

A few seconds later, he was on the microphone claiming that he had predicted Pakistani Muslim gangs would start a race riot.

The riled-up crowds would eventually go into full-on riot mode, with Nazi salutes being thrown freely.

Dozens of bricks being thrown pic.twitter.com/VwPXkfZlmR

— Taj Ali (@Taj_Ali1) June 2, 2026

#FaragesRiots

People are referring to the chaos of last night as “Farage’s Riots”.

#FaragesRiots https://t.co/yLJfsygfQP

— Reform Party UK Exposed (@reformexposed) June 2, 2026

While it’s correct to call them this, Robinson deserves credit too. The two men keep a distance from one another, but they functionally work as a team.

Farage is the posh boy riling up the masses from the heart of the establishment while Robinson is the thug on the street leading the charge.

Featured image via Finnbar Webster/ Getty Images

By Willem Moore

Source link

FIFA has announced the final squads for the 2026 World Cup, with a week left before the tournament kicks off on 11 June.

It’s confirmed that 1,248 players representing 48 national teams will take part in the biggest edition in World Cup history, hosted by the US, Canada and Mexico.

Featuring 104 matches, this World Cup involves a record number of national teams and players. FIFA has said this reflects the global expansion of the game and provides an opportunity for broader representation of nations and fans.

According to FIFA’s statement, the final squads include 357 players who have previously featured in previous editions of the World Cup, alongside 891 players who will be making their debut.

The federation also highlighted the striking age diversity among the players, with Scottish goalkeeper Craig Gordon topping the list of the oldest participants at 43, whilst Mexico’s Gilberto Mora is the youngest at 17.

The tournament features 22 players under the age of 20, seven players over the age of 40, and the return of 22 players who have previously won the World Cup.

2026 World Cup team debuts

Jordan, Uzbekistan, Cape Verde and Curaçao will make their World Cup debuts in one of the most significant  tournament’s, given the expansion to 48 teams.

For Uzbekistan, this is a historic moment as it’s their first time participating in a World Cup. Manchester City defender Abdulkadir Khusanov will lead the team, backed by a promising generation of players.

Meanwhile, the tournament features a host of rising talents with a bright future on the international stage.

Messi, Ronaldo and Ochoa set to make history

Argentina’s Lionel Messi, Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo and Mexico’s Guillermo Ochoa are all set to make their sixth appearance at the World Cup finals. This is an unprecedented achievement that reflects the enduring legacy of three of the greatest names in football history.

The squads also reveal the tournament’s truly global reach, with players representing 449 clubs from 71 different countries, underlining the World Cup’s status as football’s most inclusive sporting event.

On another note, FIFA highlighted a clear disparity in the origins of players across the national teams. Whilst Saudi Arabia and Qatar rely almost entirely on players competing in their domestic leagues, teams such as Senegal, Uruguay, Cape Verde, Curaçao, Côte d’Ivoire and the Democratic Republic of the Congo rely entirely on professionals who play abroad.

Featured image via Rob Carr/ Getty Images

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

4 min read8 min

Labour’s election victory wasn’t born out of unbridled enthusiasm but out of a desperate desire for something cleaner, better, and markedly different. The public want a government that is going to bring about change but, importantly, do so in a fair and democratic way.

Advertisement

The irony is that the Labour Party acknowledged the importance of driving up standards, not just in their pre-election words and promises but in terms of the legislative and tangible changes that are required to deliver it. The bad news is they only decided to move beyond the warm words when it was too late.

The recent local election results reflect the scale of public disillusionment. After years of political misconduct, sleaze allegations, lockdown parties, murky financial arrangements, and a revolving door of scandal-hit ministers, drastic change was needed. Labour’s central promise was to restore the dignity and trustworthiness that Westminster had squandered so recklessly under the Conservatives.

A little under two years on and Keir Starmer’s already beleaguered premiership is under threat, in part, to a scandal of his own making thanks to his decision to appoint Peter Mandelson as Ambassador to Washington. Governing in the post-Brexit era with increased global economic and political uncertainty was never going to be easy but the basic pre-election promises of improved integrity and stability are already disintegrating before our eyes.

The tragedy is that trust, once broken, is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild. Political capital is not like financial capital in that you cannot simply replenish it through smarter budgeting. It requires consistent and real action, genuine reform, and the visible dismantling of the structures that enabled misconduct in the first place.

Advertisement

Labour spoke a lot about restoring trust in our politics, pre-election. However, it was only following the Mandelson revelations that the Prime Minister commissioned the newly-formed Ethics and Integrity Commission to conduct a review into our laws concerning lobbying, disclosure and access to government. It may well be that the Commission’s recommendations end up in the inbox of a new leader. Whoever that may be would be foolish to ignore them.

Reforming the Lobbying Act – the rules that address transparency in who is seeking to influence the policy-making process – now sits at the very heart of building back public trust, for all parties and all politicians. The CIPR is supporting Baroness Hayter with her Private Members’ Bill in the Lords that seeks to expand the lobbying register to in-house lobbyists, demonstrating the breadth of support for change from within Parliament itself and the recognition that the status quo is no longer sustainable.

Lobbying and the relationship between business and politics now occupies a unique space in the public imagination. They are sympathetic and supportive of the idea that government needs real-world input when making policy – as long as it is done fairly and with a degree of transparency.

Advertisement

The existing Lobbying Act, introduced in 2014, makes that nearly impossible and has long been criticised as inadequate and riddled with loopholes. It covers a narrow band of consultant lobbyists while leaving vast swathes of activity in the shadows, unregulated and unscrutinised. For a public already primed to distrust Westminster, this gap is populated with mistrust and scepticism.

Overhauling the Lobbying Act would send an unambiguous signal and demonstrate that this government is prepared to take action to ensure the lobbying scandals of recent years cannot be repeated. It would also send a powerful message that our politics cannot and should not be influenced opaquely. Expanding the register of lobbyists, strengthening enforcement mechanisms and closing the loopholes that mean in-house lobbyists have no way of statutorily recording their activities is the basic architecture of a democracy in which power is exercised visibly, and accountability is genuine rather than performative.

Labour must understand the urgency of the moment. They need quick and decisive wins, and soon, and few come easier than this. It also has the added bonus of commanding overwhelming support in Parliament and beyond, including within the lobbying industry.

Fail to grab the opportunity and this government risks not just its own electoral future, but the deeper, more corrosive consequence of a democracy in which citizens have simply stopped believing that the rules apply equally to everyone.

Advertisement

Alastair McCapra is CEO of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations

Source link