• Mon - Fri 9.00 - 19.00
Open

Category Archives: World

Tamara's World  /  Blog  /  World
13 Sep 2026
Flags outside a government building in New Delhi, where the BRICS New Delhi Declaration was adopted

BRICS New Delhi Declaration: What the 140 Points Actually Say

Categories World

Leaders of the ten-member bloc adopted the BRICS New Delhi Declaration on 12 September, closing a summit that had looked, for two days, as though it might not produce a joint text at all. The 140-point document papers over real disagreement on the Middle East while making one concrete institutional demand: a bigger seat for India and Brazil at the United Nations.

The declaration was published in full by India’s Prime Minister’s Office under the title “Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability”.

The Security Council line is the headline

China and Russia — both permanent members with vetoes — signed text supporting a greater role for India and Brazil at the Security Council.

Read that carefully. Supporting “a greater role” is not the same as backing new permanent seats with veto power, and no permanent member has ever ratified a reform that dilutes its own position. The wording is a diplomatic win for New Delhi and Brasília in the sense that it exists at all; it commits nobody to a vote.

Still, getting Beijing to sign anything on Indian Security Council ambitions is a shift worth noting, and it happened at a summit India hosted, alongside a Modi-Xi bilateral. Outlook India’s summary of the takeaways treats the clause as the summit’s principal deliverable for the host.

India’s incentive for hosting was largely this. A rotating summit presidency is an opportunity to put national priorities into a consensus text, and New Delhi used it on Security Council language and on the Kashmir condemnation. Whether either translates into anything is a separate question from whether they were worth extracting.

Where the bloc actually agreed

The economic sections carry the least ambiguity, because they describe work already underway:

  • Cross-border payments and local-currency settlement. Members committed to expanding trade settled in their own currencies rather than dollars.
  • Opposition to unilateral measures. The text opposes unilateral trade tariffs, secondary sanctions, and carbon border adjustment mechanisms it deems non-compliant with World Trade Organization rules.
  • Sectoral cooperation. Artificial intelligence, health, energy, food security and supply-chain resilience all get expanded frameworks.

The carbon border language is aimed squarely at the European Union’s border levy, which BRICS members have consistently characterised as protectionism dressed as climate policy. That is the bloc’s own framing, and European officials reject it.

No common currency, again

The declaration did not launch a BRICS currency. It has not launched one at any previous summit either, despite recurring speculation that it might.

What the bloc is actually building is narrower and more plausible: payment rails and bilateral local-currency arrangements that let members trade without routing through dollars. That reduces exposure to US financial leverage at the margin. It does not create a reserve currency, which would require a level of monetary and fiscal integration that members with this range of interest rates and capital controls are nowhere near.

The Middle East language, and what it cost

The hardest negotiation was over West Asia, with the UAE and Iran both inside the tent and on opposite sides of an active conflict.

The agreed text calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, endorses a two-state solution along 1967 boundaries with East Jerusalem as the Palestinian capital, and supports full UN membership for Palestine. It also condemns the April terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir — a clause India pushed for.

Unanimity on that text, among members including Iran, Russia, China, the UAE, Egypt and Ethiopia, required days of drafting. It is a measure of how far the bloc will go to avoid publishing a split, and of how little the declaration therefore binds any individual member’s conduct.

What the summit tells you about BRICS

The bloc’s expansion to ten members bought it a larger share of world population and output, and cost it coherence. A group containing both Iran and the UAE, both India and China, cannot easily take positions with teeth.

What it can do — and what New Delhi delivered — is generate consensus documents that establish alternative framings of the international order: on trade rules, on sanctions, on who belongs at the top table. Those framings accumulate. They also survive contact with the fact that members disagree, because they cost nothing to sign.

The practical test is whether local-currency settlement volumes actually rise over the next year. That is measurable, unlike most of the rest.

Common questions about the declaration

Which countries are in BRICS now?

Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates.

Did BRICS agree to create a shared currency?

No. The declaration focuses on local-currency trade settlement and cross-border payment systems. No common currency was announced.

Does the declaration change India’s UN Security Council status?

No. It records China’s and Russia’s stated support for India and Brazil playing a greater role. Any actual change to Security Council membership requires UN Charter amendment, which permanent members can block.

What did BRICS say about tariffs?

The bloc opposed unilateral tariffs, secondary sanctions, and carbon border adjustment measures it considers inconsistent with WTO rules.

Is the declaration legally binding?

No. Summit declarations are political statements of intent. They create no enforceable obligations on signatories.

Why was the Middle East section difficult?

Because Iran and the UAE are both members and are on opposing sides of the current conflict. Reaching agreed language required extended negotiation.

Related reading on the shifting trade order: the US-Canada tariff exchange and the Trump-Xi summit in Washington.

13 Sep 2026
Shelter tents at a displacement camp, illustrating the Yemen displacement crisis reported by the UN

Yemen Displacement Crisis Quadruples in a Single Week

Categories World

The Yemen displacement crisis has escalated sharply, with the United Nations reporting that at least 76,000 people have fled their homes since July — a figure that quadrupled in the space of a single week as Houthi forces pushed a large-scale offensive against government positions.

The International Organization for Migration described a situation deteriorating by the hour. UN News reported the surge on 12 September, with the sharpest concentration in the southwest.

Taiz is bearing most of it

Roughly 8,300 households — close to 50,000 people — have been displaced from districts in Taiz province alone. That is about two-thirds of the total from one governorate.

Taiz has been a front line for most of the war, but the current fighting is different in pace. The Houthis launched their offensive last week and have taken position after position, in fighting that Arab News reported has left hundreds dead. We covered the opening phase in our report on the week that killed 129; the toll and the displacement have both moved substantially since.

Why the numbers moved so fast

A quadrupling in one week is not a gradual humanitarian deterioration. It is the signature of a front line collapsing and civilians leaving ahead of it.

Displacement in Yemen has generally been incremental — families moving short distances, often repeatedly, as shelling shifts. A step change of this size indicates territory changing hands quickly enough that people are leaving in a single wave rather than over months.

It also means aid agencies are responding to a distribution of need that did not exist a fortnight ago. Stocks positioned for a static front are in the wrong places.

The Red Sea coast changes the map

Alongside the inland advance, Houthi forces took Yemen’s Red Sea coast, consolidating control over the approaches to the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

That has consequences well beyond Yemen — the strait is the southern gate to the Suez route and a corridor for Saudi oil exports, which we examined in our coverage of the fall of Mocha. But it has a humanitarian dimension too. Yemen imports the overwhelming majority of its food and fuel, and it does so through ports. Who controls the coast controls what reaches the interior, and on what terms.

What 76,000 people moving actually involves

Displacement figures are easy to read past. It is worth being concrete about what the number describes.

Most of those who flee move short distances — to a neighbouring district, to a relative’s house, to open ground on the edge of a town that already hosts people displaced in earlier rounds. Very few reach a formally managed camp. UPI’s report on the exodus describes families leaving with what they can carry.

The immediate needs are consistent and unglamorous: water, shelter material, cooking fuel, and cash. The medium-term problem is that host communities in Yemen have been absorbing displaced families for the better part of a decade and have very little left to share. Each new wave is landing on thinner ground than the last.

The funding problem underneath

Yemen’s aid operation has been running below requirement for years. A displacement surge of this speed lands on a system that was already rationing.

The mechanics are unglamorous and decisive: shelter materials, water trucking, and cash transfers all have procurement lead times measured in weeks. When 50,000 people move in seven days, the gap between need and delivery is filled by host communities that are themselves poor, or it is not filled.

No new funding appeal had been announced at the time of the UN’s report.

There is a structural reason Yemen struggles for attention even at moments like this. The war has run long enough to lose novelty, and it competes for the same donor budgets as more visible emergencies. Displacement figures that quadruple in a week are precisely the kind of data point that moves funding decisions — but only if they are noticed while they are current.

What determines the next month

Whether the offensive stops. If the Houthis consolidate what they have taken, displacement flattens and the response becomes a logistics problem with a known shape. If the advance continues toward Aden or further into Taiz’s remaining government-held districts, the 76,000 figure will be obsolete quickly.

Watch, too, for port access arrangements. Whether humanitarian cargo continues to move through Red Sea ports under the new control arrangement will determine whether this stays a displacement emergency or becomes a food security one.

Reader questions

How many people have been displaced in Yemen since July?

At least 76,000, according to the United Nations. The figure quadrupled during the week to 12 September.

Which area is worst affected?

Taiz province, where roughly 8,300 households — nearly 50,000 people — have been displaced from districts within the governorate.

What triggered the surge?

A large-scale Houthi offensive against Yemeni government forces launched the previous week, which has taken multiple positions and left hundreds dead.

Have the Houthis taken the Red Sea coast?

Yes. Houthi forces captured Yemen’s Red Sea coast, strengthening their control over the Bab al-Mandab Strait.

Is there a new humanitarian appeal?

No new appeal had been announced when the UN reported the displacement figures. The IOM has warned that the situation is worsening rapidly.

Why does Yemen’s coastline matter for aid?

Yemen imports most of its food and fuel through seaports. Control of the coast determines what supplies reach the interior and under what conditions.

Our continuing Yemen coverage tracks both the humanitarian situation and the shipping consequences — start with the escalation report.

13 Sep 2026
Oil tanker at sea, illustrating the Saudi East-West pipeline shutdown and its effect on crude exports

Saudi East-West Pipeline Shut After Drone Strikes From Iraq

Categories Business, World

Saudi Arabia has shut down the Saudi East-West pipeline, the 1,200-kilometre artery it uses to move crude from its eastern oilfields to the Red Sea, after a series of drone attacks launched from Iraq. The closure removes the kingdom’s main insurance policy against disruption in the Gulf at precisely the moment that insurance is most needed.

CNBC reported that the shutdown was precautionary, taken after drones struck the line in the Riyadh and Medina regions on Thursday morning, starting fires and causing some damage. Riyadh has not published a damage assessment or a restart date.

Why this particular pipeline matters

The East-West line carries up to 7 million barrels per day from Abqaiq in the east to the Yanbu terminal on the Red Sea. Its entire strategic purpose is to let Saudi crude reach world markets without passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

That mattered little for most of the past decade. It matters enormously now. With the United States and Iran contesting control of Hormuz, Saudi Arabia had been leaning on the East-West route to keep exports flowing westward. Closing it narrows the kingdom’s options to the very chokepoint it was built to bypass.

The timing compounds an already tight picture. Houthi forces took Yemen’s Red Sea coast last week, tightening their grip on the Bab al-Mandab Strait at the southern end of the same sea lane — a development we covered in our report on the fall of Mocha. A tanker leaving Yanbu now sails south toward contested water.

What the attack says about the conflict’s shape

The drones came from Iraq, not Yemen. That is a meaningful shift. Attacks on Saudi energy infrastructure have historically originated from Houthi-held territory to the south; an Iraqi launch point opens a second axis and puts central Saudi Arabia — Riyadh and Medina are far inland — within reach.

No group had claimed responsibility at the time of the initial reports. Al Jazeera’s account situates the strike within the wider Iran-aligned campaign that has intensified since American strikes inside Iran, including the recent attack on Kermanshah.

It also follows Houthi strikes on the kingdom earlier in the same week, which hit energy facilities and civilian assets. The pattern that emerges is not a single spectacular attack of the kind that took Abqaiq offline in 2019, but repeated smaller strikes on dispersed targets. That is harder to defend against and harder to price, because each individual hit is survivable while the cumulative effect on operating decisions is not.

The price response

Crude broke above $100 a barrel for the first time in months, with Brent trading above $107 on Friday. Prices finished the week more than 8% higher.

Two things are worth separating here. The first is the physical loss: a closed pipeline is barrels that cannot move on a particular route, not barrels that cease to exist. The second is the risk premium: traders are pricing the possibility that the next strike hits something harder to replace. Most of the move is the second thing.

That distinction matters for how long the price holds. If the line restarts within days and no further infrastructure is hit, the premium deflates. If attacks continue on a second front, it does not.

Where the cost lands

Higher crude reaches consumers through fuel, freight and the price of anything that moves. It has already begun feeding official data — US wholesale prices rose 0.4% in August on the back of energy, as set out in our coverage of that release.

Oil-importing economies absorb the hit most directly. Countries that subsidise fuel face a widening bill on top of the import cost, which turns an energy shock into a fiscal one.

Central banks face the familiar bind. An energy-driven price rise is a supply shock, and textbook practice is to look through it. Looking through it is harder when inflation is already running above target and a second shock arrives before the first has faded.

What to watch from here

Three signals will tell you which way this resolves.

  • A restart announcement. Saudi Aramco confirming the line is back would take the sharpest edge off the premium.
  • Whether Iraq-launched attacks repeat. One strike is an incident. A pattern is a new front, and prices will treat it that way.
  • Hormuz traffic counts. With the western route closed, Gulf transit volumes become the single best read on how much Saudi crude is actually reaching buyers.

Questions readers are asking

How much oil does the East-West pipeline normally carry?

Its capacity is about 7 million barrels per day, though it typically runs well below that. Actual throughput before the shutdown has not been disclosed.

Does the shutdown mean Saudi exports have stopped?

No. It closes one route. Crude can still be exported through Gulf terminals, but those cargoes must transit the Strait of Hormuz, which is the risk the pipeline existed to avoid.

Who launched the drones?

The drones were launched from Iraq. No group had claimed responsibility in the initial reporting, and Saudi authorities have not formally attributed the attack.

Will petrol prices rise?

Pump prices follow crude with a lag of roughly two to four weeks in most markets, and the pass-through depends heavily on local taxes and any subsidy. A sustained move above $100 would show up at the pump; a brief spike may not.

How long can the pipeline stay offline?

That depends on damage the kingdom has not disclosed. Precautionary shutdowns after limited damage have historically been measured in days, but no restart timeline has been given.

For the wider picture on how this conflict is reshaping trade routes and energy prices, see our continuing coverage of Red Sea shipping and the inflation data.

12 Sep 2026
Hong Kong skyline: Tiananmen vigil organizers sentenced here this week

Seven Years for a Candle: Hong Kong’s Last Tiananmen Vigil Leaders Sentenced

Categories World

Three of Hong Kong’s best-known pro-democracy figures learned on September 11 how many years they will spend in prison. Their offense: organizing a candlelight vigil. A Hong Kong court handed down sentences of five to just over seven years. The three led the group that had run the city’s annual Tiananmen Square remembrance. The Tiananmen vigil organizers sentenced this week were convicted of inciting subversion under Beijing’s 2020 national security law. The case began with their arrests in September 2021.

Tiananmen vigil organizers sentenced to years behind bars

Lee Cheuk-yan received seven years. Chow Hang-tung, a barrister who kept defending the vigil in public even after her arrest, received seven years and three months. That was the longest term of the three. Albert Ho, 74, was sentenced to five years and two months after entering a guilty plea. A guilty plea typically shortens a term under Hong Kong law. All three had already spent years in pretrial custody by the time the sentences were read (Al Jazeera).

Statue of Lady Justice outside a Hong Kong court where Tiananmen vigil organizers were sentenced

The group behind three decades of candlelight

The defendants led the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China. It ran the only large-scale public commemoration of the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown anywhere on Chinese soil. For 30 years, tens of thousands gathered each June in Victoria Park. They held candles and observed a minute of silence. That vigil has not been permitted since 2020. The Alliance itself dissolved under legal pressure in 2021 (NBC News).

A case widely read as a test of Hong Kong’s freedoms

Legal observers and rights groups call the prosecution a clear marker of how far Hong Kong’s civil liberties have narrowed. Amnesty International called the sentencing a “triple tragedy.” It pointed to the defendants’ years in custody, the loss of the vigil itself, and a broader erosion of protections that once set Hong Kong apart from mainland China. The United Nations and the European Union both issued statements criticizing the verdict. Hong Kong and Beijing maintain the prosecution followed due process under the city’s laws.

International reaction and what happens next

Governments in Europe and North America have called for the defendants’ release. Hong Kong authorities have rejected those calls as interference in the city’s judicial affairs. Chow Hang-tung and Lee Cheuk-yan have both indicated they plan to appeal. That process could take months to resolve in Hong Kong’s Court of Appeal. All three had already been detained since 2021. Their formal release dates will therefore fall several years earlier than the headline sentences suggest, once time served is factored in.

The case leaves Hong Kong without any organization permitted to publicly mark the 1989 crackdown, a gap now in its sixth year. Rights groups expect scattered, unofficial tributes to continue. None are likely to match the scale the Alliance once drew to Victoria Park. For background on how Beijing’s national security law has reshaped the city’s institutions, see Tamara News’ earlier coverage of the EU’s response to security incidents in Europe and its report on a separate high-court ruling reshaping political representation.

How the trial unfolded over four years

The three defendants were first arrested in September 2021. That came shortly after the Hong Kong Alliance voted to disband under mounting legal pressure. Prosecutors pointed to the group’s charter, which called to “end one-party rule” in mainland China, language used for decades. They argued it amounted to incitement once the national security law took effect in 2020. Defense lawyers countered that the wording predated the law by nearly 30 years. They called it a peaceful, long-standing political position, not a call to violence. The trial itself ran intermittently for roughly a year. The September 11 sentencing closed a legal process that outlasted the organization it targeted.

What the sentences mean for Hong Kong’s civil society

Legal scholars watching the case note the sentences fall within the range prosecutors sought. The court’s written reasoning leaned heavily on the defendants’ continued public advocacy after their 2021 arrests. Judges treated that advocacy as evidence of ongoing intent. Press freedom and rights organizations argue the outcome sends a clear signal to any remaining civil society groups in Hong Kong. In their reading, organizations that predate the national security law are not protected from retroactive scrutiny of their founding documents. Hong Kong’s government has repeatedly rejected that characterization. It maintains the prosecution addressed specific criminal conduct, not the Alliance’s broader existence.

Frequently asked questions

  • Who were the three people sentenced? Lee Cheuk-yan, Chow Hang-tung and Albert Ho, all former leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China.
  • What were they convicted of? Inciting subversion of state power under Hong Kong’s 2020 national security law.
  • How long are the sentences? Seven years for Lee, seven years and three months for Chow, and five years and two months for Ho, who pleaded guilty.
  • Will they serve the full terms? No. All three have been in custody since 2021, so time served counts toward their sentences.
  • Can the sentences be appealed? Yes. Lee and Chow have signaled they intend to challenge the convictions in Hong Kong’s Court of Appeal.
  • Does the Tiananmen vigil still take place in Hong Kong? No public vigil has been permitted in Victoria Park since 2020, and the organizing Alliance dissolved in 2021.

Sources

12 Sep 2026
Iranian flag held aloft, as US strikes Kermanshah Iran deepen the conflict

Why the US Just Struck a City Iran Rarely Sees Hit

Categories World

The United States and Iran traded fire again this week, in one of the heaviest exchanges since their conflict began. Washington says the latest round of US strikes Kermanshah Iran targets answered an Iranian attempt to plant sea mines in the Strait of Hormuz. Officials also cite a separate attack on US troops in the region. Iran says four members of its Revolutionary Guard aerospace unit were killed in the western city of Kermanshah overnight.

US strikes Kermanshah Iran after Strait of Hormuz mine attempt

President Trump said on Truth Social that the strikes were retaliation for “the Iranians’ failed attempt at adding sea mines” in the Strait of Hormuz. A large share of the world’s seaborne oil passes through that waterway. US Central Command said it struck Iranian military sites after the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps tried to attack US troops and commercial shipping in the strait (NBC News).

Oil tanker in Gulf waters near the Strait of Hormuz, at the center of the US strikes Kermanshah Iran dispute

Four IRGC aerospace personnel reported killed

Iranian state media and the IRGC itself said four members of its aerospace force died in the Kermanshah strikes. Casualty figures in this conflict have come almost entirely from Iranian government and IRGC statements. That is not independently verified reporting. Tamara News is presenting this figure as Tehran’s own account, not a confirmed fact. Kermanshah is a city in western Iran with a significant military presence. It has not previously been named as a strike location in this round of fighting, marking an expansion beyond the Gulf shipping lanes where earlier exchanges concentrated.

The broader pattern behind the strikes

This exchange follows weeks of rising tension across the region. Houthi forces aligned with Iran seized Yemen’s port of Mokha in early September, tightening pressure on Red Sea shipping routes. Separate Iranian strikes hit US allies’ interests in the Gulf earlier this month. Analysts tracking the conflict describe the pattern as tit-for-tat escalation, not a single decisive campaign. Each side cites the other’s most recent action as justification for its own strikes.

What happens next in the US-Iran standoff

Neither side has signaled interest in formal talks since the latest strikes. A ceasefire brokered with Pakistani mediation earlier this year has already been tested repeatedly by exchanges like this one. Officials on both sides describe the current situation as a stalemate. At issue: Iran’s nuclear program, access to the Strait of Hormuz, and the terms of any sanctions relief. Oil markets have shown renewed sensitivity to the fighting. Shipping insurers are reportedly reassessing risk premiums for tankers transiting the strait.

For more on how the conflict has touched Red Sea shipping routes, see Tamara News’ earlier coverage of the Houthi takeover of Yemen’s Mokha port and the separate strikes on Gulf allies’ bases. Global oil markets are also watching OPEC’s upcoming output decision for signs of how producers plan to respond to the volatility.

How mediation efforts have struggled to hold

A Pakistan-brokered ceasefire and accompanying memorandum of understanding halted the largest wave of fighting between Washington and Tehran earlier this year. The arrangement has proven fragile since. Both governments have accused the other of violations on multiple occasions since it was signed. This week’s exchange over the Strait of Hormuz mine attempt is the most serious test of the agreement in over a month. Diplomats involved in the earlier mediation have not publicly signaled a fresh round of talks. Officials in both capitals have instead framed their recent actions as defensive responses, not opening moves toward negotiation.

The unresolved disputes driving the conflict

Three issues remain at the center of the standoff. They are the scope of Iran’s nuclear program, freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, and the terms under which sanctions on Iran’s economy might eventually ease. None of the three has moved meaningfully since the Pakistan-mediated ceasefire took hold. Each fresh exchange of strikes tends to harden both sides’ negotiating positions rather than soften them. Analysts describe a pattern in which military escalation and diplomatic stalemate now reinforce each other. That makes a durable settlement harder to reach the longer the current cycle continues.

Frequently asked questions

  • What prompted the US strikes on Kermanshah? The US says it acted after Iran attempted to place sea mines in the Strait of Hormuz and after an attack on US troops in the region.
  • Where is Kermanshah? Kermanshah is a city in western Iran, near the border with Iraq, and home to a significant Iranian military presence.
  • How many casualties were reported? Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said four of its aerospace personnel were killed; this figure comes from Iranian sources and has not been independently confirmed.
  • Is there a ceasefire in place? A Pakistan-mediated ceasefire exists on paper, but both sides have continued to trade strikes over alleged violations.
  • How is this affecting oil markets? Shipping through the Strait of Hormuz carries a large share of global seaborne oil, and insurers have reportedly begun reassessing risk premiums for tankers using the route.

Sources

1 … 25 26 27 28 29 … 40