Lebanon, Hezbollah agree to US proposal for ceasefire with Israel, Lebanese official says

Lebanon and Hezbollah have agreed to a U.S. proposal for a ceasefire with Israel with some comments on the content, a top Lebanese official told Reuters on Monday, describing the effort as the most serious yet to end the fighting.

Ali Hassan Khalil, an aide to Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, said Lebanon had delivered its written response to the U.S. ambassador in Lebanon on Monday, and White House envoy Amos Hochstein was travelling to Beirut to continue talks.

There was no immediate comment from Israel.

Hezbollah, a heavily armed movement backed by Iran, endorsed its long-time ally Berri to negotiate over a ceasefire.

"Lebanon presented its comments on the paper in a positive atmosphere," Khalil said, declining to give further details. "All the comments that we presented affirm the precise adherence to (U.N.) Resolution 1701 with all its provisions," he said.

He was referring to U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended a previous war between Hezbollah and Israel in 2006.

Its terms require Hezbollah to have no armed presence in the area between the Lebanese-Israeli border and the Litani River, which runs some 30 km (20 miles) north of the frontier.

Khalil said the success of the initiative now depended on Israel, saying if Israel did not want a solution, "it could make 100 problems".

Israel has long claimed that Resolution 1701 was never properly implemented, pointing to the presence of Hezbollah fighters and weapons along the border. Lebanon has accused Israel of violations including flying warplanes in its airspace.

Khalil said Israel was trying to negotiate "under fire", a reference to an escalation of its bombardment of Beirut and the Hezbollah-controlled southern suburbs. "This won't affect our position," he said.

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

What long-range missile strikes in Russia could mean for Ukraine war

The U.S. decision to authorise long-range Ukrainian strikes could help Kyiv defend the foothold in Russia's Kursk region that it seized as leverage in any war talks, but may come too late to change the course of the war, analysts said.

Two months before leaving office, President Joe Biden lifted some restrictions that have blocked Kyiv from using U.S.-supplied weapons for strikes deeper into Russian territory, in a major policy change, Reuters reported on Sunday.

Military analysts said the impact on the battlefield, where Ukraine has been on the back foot for months, would depend on what limits remained. But while the shift may shore up the Kursk operation, it was unlikely to be a gamechanger overall.

"The decision comes late, and like other decisions in this vein, it may be too late to substantially change the course of the fighting," said Michael Kofman, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.

"Long-range strikes were always one piece of the puzzle, and had been overly freighted with expectations in this war."

There also is no way to know how long the new policy will last. It was criticised by Richard Grenell, one of the closest foreign policy advisors of returning president Donald Trump, who replaces Biden on Jan. 20. Trump has long criticised the scale of U.S. aid to Kyiv and has vowed to end the war quickly, without saying how. A Trump spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Ukraine has lobbied for the change for months, arguing its inability to hit areas inside Russia, and in particular military airbases hosting warplanes involved in strikes on Ukraine, was a major handicap.

Russian forces, which have been on the offensive for more than a year, have been advancing at their fastest rate since 2022 in eastern Ukraine and exerting pressure in the northeast and southeast.

Russia says Ukraine cannot fire the missiles at targets inside Russia without direct help from NATO allies, calling this a major escalation. On Monday, the Kremlin said any such decision would mean the United States was directly involved in the conflict.

The first Ukrainian strikes could happen in the coming days and are likely to be carried out using ATACMS rockets, which have a range of up to 190 miles (306 km), Reuters reported.

A central European defence official told Reuters the strikes would give Kyiv a greater chance to defend itself from aerial attacks, but would not decisively swing the conflict in Ukraine's favour.

Russia had already moved many of its air assets beyond the reach of Western weapons in Ukraine, the official said, although the range would cover beyond the area of Kursk occupied by Ukraine.

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis said he was "not opening champagne just yet" as it was unknown how many rockets the Ukrainians had and whether they had enough to impact the battlefield.

The decision to authorise the strikes only after months of Ukrainian lobbying follows a patternrepeated throughout the war as the Biden administration tried to balance its support for Ukraine with concern about escalation.

Previously, Washington vacillated for months before approving giving Ukraine long-range missiles, tanks and planes.

Some military analysts say such delays gave Moscow time to recover from early failures and reinforce defences of occupied territory, contributing to the failure of a major Ukrainian counteroffensive last year.

UKRAINE UNDER PRESSURE

Being able to attack Russian territory with missiles could have its most direct impact in Kursk, where Ukraine aims to hold a salient it captured after its first major cross-border assault in August. The Russian land could be a bargaining chip in any negotiations after Trump enters the White House.

Kyiv says Russia has massed 50,000 troops to try to retake the territory in Kursk, and that it has deployed 11,000 North Koreans, some of whom it says have joined the fight. Russia has neither confirmed nor denied the deployment.

"ATACMS missiles can hold at risk high value Russian and North Korean targets. This would help Ukrainian forces defend the Kursk salient, which is under pressure," said Kofman.

Rob Lee, a senior fellow at the Philadelphia-based Foreign Policy Research Institute, said it would be difficult for Ukraine to hold its ground in Kursk in the long term, but its fortunes there would depend on resources.

"Ukraine has committed some of its best units there, so they may be able to hold for some time if they continue to receive enough ammunition and combat replacements," he said.

Kyiv-based military analyst Serhii Kuzan said there were an array of targets in Russia at a depth of up to 500 km from Ukraine that Kyiv's forces saw as priorities, but many of which would still be out out of range of ATACMS.

France and Britain have not spelled out whether they would follow the Americans by allowing Ukraine to use Storm Shadow/SCALP cruise missiles, which have a range of 250 km (155 miles).

"Russia can shoot down Storm Shadow and ATACMS, so the salvo size that can be launched is also an important consideration," Lee added.

On the streets of Kyiv on Monday, the general feeling was that the decision would help, but that it had come far too late.

"This should have been used either as a preventative measure, or as a sharp reaction in February or March 2022. Now it does not play a big role," said Olga Korovyachuk, 21.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Moscow issues long-range missiles warning to West

Moscow has issued a stark warning to the United States and its allies, stating that any use of long-range missiles by Kiev to strike deep inside Russian territory would signify the “direct participation” of the Western powers in the conflict. 

Monday evening’s statement from the Russian Foreign Ministry comes amid unconfirmed reports that US President Joe Biden has authorized Kiev to use American-supplied ATACMS missiles to target sites inside Moscow’s pre-2014 borders. 

Maria Zakharova, the spokeswoman for the ministry, said any such move would “radically change the essence and nature of the conflict.”

On Sunday, the New York Times reported that US President Joe Biden had given Ukraine permission to use ATACMS missiles against Russian territory. However, the White House has made no official statements.

When asked about the reports on Monday, Zakharova noted that they have not been confirmed by Washington.

Zakharova further emphasized: “Kiev’s use of long-range missiles to attack our territory will mean the direct participation of the United States and its satellites in hostilities against Russia. In this case, Russia’s response will be adequate and tangible.”

Zakharova’s comments follow a report in The New York Times on Sunday that suggested Biden had greenlit Ukraine’s use of the long-range missiles to target Russian forces defending Kursk Region, allegedly alongside North Korean troops. 

While the White House has neither confirmed nor denied the claim, the very possibility of such a policy shift has elicited a strong reaction from Moscow.

The Foreign Ministry reiterated President Vladimir Putin’s earlier warnings regarding Western nations potentially providing Ukraine with long-range weapons. In September, Putin stated that any move to arm Kiev with such capabilities would force Moscow to make “appropriate decisions based on the threats presented to us.” 

He suggested that such actions would represent a shift in whether “NATO countries are directly involved in the military conflict.”

Zakharova underscored the gravity of the potential escalation, warning that Moscow would not stand idly by: “In this case, Russia’s response will be adequate and tangible.” 

The Kremlin has consistently framed Western military aid to Ukraine as a threat to its national security, and Zakharova’s comments further emphasize Moscow’s stance on long-range weaponry. The situation remains tense, with some Western leaders openly admitting concerns about further escalations and the potential for direct confrontation between NATO and Russia.

Amid rising tensions, Moscow also noted uncertainty regarding the veracity of US policy changes. “It is not yet known whether these claims are based on official sources,” a statement outlined.

Reuters/RT

This US election marks what Germans call a Zeitenwende (“turning point”). Voters are signaling clearly that they want change, preferring a second Donald Trump administration to another caretaker government presiding over a regime that they reject.

True, political parties that promised to protect the status quo have lost elections in country after country this year. But the significance of voters in the world’s oldest democracy rejecting their country’s constitutional foundations – the rule of law, an independent and impartial judiciary, due process, and an orderly transfer of power – can hardly be overestimated.

The blame game started before the election results had sunk in, with a predictable focus on elitism, identity, and the losing candidate herself. This cycle of recrimination will tear apart the Democratic Party and render it even less fit for governing in the future. It also will distract from the elephant in the room: capitalism. Democracy is in a death spiral because it is subject to a socioeconomic regime that pits everyone against everyone else, undermining the capacity for consensus and collective decision-making.

It is not the first time that capitalism has upended democracy. A century ago, the effects of rapid industrialization at the expense of individuals and their communities fueled communism and fascism in Europe. Writing during World War II, the economic historian Karl Polanyi traced the root cause of his era’s political upheavals to an economic system that subordinated society to the market principle.

The problem, according to Polanyi, started with the abolition of the “poor laws” in England in the early nineteenth century. Uprooted, landless masses had no choice but to migrate to cities, where they were exploited as cheap labor in factories that consumed their lives and those of their children. While this system undoubtedly generated prosperity, it came at enormous costs to too many people. Without the devastation brought by World War I, the backlash against it by the masses might have taken much longer.

The United States, which fought in WWI but not on its own territory, largely avoided the backlash despite the economic depression of the 1930s. Importantly, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s administration accomplished something that other countries did not: It gave the American people enough economic security that they could begin to envision a better future for themselves and their families.

This time is different, and not only in the US. We live in a system that most politicians have declared to be without alternative. In fact, they themselves have long surrendered control of the system and lack the capacity or will to imagine a different one. The late Fredric Jameson’s aphorism that “it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism” has gained renewed currency, and it is not hard to see why. Governments have very little room for maneuver, lest they be punished by (utterly amoral) financial markets. Long celebrated as a tool for disciplining policymakers, financial globalization has placed the fate of entire societies in the hands of investors who care only about price signals and are oblivious to human needs.  

Governments tied their own hands in the hope that markets would deliver capital, goods, and jobs. Buying into the belief that they should get out of the market’s way, they opened their countries to free capital flows, even as they supported the selective legal coding of assets and intermediaries to benefit the well-heeled. Later, they encouraged their central banks to bail out intermediaries who threatened to bring down the entire financial system in yet another crisis.

Countries also adopted international treaties that gave multinational corporations the power to sue host states for harming the profitability of their investments, or for “unfair and inequitable” treatment. With these cases overseen by an arbitral tribunal located elsewhere, governments effectively disarmed their own courts and undermined their own constitutions (whose provisions cannot be used as a defense against violations of international treaties).

Some countries (Germany most prominently) went so far as to deny future elected governments the option of raising additional debt finance, by enshrining balanced-budget requirements in their constitutions. Others held their people on a short leash by pursuing fiscal austerity, even as the rich thrived on yet another asset boom supported by easy monetary policies. Like Odysseus, who had his hands bound to the ship’s mast to withstand the call of the sirens, governments found ways to escape the call of the voters who had elected them. Democratic self-governance lost credibility long before the rise of the anti-democratic parties that now openly deride it.

For his part, Polanyi expected the war to be followed by another transformation that would put society, and not markets, in control. The legal and institutional mechanisms adopted to advance this goal did work initially, but powerful private actors and their lawyers soon found ways to arbitrage around them.

Two decades after the war, what the University of Michigan’s Greta Krippner describes as the financialization of the American economy had already taken off. Financial returns became the end to which all other needs and aspirations were subordinated. While the collateral damage of this process was widespread, the biggest blow was dealt to our capacity for collective decision-making.

Had communism and socialism not collapsed at the very moment when financialization unleashed its full force, many might have noticed its corrosive effects on democracy much earlier. Instead, capitalism was celebrated as the only game in town. As a result, we did not witness the “end of history” that Francis Fukuyama proclaimed when the Cold War wound down. We are condemned to relive it, but whether as tragedy or farce remains to be seen.

Project Syndicate

Bryan Robinson

As we near 2025, some outdated leadership strategies are on their last breath. If you were to write a "leadership obituary" for 2024, you would bury outdated leadership strategies that once dominated the workplace but are now ineffective and harmful.

Employees don’t leave organizations; they leave bad leadership. A terrible leader can overshadow an otherwise positive work experience. Statistics show that nearly 20% of employees are on the receiving end of toxic work conditions. A few examples of toxic leadership are failure to act on employee feedback, ignoring work-life balance and inconsistent or unfair treatment of employees. DDI’s Frontline Leader Project data shows that 57% of employees have left at least one job because of poor leadership.

Identifying Outdated Leadership Strategies

When I spoke with Dr. Tacy Byham, CEO of DDI, she identified five questions leaders can askbefore they reach the status of “career villain”:

1. Do you fail to see your employees as whole people?
2. Do you give vague or damaging feedback or no feedback at all?
3. Are you solving too many of your team’s problems?
4. Do you micromanage because you don’t trust your team?
5. Do you waste your team’s time on unproductive meetings?

Many HR personnel find it difficult to identify or eradicate a toxic work culture or identify its origins. It’s difficult to recognize leadership toxicity, especially if managers display strong and praised leadership that camouflages toxicity under the surface. But Christie Smith, human-centered leadership expert, unearths the outdated leadership strategies that need to be laid to rest and what needs to replace them in 2025.

She cites Gallup Research, showing that 77% of employees don't trust their leaders' ability to navigate today's challenges. Smith, co-author of ESSENTIAL: How Distributed Teams, Generative AI, and Global Shifts are Creating a New Human-Powered Leadership, pinpoints three outdated leadership strategies that should be buried for good.

1. The Hierarchical, Command-And-Control Model. “This top-down, ego-driven approach assumes that employees must be micromanaged and are unwilling to work without constant supervision,” Smith asserts. “Amazon, Starbucks, Apple and Google, once considered worker paradises, are now facing growing unionization efforts—employees demand more autonomy and representation.” She cites research by Gallup, showing that when companies promote a strong sense of purpose and connection, they reduce turnover by 8.1% and increase profitability by 4.4%, highlighting the tangible value of human-centered leadership over rigid control.
2. What's Good For Employees Isn't Good For Business. Smith says that leaders who cling to the idea that prioritizing people undermines profitability are not only wrong—they're harmful. “Human-centered leadership that prioritizes employee growth and well-being is critical to sustaining both innovation and business growth,” she explains. “Johnson & Johnson’s wellness programs, for instance, yielded a six-to-one ROI and saved $250 million over a decade in healthcare costs, demonstrating that employee well-being investments can significantly strengthen a company’s bottom line .”
3. The Idea That Presence Equals Productivity. Today’s workforce isn’t seeking work-life balance, according to Smith; they’re after work-life integration. “Employers who offer flexibility and agency over how, when and where people get the job done will benefit from a more engaged (and productive) employee base,” she emphasizes.

Why These Legacy Models Are Failing

Smith told me by email that legacy leadership models, especially hierarchical command-and-control, are out of touch with the requirements of today’s business environment, which requires adaptability, collaboration and meaningful employee engagement. “These outdated practices assume constant oversight is necessary for productivity, but research consistently shows the opposite: Gallup found that purpose-driven cultures achieve an 8.1% reduction in turnover and a 4.4% increase in profitability,” she points out.

“Companies like Microsoft, under Satya Nadella’s leadership, exemplified this shift by fostering a ‘learn-it-all’ mindset, prioritizing curiosity and collaboration, which has led to significant growth and employee satisfaction,” she adds. “Today’s workforce expects flexibility, work-life integration and leaders who actively live their values—demands that legacy models can’t meet in today’s world.”

What Can Replace These Defunct Practices

Smith believes that human-powered leadership is rapidly replacing outdated models, prioritizing flexibility, agency, connection and well-being. “Rather than micromanaging, today’s most effective leaders act as facilitators and bridge builders— empowering their teams to take ownership of their work while supporting their growth and deepening their connection to the organization’s purpose,” she explains. “This approach builds the trust and accountability that control-driven models often erode. Take Atlassian: its ‘Team Anywhere’ policy re-imagines not only where work gets done but also aligns work with employees’ needs. The results are striking: 92% of Atlassian employees report that flexibility helps them perform at their best, and 91% cite it as a key reason for staying with the company.”

How Leaders Can Adapt To Human-Powered Leadership

Leaders must practice emotional maturity by suspending self-interest, Smith suggests and becoming curious about their people, and focusing relentlessly on culture. “These shifts cultivate trust, resilience and psychological safety—qualities essential for high employee engagement and productivity in a complex and rapidly changing landscape,” she points out. “The impact is measurable: Upwork’s 2023 Work Innovators Study found that companies with a human-centered approach saw a 33% increase in revenue growth over 12 months, with 55% of leaders fully confident in their organization’s future. Human-powered leadership isn’t just good for culture - it’s a strategy for lasting growth.”

A Final Takeaway

You have the power to write a “leadership obituary” and lay to rest the negative emotions that outdated leadership strategies might be spreading to you and your coworkers. It’s not worth sacrificing your mental health and toiling under outdated leadership strategies when other job openings are now prioritizing employee mental and physical well-being. You are not weak or selfish if you bury the old and turn to the new, refusing to subject yourself to ineffective and potentially harmful leadership. You’re a normal person responding to a toxic workplace leadership, and it’s important to make your self-care a top priority.

Forbes

Key Market Developments

Foreign Investment Flows

- Foreign inflow hit a 2024 low of ₦11.26 billion in September

- Foreign outflow increased to ₦30.15 billion (from ₦24.38 billion in August)

- YTD foreign inflow: ₦310.99 billion (substantially higher than ₦108.93 billion in 2023)

- Peak inflow was ₦54.87 billion in May 2024, followed by steady decline

Market Activity

- Total transactions increased 29.90% month-over-month to ₦493.01 billion

- Year-over-year increase of 66.67% compared to September 2023

- Domestic investors dominated with 84% of transactions

- Retail investors outperformed institutional investors by 28%

Economic Implications

Immediate Concerns

1. Capital Flight Risk

   - Net negative foreign investment flow (outflow exceeding inflow)

   - Suggests declining foreign investor confidence

   - Potential pressure on foreign exchange reserves

2. Currency Pressure

   - Naira trading at ₦1652.25/$ indicates continued weakness

   - Foreign investment decline may further pressure exchange rates

   - Risk of creating a negative feedback loop with foreign investment

3. Monetary Policy Challenges

   - High benchmark rate (27.25%) failing to attract foreign capital

   - Inflation at 33.88% suggesting potential further rate hikes

   - Balancing act between controlling inflation and attracting investment

Positive Indicators

1. Domestic Market Resilience

   - Strong growth in total market transactions

   - Robust domestic investor participation

   - Particularly strong retail investor engagement

2. Year-on-Year Improvement

   - Higher YTD foreign inflow compared to 2023

   - Significant increase in total transaction value

   - Suggests underlying market strength despite challenges

Strategic Considerations

Short-term Outlook

- Likely continued pressure on the Naira

- Potential for further monetary tightening

- Risk of continued foreign investment decline

Long-term Implications

- Need for structural reforms to attract stable foreign investment

- Opportunity to develop domestic investor base further

- Importance of addressing currency stability for long-term growth

Recommendations

1. Policy Measures

   - Consider additional measures beyond interest rates to attract foreign investment

   - Focus on structural reforms to improve market confidence

   - Develop strategies to maintain domestic investor momentum

2. Market Development

   - Further strengthen domestic investor participation

   - Enhance market infrastructure and transparency

   - Consider incentives for long-term institutional investment

3. Risk Management

   - Monitor foreign exchange exposure

   - Develop contingency plans for continued foreign outflows

   - Strengthen domestic market resilience

Current Market Situation

Import Statistics (Oct 1 - Nov 11, 2024)

- Total petrol imports: 1.5 million metric tonnes (~2 billion litres)

- Diesel imports: 414,018 metric tonnes

- Jet fuel imports: 13,500 metric tonnes

Port-wise Distribution (October)

- Lagos: 555,121 metric tonnes

- Warri: 281,100 metric tonnes

- Port Harcourt: 94,224 metric tonnes

- Calabar: 64,000 metric tonnes

Dangote Refinery Performance

- Current stock: 500 million litres of petrol

- Actual delivery (Sept 15 - Oct 5): 148 million litres

- Expected delivery by NNPCL: 575 million litres

- Capacity potential: 650,000 barrels per day

Market Dynamics Analysis

Price Competition Challenges

1. Market Inefficiencies

   - Higher Dangote Refinery prices creating market resistance

   - Marketers preferring cheaper imports despite domestic availability

   - Potential pricing strategy misalignment with market realities

2. Operational Issues

   - Significant gap between capacity and actual production

   - Logistical hurdles affecting distribution

   - Delivery shortfall against NNPCL expectations

Economic Implications

1. Currency Impact

   - Continued pressure on Naira (₦1,740/$ parallel, ₦1,652/$ official)

   - Foreign reserve depletion from sustained imports

   - Circular effect: currency weakness → higher import costs → more pressure

2. Market Inefficiencies

   - Double infrastructure burden (import + domestic)

   - Underutilization of domestic refining capacity

   - Higher end-user costs due to market fragmentation

Critical Challenges

1. Pricing Mechanism

   - Dangote Refinery's pricing strategy may need review

   - Market resistance to higher domestic prices

   - Need for competitive pricing against imports

2. Operational Efficiency

   - Production capacity utilization issues

   - Distribution network limitations

   - Supply chain optimization needs

3. Policy Framework

   - Lack of clear import substitution strategy

   - Regulatory environment not fully supporting domestic production

   - Need for balanced approach to market intervention

Strategic Recommendations

1. Short-term Actions

   - Review Dangote Refinery's pricing strategy

   - Optimize distribution networks

   - Enhance coordination between NNPCL and domestic refiners

2. Medium-term Solutions

   - Develop import substitution incentives

   - Strengthen domestic supply chain

   - Implement gradual import reduction strategy

3. Long-term Strategies

   - Invest in distribution infrastructure

   - Create policy framework favoring domestic production

   - Develop export capacity for regional markets

Market Outlook

Positive Factors

- Domestic refining capacity exists

- Potential for self-sufficiency

- Infrastructure development ongoing

Risk Factors

- Continued currency pressure

- Market preference for imports

- Operational inefficiencies

Critical Success Factors

1. Price competitiveness of domestic production

2. Distribution network efficiency

3. Policy support for domestic refiners

4. Currency stability

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has rejected the result of the governor election in Ondo state.

Lucky Aiyedatiwa, candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC), was declared winner of the Ondo state governorship election held on Saturday.

Aiyedatiwa, the incumbent governor of Ondo state, won the election in all 18 LGAs with 366,781 votes to defeat his closest rival, Agboola Ajayi of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), who secured 117,845 votes.

In a statement issued on Sunday, Debo Ologunagba, PDP spokesperson, said the poll “runs short of all expectations and requirements of a free, fair and credible election”.

“The Peoples Democratic Party and indeed all lovers of democracy in Nigeria and across the world have just witnessed the worst election conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC),” the statement reads.

Ologunagba said the election “witnessed the height of electoral swindle, deceit and manipulation” allegedly perpetrated by the APC.

He said the poll “witnessed widespread election merchandising, monetisation and barefaced vote buying” and voter suppression.

Ologunagba said Nigerians and the international community should take “serious action” to stem all forms of election manipulation and preserve the nation’s democracy.

The PDP spokesman said the party will “take appropriate action” after reviewing the election outcome.

The Cable

Hezbollah media head killed in Israeli strike on Beirut, security sources say

Lebanese armed group Hezbollah confirmed its media relations chief Mohammad Afif was killed by an Israeli strike on a building in central Beirut on Sunday.

Israel has rarely hit senior Hezbollah personnel who do not have clear military roles, and its air strikes have mostly targeted Beirut's southern suburbs where the group has its heaviest presence.

Israel's military, which earlier declined to comment, issued a statement late on Sunday reporting it had "eliminated" Afif. The Lebanese health ministry said the strike had killed one and injured three.

A second, separate strike later on Sunday hit Mar Elias street, another central area rarely targeted by Israeli bombs, Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV reported. The Lebanese health ministry said that strike killed at least two people and wounded 22.

Hezbollah and Israel have been trading fire for more than a year, since the group began launching rockets at Israeli military targets on Oct. 8, 2023. That was a day after its Palestinian ally Hamas attacked southern Israel, killing some 1,200 people, Israeli authorities say.

In late September, Israel expanded its military campaign in Lebanon, heavily bombing the south and east and the southern suburbs of Beirut alongside ground incursions on the border.

Israel's campaign in Lebanon has in the last year killed 3,841 people and wounded nearly 15,000 others, the Lebanese health ministry said on Sunday, a toll that did not distinguish between civilians and combatants.

Hezbollah rockets fired across the border have killed dozens of Israelis, including soldiers and civilians, Israel says.

A separate assault on the Gaza Strip in Israel's war against Hamas has killed more than 43,000 people, most of them civilians, according to Palestinian health officials.

LEBANESE SOLDIERS KILLED

In addition to targeting Hezbollah, the escalation has killed several soldiers of the Lebanese military, including two who died on Sunday when Israel attacked an army post in the southern town of Al-Mari, the Lebanese army said on X.

Two other soldiers were wounded, it said.

The strike in Beirut targeting the Hezbollah official hit the Ras al-Nabaa neighbourhood, where many people displaced from the southern suburbs by Israeli bombardment have sought refuge.

The Lebanese security sources said a building housing offices of the Ba'ath Party had been hit, and the head of the party in Lebanon, Ali Hijazi, told the Lebanese broadcaster Al-Jadeed that Afif had been in the building.

Ambulances could be heard rushing to the scene, and guns were fired to prevent crowds approaching.

The Lebanese broadcaster showed video of a building whose upper floors had collapsed and civil defence workers at the scene.

Afif was a long-time media adviser to Hezbollah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed in an Israeli air attack on the southern suburbs of Beirut on Sept. 27.

He managed Hezbollah's Al-Manar television station for several years before taking over the group's media office.

Afif hosted several press conferences for journalists among rubble in Beirut's southern suburbs. In his most recent comments to reporters on Nov. 11, he said Israeli troops had been unable to hold any territory in Lebanon, and that Hezbollah had enough weapons and supplies to fight a long war.

Reuters

WESTERN PERSPECTIVE

'Massive' Russian attack causes Ukraine blackouts

A “massive” Russian missile and drone attack has targeted power infrastructure across Ukraine, the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky has said.

At least 10 people were killed in the strikes, which hit the capital, Kyiv, as well as multiple targets in several regions including Donetsk, Lviv and Odesa.

Ukraine’s largest private energy company, DTEK, said its thermal energy plants had suffered “significant damage”, resulting in blackouts.

The country's state-owned energy operator, Ukrenergo, says it will enforce "restriction measures" for the whole of Ukraine on Monday.

The co-ordinated assault overnight on Saturday was largest of its kind since early September, according to authorities and local media.

In total, around 120 missiles and 90 drones were launched, Zelensky said on Telegram.

"Peaceful cities, sleeping civilians" and "critical infrastructure" were targeted, Ukraine's foreign minister Andrii Sybiha said.

The Russian defence ministry reported that it had hit all its targets, saying that its attack was on "essential energy infrastructure supporting the Ukrainian military-industrial complex".

“Russian terrorists once again want to scare us with cold and lack of light,” was how President Zelensky put it.

Of course, anything that seeks to deny power to factories producing weaponry inevitably harms civilians too - indirectly, through the loss of electricity and frequently water, and directly, as missiles or fragments of missiles rain down from the sky.

The governor of the Odesa region, Oleh Kiper, said there had also been disruptions to heat and water supplies, although the latter was gradually being restored. Hospitals and other critical infrastructure were operating using generators.

Further east, the city of Mykolaiv was also hit. The region's leader, Vitaliy Kim, told the BBC that the people were resilient there, despite being attacked regularly.

"People are in a good shape and want to defend themselves. We do not want to lose our homes," he said.

In Kyiv, fragments from intercepted missiles and drones fell in several places, but there were no reports of injuries.

The attack was the eighth large-scale one targeting Ukraine's energy facilities this year, DTEK said in a statement, adding that its plants had been attacked more than 190 times since the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.

Ukrainian officials fear the most recent strike could signal another concerted Russian attempt to deplete the power grid as winter arrives.

Having already endured two-and-a-half bitter winters since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukrainians are bracing themselves for another.

“Here we go again" were the words of an official at one of Ukraine’s private energy companies, summing up the mood across the country on Sunday.

Through ingenuity and sheer determination, Ukraine has managed to survive each winter assault so far. There is every chance it will again, although its generation capacity is now less than a half of what it was in February 2022.

Poland, Ukraine's neighbour to the west, scrambled fighter jets to patrol its own airspace as a security precaution.

"Due to a massive attack by Russia, which is carrying out strikes using cruise missiles, ballistic missiles and drones against sites located, among other places, in western Ukraine, operations by Polish and allied aircraft have begun," Poland's Operational Command said.

Hungary, which neighbours both Ukraine and Poland, was also on alert after drone attacks struck the westernmost Subcarpathian region - about 20km (12 miles) from the Hungarian border.

The country's defence minister said the "situation is being monitored continuously".

These latest attacks come as both Ukraine and Russia continue to try to anticipate how US President-elect Donald Trump will act once his administration takes power in January.

Trump has consistently said his priority is to end the war and what he describes as a drain on US resources in the form of military aid to Kyiv. He has not said how.

The US has been the greatest supplier of arms to Ukraine. Between the start of the war and the end of June 2024, it delivered or committed to send weapons and equipment worth $55.5bn (£41.5bn), according to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy, a German research organisation.

There are fears in Kyiv that it may come under pressure to negotiate an end to the war that may favour Russia's advances - Moscow continues to control a large swathe of Ukrainian territory.

Zelensky has said he is certain the war with Russia will “end sooner” than it otherwise would have under the new Trump presidency.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov recently told Russian state media of "positive" signals from the incoming US administration. But Russia has denied that a phone call took place in which Donald Trump reportedly warned the Russian president against escalating the war.

However, for all the talk of the possible changes coming when Donald Trump enters the White House, Sunday's attacks seem to indicate that, for now at least, the war’s grim realities are not changing.

Meanwhile, the leader of Germany - another Ukrainian ally - has defended a phone call he had with Putin on Friday, something Kyiv criticised as an attempt at appeasement.

"It was important to tell him [Putin] that he should not count on the support of Germany, Europe and many others in the world for Ukraine waning, but that it is now also up to him to ensure that the war comes to an end," Olaf Scholz said on Sunday.

He added that the Russian president had given no indication of a shift in his thinking on the war.

RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE

Moscow comments on Biden’s reported approval of strikes deep inside Russia

Russian President Vladimir Putin has already shared his thoughts on possible Western approval for Ukraine to carry out long-range strikes deep within Russian territory, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.

According to a report from the New York Times on Sunday, which cited unnamed American officials, US President Joe Biden has given Kiev the green light to deploy long-range American missiles against targets within Russia’s internationally recognized borders.

“The president has expressed his opinion on this matter,” Zakharova told news outlet RBK on Sunday.

In September, Putin stated that Ukrainian forces lack the capability to carry out attacks with Western-supplied long-range missiles without external assistance. “It is not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It is about deciding whether NATO countries become directly involved in the military conflict or not,” he said.

Putin added that if a decision allowing the strikes were made, Moscow would make “appropriate decisions in response to the threats that will be posed to us.”

BBC/RT

Phillip Adenekan Adekunle Ademola had everything it takes for an excellent career at the highest levels of a judicial career. He was the grand-son of a king, the son of a Chief Justice and a prince in his own right. In another era, he could easily have become the first second generation Chief Justice of Nigeria, CJN. It was his destiny to make neither and many still believe that he could well have been the ablest Justice of the Supreme Court Nigeria never had.

Born 27 July 1926, Adenekan Ademola finished his high school at Kings College in Lagos in 1944 and attended Higher College Yaba before proceeding to the University of London from where he graduated with a degree in law. When he qualified as a lawyer in 1951, his dad was already a judge, only the third Nigerian to be so appointed. Ademola practiced law for the next 19 years and spent three of those years also working as Chairman of the Finance Committee of the Egba Divisional Council in present day Ogun State.

When Yakubu Gowon gazetted his appointment as a judge of the High Court of the Western State of Nigeria on 18 June 1970, Ademola was just 45 years old. His dad, Adetokunbo Ademola, an Egba blue blood, had been in office as the CJN for 12 years. It was two years before Adetokunbo retired as CJN. Five years after his appointment as a judge, in 1977, another soldier, Olusegun Obasanjo, elevated Ademola into the pioneer cohort of justices of the Court.

A product of the mostly diffident judicial philosophy of the military era, he did not let the soldiers down. When some pesky Taiwanese litigants approached his bench in the Court of Appeal to hold the military to account for what looked like evident violations of human rights, Ademola elegantly counselled judges to “blow muted trumpets.” It was only a matter of time, many thought, before his diligent service was requited by setting him on his way to follow in the footsteps of his celebrated father to the Supreme Court. Many made it there who had but a fraction of his ability and preparation.

On more than two occasions, Ademola was actively considered for elevation to the Supreme Court. He had the intellect and pedigree for the role and no one could accuse him of judicial levitas. In the end, it was not to be. There was a persistent objection from another scion of an equally famous Egba dynasty who relentlessly levied serious complaints against Ademola which were never dispositively determined. But that was considered enough to ultimately park his judicial career in the cul-de-sac of the Court of Appeal. In 1991, Adenekan Ademola retired from the Court of Appeal. Reflecting his cultured intellectual outlook, he was appointed thereafter as the inaugural Director of Studies of the National Judicial Institute.

In those days, judicial integrity was taken seriously and even the slightest whiff of integrity deficit or exposure attracted career consequences. Olumuyiwa Jibowu was the first Nigerian Justice of the Supreme Court. His reputation as a judge appeared impeccable. In 1957, it emerged that Olumuyiwa had written a letter to an old friend, one Mr. Savage, which was said to have content that made references considered to be insalubrious about the leader of the National Council of Nigeria and Cameroons (NCNC), Nnamdi Azikiwe. One year later, when his name came up for consideration to become the first indigenous CJN, the contents of the letter were enough to force Olumuyiwa’s withdrawal from contention. The beneficiary was Adenekan Ademola’s dad.

Today in Nigeria, closeness to politicians is widely perceived to be a boost to judicial ambitions, not a constraint. A judge of the Federal High Court has recently gone on record to say that to be appointed a federal judge today in Nigeria, “one must either have the backing of the presidency or a political party.”

A widely respected continental medium recently reported under the caption “Why Nigerian judges love Nyesom Wike”, that the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) is “lauded like a rock star in judicial circles.” Part of the reason for the judicial superstardom of the FCT Minister is his material “generosity” towards judges.

This was not always the standard judicial fare.

The 1983 elections in Nigeria were quite contentious. Those were the first to be supervised by civilians under the presidential system. Many of the disputes over election outcomes ended up in court. Emmanuel Obioma Ogwuegbu, whose death at 91 recently became public, was then a judge of the High Court of Imo State. He later joined Adenekan Ademola in the Court of Appeal. The year after Ademola’s retirement, Ogwuegbu proceeded to the Supreme Court where he served for 11 years before retiring in 2003.

One night shortly after the 1983 elections, Ogwuegbu received an unusual night-time visitor at his official residence in Aba. Onyeso Nwachukwu who died in 2022 was a pious man, an Elder in the church, and the state chairman of the ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN). On this night, the party chairman arrived with his wife, who blagged her way into the house by dropping the fact that she was a high school contemporary of the judge’s wife at the Community Girls Secondary School, Elelenwo, Rivers State.

Under the guise of a social visit, the party chairman visited to plead the cause of the beaten NPN governorship candidate, Collins Obi. The election petition was yet to be heard and the panel to hear it was not even announced. But the party wanted to advance the judge onto the panel as its “person.”

Ogwuegbu firmly reprimanded him before ushering him out of the house.

On the grounds of the compound but unknown to the judge, the party chairman had parked a brand-new Range Rover car complete with cellophane frills. As Justice Ogwuegbu ushered him out of the house, he noticed the party chairman walking to slide into another well-appointed sedan. So, he asked who the owner of the new Range Rover was. In response, the party chairman sidled up to the judge to inform him that he was the proud recipient of the four-wheel gift for his end of year.

Ogwuegbu smiled and pleaded with the party chairman to spare him further hardship. He explained that he had enough problems maintaining his Mercedes Benz car on his judicial salary and could not afford the financial exposure of trying to maintain an exponentially more expensive car. He insisted that the party chairman had to go with the car in the same manner that he brought it onto his compound. Ogwuegbu later begged off election tribunal duty because of this.

With reluctance, Elder Onyeso Nwachukwu drove out in the Range Rover which was manifestly meant to bribe an honest judge. For the remainder of his life, however, he lived in awe of Ogwuegbu because, he said, the judge belonged to that rare breed who could not be bought.

Honorable Justice Emmanuel Obioma Ogwuegbu was part of a generation in which judging was a deservedly elevated calling. In return, society honoured people like him with the honorific “My Lord”, an acknowledgement that they were called to a job that is truly divine. Today, the senior-most lawyers publicly twerk to partisan orchestras conducted by people who were in professional diapers when they were already in the Inner Bar and judges are made to believe it is kosher to enjoy political joy-rides and be serenaded with four-wheel bribes by politically exposed persons.

There will be time to return to the matter of how judicial integrity descended into their current morass and to address what can be done about that. For the moment, it is time to honour the memories of a generation of men and women, epitomised by Emmanuel Obioma Ogwuegbu, who put the “honorable” into the appellation, “Honourable Justice.”

** Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, a professor of law, teaches at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and can be reached through This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..