A US airstrike in southern Somalia that killed at least 12 civilians, including eight children, in November 2025 has raised renewed questions over the consequences of American military operations targeting armed groups in the country.

The strike took place in Jamaame, a town in Somalia’s Lower Juba region, on the morning of Nov. 15, according to accounts gathered from residents and reviewed evidence from the attack site. The United States has not publicly acknowledged civilian deaths from the operation.

Residents said the attack began shortly after 9 a.m. when aircraft were heard above the town. Witnesses described a series of explosions that struck residential areas and a religious school, leaving homes damaged or destroyed.The victims included children who had been returning from Qur’an school, families inside their homes, and a pregnant woman, according to relatives and witnesses.

The US military confirmed that it had conducted an operation against al-Shabaab, an armed group linked to al-Qaida that has carried out attacks in Somalia and neighbouring countries. The strike was part of a wider campaign of US air operations aimed at disrupting the group.Residents said the aircraft involved were likely drones.

The weaponry used in the attack was not publicly disclosed, but witnesses described repeated missile strikes consistent with the use of remotely piloted aircraft.At one home in Jamaame, relatives said the attack killed Safiyo Hassan Abukar, who was heavily pregnant, along with her children Abdifatah, 10, Abdinasir, 7, Hussein, 6, and Abdurahman, 4.Mohamed, the children’s grandfather, said he rushed to the scene after hearing explosions and found debris scattered around the destroyed house.

He said Abdifatah was often close to his mother and helped her with household tasks. He described Abdinasir as a child who regularly asked him to pray so he could memorise the Qur’an.Other residents reported similar losses.

Marian Haji Abdi Guled said her children were returning from Qur’an school when the attack occurred. She said the sound of aircraft overhead caused fear among residents before the strikes hit.According to Guled, her children were injured when missiles struck nearby.

She said the area became chaotic as residents attempted to move away from the attacks.Maryan Nur Buruji said her pregnant stepdaughter sought shelter at the Qur’an school with her two-year-old child. She said the school was later hit, killing the woman while the toddler survived.

Another resident, Mohamed Hassan Abdulle, said he returned to find his home destroyed and his wife, Farhiyo Hassan Nuur, and their 10-month-old daughter, Layla, dead.Farmers working outside the town also described receiving urgent calls from relatives as the attack unfolded.Gedow Ibrahim said he was working in his sesame fields when his wife called, warning him that drones were flying overhead.

He told her to remain inside, but later received another call saying their home had been hit.He said his daughters Maryan, 9, and Farhiyo, 7, were killed, while another child, Amin, 8, was injured by shrapnel.The attack also killed other residents, including a local imam, according to witnesses.

Residents said at least 15 explosions were heard and that numerous homes were damaged. Witnesses estimated that about 18 houses were destroyed, while the school was heavily damaged.The incident is among the deadliest reported civilian casualties from a US operation in Somalia in recent years.

Previous major incidents involving US forces in Somalia include the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu, known as “Black Hawk Down,” which resulted in significant casualties during a failed US military mission.The strike occurred months after the start of the second Trump administration, during a period when US policy toward Somalia was being reassessed.

In early 2025, US defence officials held discussions with senior officers from US Africa Command, which oversees American military operations on the continent.A directive issued during that period changed procedures governing aspects of US military operations, according to reporting on the policy shift. The effect of those changes on individual operations was not publicly detailed.

US officials have repeatedly said American military action in Somalia is aimed at preventing attacks by al-Shabaab and reducing the group’s ability to operate. The group has controlled territory in parts of Somalia at various times and has carried out attacks against civilians, government forces, and international targets.

Human rights organisations have previously raised concerns about civilian harm from airstrikes in Somalia and other conflict zones, calling for greater transparency around targeting decisions and investigations into possible civilian casualties.The Jamaame strike has renewed scrutiny over the balance between counterterrorism operations and civilian protection in areas where armed groups operate among local populations.

For the families affected, the consequences remain centred on the loss of relatives who were inside homes, travelling from school, or working nearby when the strikes occurred.Abdullahi Mohamed Abo Sheikh Ali, whose family was killed, said he believed civilians had been caught in the attack.

“The Americans bombed us,” he said. “Children, women and elders were bombed. They spared nothing.”

U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) said American forces operating in the Middle East intercepted the drones before they could threaten maritime traffic moving through one of the world’s most strategically important energy corridors.

“Earlier today, U.S. forces in the Middle East shot down two Iranian one-way attack drones that threatened international maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz,” CENTCOM said in a statement posted on X, adding that U.S. forces remained prepared to defend against what it described as Iranian aggression.

The incident followed another military exchange less than 24 hours earlier. CENTCOM said on Friday that American forces had shot down four Iranian attack drones launched toward the strait before conducting retaliatory strikes against Iranian coastal surveillance radar sites.

The latest actions underscore the growing risk to commercial navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime chokepoint connecting the Persian Gulf with global energy markets. Any disruption to shipping in the narrow waterway has the potential to affect international trade flows and energy supplies.

Saturday’s drone interceptions came amid a broader deterioration in regional security conditions. Earlier in the day, Iran launched missiles toward Bahrain and Kuwait, according to reports cited by regional officials, expanding the geographical scope of hostilities and drawing renewed concern from Gulf states.

The exchanges represent the latest chapter in an escalating conflict between the United States and Iran, even as both sides continue indirect diplomatic contacts aimed at exploring possible pathways toward ending the confrontation.

The juxtaposition of military operations and ongoing negotiations highlights the complexity of the current crisis, with diplomatic engagement proceeding alongside repeated battlefield escalations.

Neither Tehran nor Washington has indicated any immediate willingness to scale back military activities, raising concerns among regional governments and international shipping operators that further incidents in and around the Strait of Hormuz could increase tensions and heighten risks to maritime security.

The latest drone interceptions reinforce the central role of the waterway in the broader U.S.-Iran confrontation, as both sides continue to test each other’s military capabilities while seeking leverage in parallel diplomatic discussions.

The conflict has intensified despite ongoing diplomatic efforts aimed at securing a ceasefire and broader regional de-escalation. Areas south of the Litani River have been largely depopulated and heavily damaged, while Israeli military activity has increasingly extended north of the river.

Recent clashes have highlighted Hezbollah’s evolving battlefield approach. According to Israeli media reports cited in the source material, a Hezbollah fighter infiltrated an area near Qawzah, north of the border, and killed an Israeli major before escaping. In another reported incident, a Hezbollah drone targeted the commander of Israel’s 401st Armored Brigade in the town of Debel.

Military sources cited in the report said Hezbollah has largely moved away from the extensive use of guided missiles and rocket barrages that characterized earlier phases of the conflict. Instead, the group is relying on small, mobile units conducting ambushes, infiltration operations and drone attacks designed to inflict casualties while avoiding direct confrontation with Israel’s superior air power and surveillance capabilities.

Analysts said advances in Israeli intelligence gathering, including drones, surveillance balloons and satellite monitoring, have made traditional launch-and-withdraw tactics increasingly difficult. As a result, Hezbollah has adapted by dispersing fighters into smaller independent units operating across multiple locations.

A Lebanese military source said the growing use of fiber-optic first-person-view drones has altered the nature of the battlefield by enabling more precise attacks against Israeli positions. However, Israeli forces continue to maintain overwhelming advantages in airpower, intelligence collection and long-range strike capabilities.

The humanitarian impact has continued to mount. According to figures cited in the report, more than 3,120 civilians have been killed and over 9,500 wounded since March 2. Israeli forces recently issued additional evacuation warnings covering dozens of villages north of the Litani River ahead of further military operations.

The destruction has fueled debate inside Lebanon over the costs of continued fighting. Israeli newspaper reports cited in the article suggested that Hezbollah faces difficulties rebuilding its ranks and is under pressure to reach a ceasefire, although the group has not publicly commented on such claims.

Retired Lebanese military officials offered differing assessments of the conflict’s trajectory. Retired Major General Abdul Rahman Chehaitli argued that Hezbollah’s guerrilla tactics complicate Israeli efforts to hold territory but are unlikely to produce a decisive military outcome.

He said civilians and the Lebanese state remain the principal victims of the confrontation.
Retired Brigadier General Khalil Jamil said Hezbollah’s tactics can impose costs on Israeli forces but are unlikely to compel a withdrawal from southern Lebanon.

He argued that Israel increasingly views the conflict through an existential security lens and has demonstrated a willingness to sustain a prolonged campaign despite casualties and domestic pressure.
Both officers agreed that a military solution remains unlikely and that negotiations ultimately represent the only viable path to ending the conflict.

Diplomatic attention is focused on upcoming security discussions expected later this month between Israeli and Lebanese officials under U.S. sponsorship, followed by a broader political track in June. The talks come amid wider regional diplomacy, including ongoing discussions between the United States and Iran.
Israel continues to reject any arrangement that would permit Hezbollah to maintain a presence in southern border areas, while Lebanon is seeking a comprehensive ceasefire, Israeli withdrawal, prisoner releases, the return of displaced civilians and reconstruction assistance.

According to Yassin Jaber, economic losses from the war, including damage to homes, infrastructure and businesses, have reached approximately $20 billion. He said international aid flows have been significantly lower than those received during previous conflicts.

As diplomatic efforts continue, fighting on the ground shows little sign of easing, leaving southern Lebanon caught between Hezbollah’s campaign of resistance and Israel’s determination to secure its northern frontier.

Aoun’s remarks came after Israeli strikes targeted several locations in southern Lebanon and the Iran-backed armed group Hezbollah announced a drone attack on what it described as a military target in northern Israel.

“The framework that Lebanon has set for the negotiations consists of an Israeli withdrawal, a ceasefire, the deployment of the army along the border, the return of the displaced, and economic aid,” Aoun said in a statement.

“My duty, based on my position and my responsibility, is to do the impossible, and to choose what is least costly, in order to stop the war against Lebanon and its people,” he added.

The ceasefire, initially reached on April 17, was extended by 45 days last week following a third round of talks between Lebanese and Israeli representatives in Washington. Hezbollah has opposed the negotiations.

Despite the truce, violence has persisted along the border. Hezbollah said Monday it launched a drone targeting an Iron Dome air defense platform at an Israeli military encampment in northern Israel, describing the strike as retaliation for Israeli ceasefire violations.

Lebanon’s state-run National News Agency reported multiple Israeli strikes across southern Lebanon, while the Israeli military issued evacuation warnings for residents in three southern Lebanese towns.

The latest escalation followed Israeli strikes on Sunday that Lebanese authorities said killed seven people, including a member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad in northeastern Lebanon, away from the border region.

Israeli forces have maintained operations inside parts of southern Lebanon within a self-declared “yellow line” extending roughly 10 kilometers north of the border. Israeli troops have also carried out demolitions in areas under their control.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that Israel was confronting growing threats from first-person-view drones increasingly deployed by Hezbollah against Israeli forces.

According to Lebanese authorities, Israeli military operations have killed more than 2,900 people in Lebanon since the conflict began, including more than 400 since the ceasefire took effect in April.

The sanctions target what U.S. officials described as a procurement network supporting Iran’s defense sector amid continuing regional tensions and stalled diplomatic efforts tied to the conflict involving Tehran and its regional allies.

The Treasury Department said the measures were aimed at entities and individuals allegedly involved in facilitating the acquisition of sensitive materials and technology for Iran’s military-industrial apparatus, including components linked to the production of Shahed unmanned aerial vehicles.

The action comes days before U.S. President Donald Trump is expected to travel to China for talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping, at a time when negotiations tied to the broader Iran conflict have shown little progress.

“Under Trump’s decisive leadership, we will continue to act to Keep America Safe and target foreign individuals and companies providing Iran’s military with weapons for use against U.S. forces,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.

The Treasury did not immediately disclose the full list of sanctioned parties in the initial announcement, but said several of the targeted entities operated from China and Hong Kong and were involved in supplying materials tied to Iran’s drone manufacturing capabilities.

Iran’s Shahed drones have become a central component of the country’s military strategy and have drawn international scrutiny over their deployment across regional conflicts. Western governments have repeatedly accused Tehran of expanding its drone production and export networks despite existing sanctions regimes.

The latest measures freeze any U.S.-based assets belonging to the designated parties and generally prohibit Americans from conducting business with them. Secondary sanctions risks may also apply to foreign financial institutions engaging with sanctioned entities.

Washington has steadily expanded sanctions targeting Iran’s defense procurement channels since the outbreak of heightened regional hostilities, focusing increasingly on overseas intermediaries and companies accused of supplying dual-use technology and industrial materials.

When Ukrainian corporal Vadym Lietunov ran from the wreckage of his frontline position in late February, he believed he was heading toward safety. Instead, he entered a Russian dugout, beginning nearly two weeks of captivity underground with an enemy soldier who would eventually surrender alongside him.

Lietunov, a 34-year-old serviceman from the southern Ukrainian city of Odesa, had arrived at his frontline post only a day before heavy bombardment began. According to his account, Russian forces subjected the position to repeated attacks for six to seven hours daily using kamikaze drones and mortar fire.He and another Ukrainian soldier, identified as Sasha, spent their days repairing the damaged dugout, putting out fires with bottles of urine and rebuilding protective walls using sacks filled with clay.

“The enemy knew we were there. It was trying to kill us,” Lietunov said while receiving treatment at a rehabilitation center in Odesa after the incident.The attacks intensified when Russian drone operators deployed a Molniya drone carrying an anti-tank mine. One explosion near the dugout entrance left both soldiers concussed.

Several similar strikes followed before another drone dropped a mine directly above their foxhole.The blast destroyed the roof and fatally wounded Sasha, tearing off both of his legs. Lietunov said he tried to pull his fellow soldier free but quickly realized he was dead. Expecting another strike within minutes, he fled the destroyed position wearing only socks and ran toward what he believed was a nearby Ukrainian shelter.

He found a fortified dugout hidden among trees, with a blanket covering the entrance. Shouting for help, he entered and saw a uniformed soldier aiming an automatic rifle at him.“I thought my guys were inside,” Lietunov said. “Then I heard his accent. He was Russian.”The soldier, later identified as Nikita, ordered him into a small underground chamber and assured him he would not be shot because he was unarmed.

On the wall hung a makeshift Christian cross built from wooden planks with the words “save and protect” written across it.Although Nikita initially promised to release him the next morning, he did not. Lietunov said he spent the first days expecting execution at any moment and concluded that survival depended on gaining the trust of his captor.

Drawing on psychology books he had read as a teenager, Lietunov began observing Nikita closely. He described the Russian soldier as a former prisoner and drug addict who had been released from jail to fight in Ukraine. According to Lietunov, Nikita had previously fled combat, been detained, and then returned to the front. His commander, whom he described as Chechen, communicated orders by radio.

Nikita searched Lietunov’s clothes and belongings, reportedly looking for drugs and hidden tracking devices, influenced by Russian state narratives portraying Ukrainian soldiers as drug users fitted with GPS transmitters.The dugout itself reflected the harsh conditions facing frontline troops on both sides. Lietunov said Nikita received only a small daily ration delivered by drone: a packet of porridge, jam, and a bottle of water.

Letters from Russian schoolchildren were pasted on the walls, each carrying nearly identical messages of support.Despite frequently insisting that Russia had the strongest army in the world, Nikita was cold, hungry, and isolated, Lietunov said.He also described his captor as unstable. At times, Nikita would place a gun against his forehead and threaten to kill him. On several occasions, he stopped without explanation.

“He would say, ‘I’m going to kill you right now,’ and then suddenly change his mind,” Lietunov said.To avoid provoking suspicion, Lietunov deliberately presented himself as weak and harmless. He later developed gangrene in one of his toes and, believing he might die there, asked Nikita to shoot him outside so his body could be recovered by Ukrainian forces.Nikita refused, according to Lietunov, fearing exposure to drones and artillery.

Meanwhile, Lietunov’s own brigade, the 118th, assumed he had likely been killed. His commander informed his mother, Mariia, that there was a 95% chance her son would not return. She fainted after hearing the news, he said.His wife, Alesya, remained convinced he was alive. The couple, who have a five-year-old son named Andriy, had already endured years of war since Lietunov joined the military hours after Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.

He had previously served in air defense and participated in operations linked to the liberation of Kherson.Inside the dugout, survival increasingly depended on water and trust. Nikita gave Lietunov one square of chocolate a day and a bottle cap of water. The Russian soldier complained about shortages and said troops were often forced to collect rainwater and even drink urine.

At one point, Nikita suggested surrendering to Ukrainian forces. Lietunov responded by describing the treatment of prisoners under the Geneva Conventions, including food, cigarettes, and regular conditions of detention. He said the subject came up five times.Eventually, when the dugout ran out of water, the two men left together in heavy fog. A Ukrainian drone hovered above them.

Lietunov used the moment to signal his identity, hanging a sign with his call-sign, “Cartman,” and his brigade number beside a tree.Initially, Ukrainian forces believed both men were Russian soldiers and prepared another strike. According to Lietunov, only after commanders checked his social media accounts did they realize the thin figure below was their missing comrade.A drone later dropped a radio, allowing direct communication with his brigade.

Lietunov carefully avoided provoking Nikita, fearing any sudden move could lead to violence. He arranged food deliveries, handing most of his share to the Russian soldier.“He had told me that when he was full, he was kind,” Lietunov said.Russian forces also continued sending supplies. One drone reportedly delivered an explosive device disguised as a log filled with TNT, which Nikita was ordered to place in the forest.

Lietunov said he remained uncertain until the final moment whether Nikita would surrender or kill them both.The standoff ended when thick fog allowed a Ukrainian armored vehicle to approach. Both men climbed into the back and were taken to Ukrainian brigade headquarters.There, Lietunov was reunited with fellow soldiers who had believed him dead. Nikita surrendered without resistance and destroyed his phone before entering custody.

Video recorded at the base showed him calmly stating that he had taken Vadym prisoner.Ukrainian security officers later transferred Nikita for interrogation. Lietunov said he requested that the Russian be treated properly, honoring a promise made during captivity. Officials indicated he could eventually be exchanged for Ukrainian prisoners of war.Now recovering after losing a toe, Lietunov remains on crutches in Odesa, reunited with his family.

“I was a prisoner,” he said. “But in the end, I came out with a prisoner.”

Ukrainian Ambassador to Japan Yurii Lutovinov told Reuters the policy change by Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi was “a very big step forward,” even though Japan still restricts exports to active conflict zones.

“This allows us to talk,” Lutovinov said, adding that any future transfer would require a defense technology agreement between the two countries.Kyiv is also seeking Japanese investment for domestic air-defense systems to reduce dependence on U.S.-made Patriot missiles and is discussing Tokyo’s possible participation in NATO’s arms-funding mechanism for Ukraine.

Japan has linked Ukraine’s security to its own concerns over China’s growing military power and tensions around Taiwan, with Tokyo viewing the war as part of a broader global security challenge.

The inauguration was held on Sunday to mark the first anniversary of what North Korea described as the end of an operation to “liberate” Russia’s Kursk border region, where North Korean troops were deployed to help repel a Ukrainian incursion, according to the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

Kim attended the ceremony alongside visiting Russian Defense Minister Andrei Beloussov and Vyacheslav Volodin, speaker of Russia’s State Duma, underscoring the growing importance of military cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

KCNA reported that Kim placed flowers before the remains of dead soldiers and participated in a burial ritual by throwing dirt over one coffin, describing the fallen troops as symbols of “the Korean people’s heroism.”In a speech carried by KCNA, Kim said the soldiers’ spirits would support “a victorious march by the Korean and Russian people” and praised joint operations for frustrating what he called a U.S.-led Western “hegemonic plot and military adventurism” on the Russia-Ukraine front.

North Korea and Russia publicly acknowledged in April 2025 that their forces had fought together in Kursk, a rare admission of direct North Korean military involvement in a foreign conflict.Neither government has disclosed the exact number of North Korean troops deployed.

South Korea’s intelligence service estimated last year that around 15,000 North Korean soldiers were sent to Russia and roughly 2,000 were killed.In a separate meeting with Beloussov, Kim said North Korea would continue to fully support Russia’s efforts to defend its sovereignty and security interests, KCNA said.

Russia’s state news agency TASS reported that Beloussov told Kim Moscow was prepared to sign a bilateral military cooperation plan covering the 2027–2031 period, signaling that security ties could deepen further beyond battlefield coordination.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, in a letter read aloud by Volodin during the ceremony, said the museum would serve as “a clear symbol of the friendship and solidarity” between the two countries and expressed confidence that their comprehensive strategic partnership would continue to strengthen, KCNA reported.

Since the start of the Ukraine war, Kim has increasingly prioritized relations with Moscow, supplying troops as well as conventional weapons, according to South Korean, U.S. and allied officials.

In return, analysts and Western governments believe Pyongyang has received economic assistance and could seek advanced Russian military technology, including systems that may strengthen its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs.Military analysts say North Korean troops initially suffered heavy losses because of limited combat experience and unfamiliarity with modern drone warfare and battlefield conditions in the Kursk region.

However, Ukrainian military and intelligence officials have said the North Korean contingent gradually adapted and became an important element of Russia’s strategy of sustaining manpower pressure by deploying large numbers of troops in prolonged fighting.

The opening of the museum adds a symbolic domestic dimension to Pyongyang’s wartime support for Moscow, presenting the casualties as national sacrifice while reinforcing the political legitimacy of its expanding alignment with Russia.

In an interview with CNN, Zelenskiy stated that Ukraine has so far experienced no disruption in the delivery of such systems or related intelligence support, but cautioned that an extended Middle East conflict could place existing supply arrangements under pressure.

He noted that Ukraine has secured portions of its U.S. weaponry through a program under which NATO countries finance purchases for Kyiv, enabling access to critical systems including anti-ballistic missiles for Patriot platforms.

“Through this program, we can include and buy anti-ballistic missiles for Patriot systems and some other weapons which is very important for us,” Zelenskiy said, adding that similar mechanisms were not available through European partners.

The Ukrainian leader emphasized that U.S. supply volumes remain limited due to constrained production capacity, acknowledging that Washington has provided only a relatively small number of such systems.“We understand why, because the production in the United States is not so big,” he said, warning that delays in de-escalation or ceasefire efforts in the Middle East could exacerbate supply risks.

Zelenskiy also highlighted Ukraine’s growing role in sharing military expertise abroad, particularly in countering drone threats. He said Kyiv had signed agreements with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates to provide training and technical know-how developed during its conflict with Russia, where Iranian-designed drones have been widely deployed.

He added that Ukraine intends to expand such cooperation with other countries, focusing initially on knowledge transfer and training missions.

Authorities in Russia’s Leningrad region confirmed that additional mobile fire units would be deployed to protect strategic facilities, including the major Baltic ports of and , which have faced repeated attacks in recent weeks. Governor said the units would include reservists serving on voluntary contracts, tasked specifically with countering unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) threats.

Kyiv has described the strikes as retaliatory measures against Russia’s sustained aerial bombardment of Ukrainian cities. Ukrainian forces have increasingly targeted Russia’s energy infrastructure, aiming to disrupt export revenues that remain a key source of funding for Moscow’s war effort.

The attacks have had a measurable impact on Russia’s oil logistics. According to data cited by the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air, oil shipments from Ust-Luga and Primorsk fell by roughly half in the week following a March 23 drone strike compared to the same period a year earlier.

Despite these disruptions, Russia’s oil revenues have shown resilience. The reported that Russian oil export earnings nearly doubled to $19 billion in March, reflecting elevated global prices amid broader geopolitical tensions, including conflict in the Middle East.
President had previously authorized the use of reservists to guard energy infrastructure under legislation signed last year, as Ukraine expanded its use of long-range drones to strike deeper into Russian territory.

The intensifying exchange of strikes underscores a shift in the conflict toward targeting economic assets, with both sides seeking to degrade the other’s capacity to sustain prolonged military operations.