Home Blog Page 49

Former Botswana President Festus Mogae Dies at 86

0

Former Botswana president Festus Mogae has died at the age of 86 following a short illness, government officials announced Thursday, marking the passing of a leader widely credited with strengthening economic stability and democratic governance in the southern African nation.

Festus Mogae served as Botswana’s third president from 1998 to 2008, a decade during which the country reinforced its reputation as one of Africa’s most stable democracies. Authorities declared three days of national mourning, while President Duma Boko paid tribute to him as a dedicated public servant and patriot.

Born on Aug. 21, 1939, in Serowe, Festus Mogae pursued studies in economics in the United Kingdom before entering public service shortly after Botswana gained independence in 1966. He joined the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning in 1968 and steadily rose through senior roles, including central bank governor, finance minister and vice president.

He assumed the presidency on April 1, 1998, succeeding Quett Masire in a peaceful transfer of power that underscored Botswana’s democratic traditions. After completing the constitutionally mandated two terms, he handed leadership to his vice president, Ian Khama, in 2008.

During his tenure, Botswana continued to experience sustained economic expansion, driven largely by diamond revenues and prudent fiscal management. The country, once among the world’s poorest at independence, saw significant improvements in infrastructure, public services and financial stability under his leadership.

Beyond economic policy, Festus Mogae gained international recognition for confronting the HIV crisis at a time when Botswana faced one of the highest infection rates globally. His administration introduced one of Africa’s most comprehensive national responses, including expanded access to treatment and public awareness campaigns.

In recognition of his leadership, he was awarded the Mo Ibrahim Prize for Achievement in African Leadership in 2008, honoring his commitment to governance, transparency and economic progress during a period of significant public health challenges.

After leaving office, Festus Mogae remained active in international diplomacy. He played a key role in efforts to stabilize South Sudan, serving as chairperson of the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission from 2015 to 2018. In that role, he oversaw the implementation of a peace agreement aimed at ending conflict in the young nation, though the deal later faced setbacks, as noted by Radiotamazuj.

Botswana’s government confirmed his death and highlighted his long record of public service. Duma Boko described him as a statesman whose contributions helped shape the country’s modern identity.

According to Reuters, Festus Mogae earned widespread respect for his stewardship of Botswana’s economy and his direct approach to tackling the HIV crisis, which brought global attention to the country’s public health efforts.

He is survived by his wife and three daughters.

The death of Festus Mogae marks the end of an era for Botswana, a country often cited as a model of political stability and economic management in Africa. His presidency came at a critical time when Botswana needed to transition from early post-independence growth into a more mature and diversified economy.

Mogae’s economic policies reflected a cautious but effective approach. By maintaining fiscal discipline and leveraging diamond revenues responsibly, his administration avoided many of the economic pitfalls that have affected other resource-rich nations. His tenure reinforced Botswana’s reputation for transparency and low corruption, factors that continue to attract investment.

Equally significant was his response to the HIV crisis. At a time when stigma and denial hindered action in many countries, Mogae’s government openly addressed the epidemic and prioritized treatment. This approach not only saved lives but also helped stabilize the workforce and economy, demonstrating how public health policy can directly influence national development.

His involvement in South Sudan’s peace process highlights another dimension of his legacy. Although the agreement he helped oversee did not fully succeed, his role reflected a broader trend of African leaders contributing to conflict resolution efforts across the continent. It also underscored the challenges of sustaining peace in regions with deep political divisions.

Botswana’s continued stability after his departure suggests that the institutions strengthened during his presidency have endured. Peaceful transfers of power and adherence to constitutional limits remain key features of the country’s political system, setting it apart in a region where such transitions are not always guaranteed.

Looking ahead, Mogae’s legacy may serve as a benchmark for leadership in resource management, public health response and democratic governance. His tenure illustrates how consistent policy, institutional integrity and long-term planning can produce lasting national benefits.

At a broader level, his death invites reflection on leadership transitions across Africa. As a generation of post-independence leaders and their successors pass from the scene, questions about continuity, reform and governance remain central to the continent’s future.

Reuters/Radioatamazuj

Tensions Surge as Iran Seizes Tanker and U.S. Disables Vessels Near Strait of Hormuz

0

Iranian forces have seized an oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman while the United States military says it disabled two vessels attempting to reach Iranian ports, marking a sharp escalation in already fragile conditions surrounding a ceasefire effort between the two sides.

Iran’s elite military unit, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, announced Friday that it had taken control of a tanker identified as the Ocean Koi during what it described as a targeted naval operation. Officials claimed the vessel was intercepted for allegedly attempting to interfere with Iran’s oil exports and economic interests.

State media released footage showing armed personnel boarding the ship and detaining its crew. Shipping data indicates the vessel is registered in Barbados.

At nearly the same time, U.S. Central Command disclosed that American forces had disabled two Iranian flagged tankers in the same region. The military said the vessels were attempting to access Iranian ports in violation of an ongoing maritime blockade.

Admiral Bradley Cooper stated that U.S. forces remain committed to enforcing restrictions on maritime traffic linked to Iran, emphasizing continued monitoring and intervention in the region.

The developments followed a direct exchange of fire between U.S. and Iranian forces in the Strait of Hormuz just hours earlier. The confrontation raised fresh concerns about the stability of a temporary halt in fighting and the prospects for a longer term agreement.

President Donald Trump said Iran had launched attacks against three U.S. Navy destroyers operating in the strait. Iranian military officials countered with claims that U.S. forces struck an Iranian tanker and another vessel, resulting in injuries to several sailors and leaving others unaccounted for.

Iran’s joint military command also accused the United States of carrying out airstrikes on civilian locations on Qeshm Island, a strategically important area at the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz. In response, Iranian forces said they targeted U.S. naval assets positioned east of the strait and near the port city of Chabahar.

Despite the exchange, President Donald Trump downplayed the incident, describing it as limited and not indicative of a breakdown in the ceasefire. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated that Washington is still awaiting Tehran’s response to a proposed framework aimed at ending the conflict.

Diplomatic efforts continued behind the scenes. Vice President JD Vance held talks in Washington with Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, focusing on mediation initiatives led by Pakistan to reduce tensions and encourage negotiations.

Iran’s foreign ministry signaled that it is reviewing the proposal and weighing its response. A spokesperson warned that Iranian forces remain on alert and prepared to respond to any perceived threats.

The seizure of a tanker and the disabling of vessels highlight a dangerous phase in the confrontation between Iran and the United States, where maritime control has become a central tool of pressure. The Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant share of global oil shipments typically passes, is once again at the center of geopolitical tension.

Iran’s actions suggest a shift toward more assertive enforcement of its influence over nearby waterways. By intercepting vessels and signaling new oversight measures, Tehran appears to be attempting to reshape the rules governing maritime movement in the region. This approach may serve both strategic and symbolic purposes, reinforcing claims of sovereignty while demonstrating operational capability.

From the U.S. perspective, disabling vessels tied to Iran reflects a continuation of efforts to limit Tehran’s economic and logistical reach. The enforcement of a blockade underscores Washington’s strategy of applying pressure without necessarily escalating into full scale conflict.

The exchange of fire, even if described as limited by officials, underscores how quickly tensions can rise. Incidents in narrow waterways like the Strait of Hormuz carry heightened risks because of the density of military and commercial traffic. A single miscalculation could disrupt global energy supplies and trigger broader instability.

Diplomatic efforts appear to be running parallel to these confrontations. The involvement of regional mediators, including Qatar and Pakistan, indicates that multiple actors are attempting to prevent further escalation. However, the effectiveness of these efforts depends on both sides demonstrating restraint while negotiations continue.

The broader implication is that maritime security has become a key bargaining chip. Control over shipping routes allows both Iran and the United States to exert influence beyond direct military engagement. For Iran, asserting authority over passage through the strait could strengthen its negotiating position. For the United States, maintaining a blockade reinforces its leverage in talks.

Energy markets are likely to remain sensitive to these developments. Any sustained disruption in the Strait of Hormuz could drive up oil prices and affect global supply chains. Even the perception of instability can influence market behavior, highlighting the economic stakes tied to the conflict.

The situation also reflects a pattern seen in past confrontations, where limited military actions coexist with ongoing diplomatic outreach. This dual track approach creates uncertainty, as progress in negotiations can be undermined by incidents at sea.

Looking ahead, the trajectory of the conflict will likely depend on whether both sides can separate military signaling from diplomatic engagement. If maritime confrontations continue, they could erode trust and complicate efforts to reach a lasting agreement.

Aljazeera

Chad Court Sentences 8 Opposition Figures to Prison in Crackdown Over Alleged Insurrection

0

A court in Chad’s capital has handed eight opposition leaders prison terms of eight years each after convicting them of charges that include insurrection, marking a significant escalation in the government’s confrontation with political dissent.

The ruling, delivered Friday by the High Court in N’Djamena, also found members of the opposition coalition known as the Political Actors Consultation Group (GCAP) guilty of rebellion and disrupting public order. Each of the defendants was additionally ordered to pay a fine of 500,000 Central African francs, equivalent to about $897.

The court’s decision follows the arrest of the group’s leaders last month. Prosecutors had sought harsher penalties, asking the court to impose 10-year prison sentences.

The case centers on GCAP’s sustained criticism of President Mahamat Idriss Deby and its call for a boycott of the country’s 2024 election. Authorities dissolved the coalition in April through a ruling by the Chadian Supreme Court, effectively banning its activities.

Defense representatives strongly rejected the verdict. Adoum Moussa, speaking on behalf of the legal team, said the convictions were unfounded and expressed disappointment with the outcome. He argued that the charges lacked substance and questioned the legal basis for the decision.

The sentencing adds to a broader pattern of legal actions targeting opposition figures in Chad. Following the most recent election cycle, several prominent political figures have faced prosecution or imprisonment. In October of last year, former prime minister Succes Masra received a 20-year prison sentence, further underscoring the tense political environment.

Authorities have not publicly detailed the specific acts that led to the insurrection charges in this case, but the government has consistently maintained that actions threatening national stability will face firm consequences.

The developments have drawn attention from observers monitoring political freedoms in the country. Chad has experienced ongoing political strain since Mahamat Idriss Deby assumed leadership following the death of his father, longtime ruler Idriss Deby, in 2021. The transition period has been marked by calls for democratic reforms alongside periodic unrest.

The sentencing of eight opposition leaders signals a deepening divide between Chad’s ruling authorities and political challengers. While the government frames such actions as necessary to maintain order, critics argue that these prosecutions reflect a narrowing space for dissent.

The use of charges such as insurrection and rebellion carries significant weight. These accusations often imply threats to national security, which can justify severe penalties under the law. However, in politically sensitive contexts, such charges can also raise concerns about their application against critics rather than armed actors.

GCAP’s dissolution and the subsequent imprisonment of its leaders point to a broader strategy aimed at weakening organized opposition. By removing structured political groups, authorities may reduce the ability of critics to coordinate campaigns or mobilize supporters. This could shape the political landscape ahead of future elections, potentially limiting competitive participation.

The earlier sentencing of Succes Masra reinforces this pattern. High-profile convictions send a strong signal to other opposition figures about the potential consequences of challenging the government. At the same time, such actions can heighten tensions and risk fueling further unrest, especially if segments of the population perceive the judicial process as politicized.

From a regional perspective, Chad plays a strategic role in Central Africa, particularly in security cooperation and counterinsurgency efforts. Stability within the country is closely watched by neighboring states and international partners. However, stability achieved through strict control of political opposition may come at the cost of long-term democratic development.

The timing of the crackdown also matters. With the political climate still shaped by the aftermath of leadership transition and election disputes, the imprisonment of opposition figures could influence public confidence in governance. It may also affect Chad’s relations with international organizations that prioritize democratic standards and human rights.

Another key implication lies in the judiciary’s perceived independence. Court rulings in politically charged cases often become a measure of institutional credibility. If the public or external observers question the fairness of such proceedings, it can erode trust in the legal system.

At the same time, governments facing internal challenges frequently emphasize the need to prevent disorder. Authorities may argue that strong measures are required to avoid instability, particularly in regions already dealing with security threats. This creates a delicate balance between maintaining order and protecting political freedoms.

Looking ahead, the impact of these sentences will likely extend beyond the individuals involved. The decision may shape how opposition movements organize, how citizens engage in political discourse, and how the international community evaluates Chad’s governance trajectory.

The Associated Press

Israeli Strike Kills Son of Hamas Negotiator as Gaza Violence Persists Despite Fragile Ceasefire

0

The son of senior Hamas negotiator Khalil al-Hayya has died after being wounded in an Israeli strike in Gaza, the group said Thursday, as renewed violence underscored the fragility of a ceasefire meant to halt months of devastating conflict.

Hamas said the negotiator’s 32-year-old son, Azzam al-Hayya, was injured in a strike in Gaza City a day earlier that also killed another person and left several others wounded. He later died from his injuries. The Israeli military has not issued a statement on the strike.

The elder Khalil al-Hayya, a central figure in ceasefire negotiations, is believed to be outside Gaza. His family’s loss comes as indirect talks over a longer-term truce remain stalled, with both sides accusing each other of failing to meet key commitments.

In a separate development, an Israeli strike killed three Hamas-affiliated security personnel at a guard position in Gaza, hospital officials confirmed. A fourth individual sustained critical injuries, while Hamas authorities said the location targeted functioned as part of their internal security structure. The Israeli military said it struck what it described as a Hamas command site.

The renewed strikes come months after a United States-mediated ceasefire agreement halted large-scale operations in October following Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, which ignited the war. That agreement also led to the release of hostages captured during the initial assault.

Despite the truce, Israel has continued targeted operations against what it identifies as militant infrastructure. These actions have frequently resulted in civilian casualties, reflecting the ongoing volatility across the territory.

Hamas has accused Israel of attempting to influence negotiations through targeted killings, including attacks on relatives of senior figures. It remains unclear whether Azzam al-Hayya was the intended target of the strike.

In remarks broadcast by Al Jazeera before his son’s death, Khalil al-Hayya said that if his son had been deliberately targeted, it would be considered a sacrifice shared by many Palestinians. He reiterated that Hamas would only engage in discussions about disarmament after Israel fulfills earlier ceasefire conditions, including a complete halt to hostilities and expanded humanitarian aid.

The conflict has already claimed the lives of several senior Hamas figures and their relatives over the years. Another son of the negotiator, Hammam, was killed in a previous strike targeting Hamas leaders abroad.

At Gaza’s Shifa Hospital, the negotiator’s daughter said the family’s loss would not alter their stance. She described the suffering as part of a broader national struggle, emphasizing that many families across Gaza have endured similar tragedies.

The humanitarian situation in Gaza remains dire. According to health officials cited by The Associated Press, more than 72,000 people have been killed since Israel launched its military campaign in response to the 2023 attack. Civilians continue to face severe shortages of food, water and medical care, while many remain displaced in crowded camps.

Scenes of grief unfolded again on Thursday as families gathered at hospitals to mourn loved ones killed in recent strikes. In one case, relatives said three members of the same family were killed while setting up tents after relocating from a school where they had sought shelter.

Meanwhile, regional tensions extended beyond Gaza. In Lebanon, Israel said it carried out a strike in Beirut’s southern suburbs that killed three members of Hezbollah, including a commander identified as part of its elite Radwan Force. The area, while a stronghold of the group, is also densely populated with civilians. Hezbollah has not issued an immediate response.

The Beirut strike marked the first attack on the area since a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah was announced in April. However, clashes have continued in southern Lebanon, highlighting the broader regional impact of the conflict.

Israel maintains that its operations are aimed at preventing militant regrouping and protecting its security. It has said it recently struck dozens of sites linked to Hezbollah and killed multiple fighters over the past week, though independent verification remains limited.

The death of Azzam al-Hayya adds another layer of complexity to an already fragile diplomatic process. Targeting or inadvertently killing relatives of key negotiators can deepen mistrust and harden positions, making it more difficult to reach lasting agreements. Even if unintended, such incidents carry symbolic weight in a conflict where personal loss is deeply intertwined with political strategy.

The continued Israeli strikes despite a ceasefire framework suggest a shift toward a prolonged low-intensity conflict rather than a complete halt to hostilities. This pattern mirrors previous cycles in the region, where ceasefires reduce large-scale fighting but fail to address underlying disputes.

At the same time, Hamas faces internal and external pressure. Internally, it must respond to widespread suffering among civilians in Gaza. Externally, it remains under scrutiny from mediators and regional actors pushing for a sustainable resolution. The death of a negotiator’s family member could strengthen hardline factions within the group, potentially complicating future talks.

Regionally, the strike in Beirut signals that tensions remain interconnected across multiple fronts. The involvement of Hezbollah and ongoing clashes in Lebanon increase the risk of broader escalation, especially if retaliatory actions intensify.

For civilians in Gaza, the immediate concern remains survival. With infrastructure severely damaged and aid deliveries inconsistent, daily life continues to deteriorate. The ongoing violence, even at reduced levels, prolongs displacement and economic collapse, raising concerns about long-term stability.

Diplomatically, the situation underscores the limitations of ceasefire agreements that lack enforcement mechanisms. Without clear accountability and mutual trust, violations—whether perceived or real—can quickly erode fragile gains.

AP

Tennessee Republicans Eliminate State’s Only Black-Majority Congressional District

0

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Tennessee Republicans tore apart the state’s only majority-Black congressional district Thursday, pushing through a new map that splits Memphis across three separate Republican-leaning districts and sets up the likely end of a Democratic congressional seat that has existed for nearly two decades — all within days of a Supreme Court ruling that stripped away the federal protections that had kept such moves in check.

Governor Bill Lee signed the map into law the same day. The Tennessee NAACP filed a lawsuit hours later.

The vote did not happen quietly. Protesters packed the gallery and filled the hallways of the state capitol, chanting “no new maps” and “we the people” and sounding air horns loud enough to disrupt floor proceedings. Republican House Speaker Cameron Sexton had protesters removed from the balcony repeatedly as the vote moved forward. Black lawmakers stood at the front of the House chamber linking arms in prayer as the final tally was called.

In the Senate, Democratic state Sen. Charlane Oliver climbed on top of her desk and unfurled a bedsheet that read “No Jim Crow 2.0” and “Stop the TN Steal.” Other Democrats turned their backs on the chamber dais. Protesters chanting outside the Senate doors could be heard inside throughout the debate.

The map passed anyway.

What the Map Does

The new district lines carve up the Memphis-based seat held by Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, who has represented the city since 2007, spreading his constituents into three districts that stretch hundreds of miles east into rural Republican Tennessee. The plan also further divides the Nashville metropolitan area — the state’s other Democratic stronghold — into five separate districts.

The result is a congressional map that positions Republicans to win all nine of Tennessee’s U.S. House seats in November’s midterm elections. Republicans already control eight of the nine. Cohen’s district is the last Democratic seat in the state.

Memphis is a majority-Black city. Shelby County, which contains Memphis, is now divided three ways under the new lines. The city’s history in the American civil rights movement made the symbolism of the vote land with particular force for those who opposed it.

What Lawmakers Said

Republican state Sen. John Stevens, who sponsored the redistricting bill, kept his justification simple. “Tennessee is a conservative state,” Stevens said. “Its congressional delegation should reflect that.”

Stevens said the maps were drawn using census data to elect more Republicans. Democrats noted the census does not include partisan registration data, raising questions about how partisan outcomes could be the stated goal of a process that relied on demographic information.

Republican state Rep. Jason Zachary was more direct about what the party stood to gain. “This gives us a unique opportunity for the first time in history to have an all-Republican delegation sent from Tennessee to Washington, D.C., to represent conservative values,” Zachary said.

No Republican spoke in defense of the map on the House floor. When one member rose to speak, the noise from protesters in the gallery became so loud the speaker called the vote while Democratic members stood and walked out.

Democratic lawmakers did not hold back. State Rep. Justin Jones, a Black Democrat, drew a straight line from the new map to the segregation-era laws the civil rights movement was built to dismantle.

“It is a form of Jim Crow terror,” Jones said. “You know what you’re doing. It’s shameful.”

Democratic Rep. Gloria Johnson of Knoxville was equally blunt. “This is not a special session,” she said from the floor. “This is a white-power rally and a white-power grab. Vote yes — you’re telling everyone you’re racist.”

State Sen. Raumesh Akbari, the Memphis Democrat who leads the Senate Democratic caucus, addressed her colleagues directly as the vote approached.

“When you had an opportunity to do right, did you beat people back on Edmund Pettus Bridge?” Akbari said. “When you had an opportunity to do right, did you vote to make sure that those Black folks in Memphis who believe in this state, who pay their taxes, who work just like everyone else, have a right to be politically represented by folks who share their interest and who advocate for them on a federal level?”

The Supreme Court Decision That Started It

Tennessee moved this fast because a door that had been legally closed swung open last week. The U.S. Supreme Court issued a 6-3 ruling finding that Louisiana had improperly relied on race when drawing a second majority-Black congressional district to comply with the Voting Rights Act. The decision effectively dismantled the Act’s core protection for minority voters in redistricting — the legal shield that had blocked moves like Thursday’s Tennessee vote for decades.

President Donald Trump pushed Republican-led states to take advantage of the ruling immediately. Tennessee was the first to act, but it is unlikely to be the last.

Louisiana has suspended its May 16 U.S. House primary — even though tens of thousands of voters had already cast early ballots — to give Republican lawmakers time to draw a new map eliminating a majority-Black district. In South Carolina, Republicans are moving legislation to erase the majority-Black district held by Democratic Rep. Jim Clyburn, a civil rights activist serving his 17th term in Congress. Alabama has asked the Supreme Court to reverse a court order that created a second majority-Black district in 2023 and allow the state to revert to a single majority-Black seat. Alabama Republicans also advanced a bill this week to postpone the state’s May 19 primary if the court rules in their favor.

Taken together, the three states — Louisiana, South Carolina, and Alabama — hold five majority-minority congressional districts currently represented by Democrats. All five are now in play.

The Tennessee branch of the NAACP filed suit Thursday against Governor Lee and the state legislature seeking to block the new map, alleging the redistricting violated state law and the Tennessee constitution. The legal challenge sets up a fight that could reach federal courts as the November midterms approach and the new district lines are already in effect for candidate filing.

Thursday’s vote is the latest move in a mid-decade redistricting war that has reshaped the national congressional map at a pace and intensity rarely seen outside of the once-a-decade post-census cycle. It began last year when Trump pressed Texas Republicans to abandon their existing map and redraw lines targeting five Democratic incumbents. Other states in both parties followed.

Republicans have built a net advantage of roughly four House seats across nine states from the ongoing cycle, with Louisiana, South Carolina, and Alabama still in motion. Litigation in Virginia, Florida, and Missouri could shift the numbers further in either direction. Republican gains across all pending states could reach as many as 14 seats. Democrats are pursuing their own redistricting opportunities in states they control and could pick up as many as 10.

Tennessee will become the ninth state to enact a new congressional map ahead of the midterms. States where filing deadlines have already passed are now looking at the 2028 cycle for further map changes.

The Supreme Court ruling that enabled Thursday’s vote did something the civil rights movement spent decades fighting to prevent. The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was written specifically to stop states from using the mechanics of democracy — district lines, voting rules, registration requirements — to dilute Black political power. For 60 years, that law provided legal grounds to challenge exactly the kind of map Tennessee approved Thursday.

That legal architecture is now severely weakened. What Republicans in Tennessee, Louisiana, Alabama, and South Carolina are doing is not a surprise — it was the predictable and immediate consequence of a ruling that told them the federal law protecting minority voting power no longer applied in the same way. The question the ruling left unanswered is what replaces it.

State constitutions, like the one the NAACP cited in its Tennessee lawsuit, offer one avenue. Federal litigation under remaining Voting Rights Act provisions offers another. But both paths are slower than the redistricting process, and maps that are in place when November arrives will determine who wins the seats regardless of what courts eventually decide.

The deeper issue is what the dissolution of majority-minority districts means for the communities they were designed to represent. Memphis is a majority-Black city. Its voters are now spread across three districts stretching into rural Republican Tennessee. Their collective political voice, which once had the weight to elect a representative of their choosing, has been diluted into three districts where they are a minority in each.

That is the point. Republican lawmakers said so openly. The only question is whether the legal system moves fast enough to do anything about it before the ballots are counted.

NBC/AP/Reuters

Nigerian Army Confirms Deadly Attack on Magumeri Base, Says Troops Repelled Assault

0

The Nigerian military says it has repelled an attack by fighters linked to the Islamic State West Africa Province on a forward operating base in Magumeri, Borno State, confirming that two soldiers were killed during the clash.

In a statement issued Thursday, Lieutenant Colonel Sani Uba, spokesperson for the Joint Task Force in the northeast under Operation Hadin Kai, said troops fought off the assault after militants breached part of the base during a nighttime operation.

The military described the response as swift and forceful, stating that troops “gallantly and decisively” pushed back the attackers following intense fighting.

The assault occurred in the early hours of May 7, when fighters attempted to infiltrate the base under cover of darkness and reduced visibility. Officials acknowledged that the attackers managed to penetrate an isolated section of the facility before being driven back.

According to the statement, troops inflicted heavy losses on the attackers. Follow-up operations in the surrounding area revealed what the military described as evidence of significant casualties among the fighters, including blood trails and bodies left behind as they retreated.

Security forces also recovered weapons abandoned during the withdrawal, including heavy machine guns, rifles and ammunition.

Despite the military’s account of a successful defense, officials confirmed that two soldiers were killed in the confrontation. An officer and several others sustained injuries and are receiving medical care, with authorities saying their conditions are stable.

The military also noted that parts of the base, including some equipment and temporary structures, were damaged by fire during the exchange.

Earlier accounts from local sources, cited by SaharaReporters, suggested the attack may have been more severe. Those reports indicated that a large group of fighters arrived in multiple armed vehicles and launched a surprise assault, causing casualties and forcing some personnel to withdraw from the camp.

Some sources claimed that additional soldiers were killed and that attackers seized military vehicles and weapons. They also reported that the base commander was among those injured.

The military did not confirm those details but acknowledged that the attackers briefly breached the facility.

Magumeri, located about 35 kilometers from Maiduguri, has long been a flashpoint in Nigeria’s conflict with armed groups. The area has faced repeated attacks over the years due to its strategic position in Borno State, a region at the center of the insurgency.

The latest incident adds to growing concerns about security in northeastern Nigeria, where attacks on military positions have increased in recent months.

In a separate incident weeks earlier, insurgents killed more than 10 soldiers, including a senior commander in the Monguno area. In March, another attack in Kukawa led to the deaths of a commanding officer and several troops after a base was overrun. Days before that, another officer was killed during coordinated assaults in the state.

These repeated attacks highlight the persistent threat posed by armed groups operating in the region, despite years of military operations aimed at weakening their capabilities.

The attack on Magumeri underscores the evolving tactics used by armed groups in northeastern Nigeria. Rather than large-scale territorial control, fighters are increasingly focusing on targeted strikes against military installations, often using surprise and mobility to gain temporary advantage.

Security analysts say such attacks serve multiple purposes. They allow fighters to seize weapons, disrupt military operations and project strength, even when they cannot hold territory for long periods.

The conflicting accounts surrounding the Magumeri incident also point to challenges in information flow during active conflict. While the military emphasized its successful defense, local sources painted a more chaotic picture, suggesting that the full extent of the damage may not yet be clear.

This gap in narratives is not uncommon in conflict zones and often reflects both operational secrecy and the difficulty of verifying events in real time.

The continued attacks also raise questions about the effectiveness of current counterinsurgency strategies. While Nigerian forces have made gains over the years, the ability of armed groups to carry out coordinated assaults indicates that they remain capable and adaptive.

For civilians in the region, the impact goes beyond the battlefield. Persistent insecurity affects daily life, disrupts economic activity and forces communities to remain in a constant state of uncertainty.

The situation in Borno State remains a critical test for Nigeria’s security forces. Sustained pressure on armed groups, combined with improved intelligence and local cooperation, will likely be key to reducing the frequency and scale of such attacks.

For now, the Magumeri incident serves as another reminder that the conflict in northeastern Nigeria is far from over, with both sides continuing to engage in a prolonged and complex struggle.

Source: SaharaReporters.

U.S. and Iran Exchange Fire in Strait of Hormuz as Navy Destroyers Come Under Attack

0

STRAIT OF HORMUZ — The United States and Iran exchanged direct fire Thursday in the Strait of Hormuz, shattering a month of fragile calm and throwing the future of a ceasefire that had barely held since April 7 into serious doubt — just as Washington was waiting for Tehran’s answer on a peace proposal that could end the two-month war.

Three U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyers — USS Truxtun, USS Rafael Peralta, and USS Mason — came under attack as they transited the strait toward the Gulf of Oman. Iranian forces fired multiple missiles, drones, and deployed small boats against the ships, U.S. Central Command said in a post on X.

None of the American vessels were struck.

U.S. forces intercepted the incoming fire and hit back, targeting Iranian military facilities on the ground that CENTCOM said were directly responsible for the attack. Strikes hit at least two locations — Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island — destroying missile and drone launch sites, command and control positions, and intelligence and surveillance nodes, a U.S. official told NBC News.

“CENTCOM does not seek escalation but remains positioned and ready to protect American forces,” the command said.

Iran’s top joint military command told a different story. Tehran accused the United States of violating the April 7 ceasefire by targeting an Iranian oil tanker and a second vessel attempting to enter the strait. Air defense systems were activated in the Iranian capital, the semiofficial Mehr news agency reported.

Each side accused the other of firing first. Neither account could be independently verified.

The exchange came at the worst possible diplomatic moment. Washington had submitted a peace proposal to Tehran through Pakistani intermediaries and was waiting for Iran’s response. Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson said Thursday that Tehran had not yet reached a conclusion on the plan.

The proposed framework, according to sources and officials familiar with the negotiations, would unfold across three stages: a formal end to the war, resolution of the Strait of Hormuz crisis, and a 30-day negotiating window to address a broader agreement covering longer-term disputes.

What the proposal does not include is significant. It leaves Iran’s nuclear program unaddressed for now and does not require immediate reopening of the strait — the waterway that before the war carried one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas supply. Those omissions reflect the difficulty of bridging the gap between what Washington demands and what Tehran will accept, and they guarantee that even a successful first-stage agreement would leave the most combustible issues for later rounds of talks.

Iran’s foreign minister had said Wednesday that Tehran was reviewing the proposal. Thursday’s exchange of fire did not constitute an official breakdown of negotiations, but it made the path to a signed agreement considerably narrower.

The fighting in the strait was not the only escalation Thursday.

The U.S. imposed fresh sanctions on Iraq’s deputy oil minister and three militia leaders, citing their support for Iran. The move extended Washington’s economic pressure campaign beyond Iranian territory and into the regional network Tehran relies on for supply lines and proxy influence.

In Lebanon, Israel said it killed a Hezbollah commander in an airstrike on Beirut — the first Israeli strike on the Lebanese capital since a ceasefire there was agreed last month. A halt to Israeli attacks on Lebanon is one of Iran’s stated demands in negotiations with Washington, making the Beirut strike another variable complicating the diplomatic picture.

The war began Feb. 28 when the U.S. and Israel launched strikes against Iran. A ceasefire took effect April 7 and had largely held — marked by periodic violations but no full resumption of hostilities — until Thursday’s exchange in the strait.

What happened Thursday follows a pattern that historians of armed conflict recognize immediately. Two militaries operating in close proximity, each with rules of engagement that authorize defensive fire, each with a genuine incentive to frame whatever happened as the other side’s provocation — and a ceasefire with no enforcement mechanism, no neutral monitoring presence, and no agreed definition of what counts as a violation.

The U.S. says Iran fired first. Iran says the U.S. targeted its ships first. Both accounts are structurally convenient for the side offering them. In the absence of independent verification, the factual record becomes a function of which government’s narrative gains more traction internationally — a competition the United States typically wins in Western capitals and Iran typically wins nowhere, which does not necessarily mean Washington’s version is complete.

The more important question is what Thursday means for the peace process. Iran was reviewing a proposal. Thursday’s strikes give hardliners in Tehran who oppose any deal additional ammunition to argue that the United States cannot be trusted to honor a ceasefire even while negotiations are underway. It gives advocates for continued resistance a fresh grievance to point to. And it raises the domestic political cost, inside Iran, of the kind of concessions the American proposal apparently requires.

On the American side, the strikes on Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island are described as defensive and limited — not a resumption of major combat operations. That framing matters legally and politically. But Iran does not necessarily accept the distinction between a targeted strike on its military facilities and an act of war, and the line between the two has a way of dissolving when missiles are landing.

Saudi Arabia has already said it will not allow its territory or bases to be used for U.S. military operations related to the strait. Russia and China have vetoed Security Council action. Pakistan is mediating but has no leverage to enforce compliance. The diplomatic architecture supporting a peace agreement is thin, and Thursday just put more weight on it than it was built to hold.

The ceasefire is not officially over. But it is no longer intact.

AP/NBC/Reuters

Iran Creates Agency to Tax and Control Strait of Hormuz Shipping

0

Iran has created a new government agency to control who passes through the Strait of Hormuz and how much they pay to do it, a move that maritime law experts say violates international law and that has piled fresh anxiety onto a global shipping crisis already choking hundreds of commercial vessels inside the Persian Gulf.

The agency, called the Persian Gulf Strait Authority, was identified Thursday by shipping data firm Lloyd’s List Intelligence, which said the body was positioning itself as the sole authority with power to grant transit permission through the waterway. Lloyd’s said the authority had already sent it an application form for vessels seeking passage — a bureaucratic formalization of a chokehold that Iran has been tightening since the war with the United States and Israel began Feb. 28.

The move came the same day Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar spoke by phone with Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi, and Pakistani officials expressed optimism — cautious but notable — that a peace deal between Tehran and Washington was drawing closer.

“We expect an agreement sooner rather than later,” Pakistani Foreign Ministry spokesperson Tahir Andrabi said Thursday. “We hope the parties will reach a peaceful and sustainable solution that will contribute not only to peace in our region but to international peace as well.”

He declined to give a timeline.

The Strait as a Revenue Stream

Iran has effectively sealed the Strait of Hormuz since the war began, while the United States has blockaded Iranian ports from the other direction. The result is a commercial standstill that has sent fuel prices climbing and rattled economies far beyond the Persian Gulf. Hundreds of ships sit bottled up in the Gulf with no clear path to open water.

The new Persian Gulf Strait Authority formalizes what had been an unofficial and opaque arrangement. Under the existing system, Iran had been vetting certain vessels and, for at least some of them, collecting a tax on their cargo before allowing passage through the strait’s northern waters near the Iranian coastline. The new agency gives that practice an institutional name and a paper trail.

Maritime law experts were direct about what that means legally. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea requires countries to permit peaceful passage through their territorial waters. Iran’s demand to approve and tax commercial vessels crosses that line, they said. The U.S. and its Gulf allies are pushing the U.N. Security Council for a resolution condemning Iran’s grip on the strait and threatening sanctions. A previous resolution calling for reopening the waterway was vetoed by Russia and China, Iran’s two most significant diplomatic shields.

Mixed Signals From Washington

The Trump administration has not projected a consistent message about how it intends to end the conflict. A fragile ceasefire has largely held since April 8. Previous declarations that military operations were finished gave way to fresh threats of bombing if Tehran rejected terms allowing oil and gas shipments to resume. Trump then launched “Project Freedom,” a military effort to force a shipping corridor through the strait — and suspended it after two days.

Only two American-flagged merchant ships are confirmed to have passed through the U.S.-guarded route during the operation. The U.S. military said it sank six Iranian small boats that threatened civilian vessels during the attempt. Trump said he paused the effort to allow more time for a peace agreement to take shape.

A Saudi official told the Associated Press on Thursday that Riyadh had not been consulted before Trump launched the strait-opening operation and had explicitly refused to participate.

“We told them that we are not part of this and that they can’t use our territories and bases for this,” the official said, speaking anonymously because they were not authorized to discuss the matter publicly. Saudi Arabia also conveyed a message directly to Iran that the kingdom would play no role in any U.S. military action tied to reopening the strait.

The revelation that one of Washington’s most important regional partners actively distanced itself from the operation before it began adds another dimension to why Project Freedom produced limited results and was suspended so quickly.

Iran Reviews the U.S. Proposal

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said Thursday that Tehran was reviewing messages relayed through Pakistan — the designated intermediary in the peace negotiations — but had not yet reached a conclusion or sent a response to the U.S. side, Iranian state television reported.

Late Thursday, semiofficial Iranian news agencies Fars and Tasnim reported that explosions were heard in southern Iran near Bandar Abbas. Neither agency identified the source of the blasts, and no further details were immediately confirmed.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian added an unusual detail to the picture of Iran’s internal deliberations on Thursday, disclosing that he had met recently for more than two hours with Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei. Pezeshkian praised Khamenei’s conduct in the meeting during remarks aired on Iranian state television.

Khamenei, who replaced his father Ayatollah Ali Khamenei after the elder was killed in the war’s opening strikes, has not appeared in public since being wounded early in the conflict. He has communicated exclusively through written statements since being named supreme leader in March. Iranian officials have said he is playing a central role in overseeing the negotiations with Washington, though his precise location and condition remain undisclosed.

The Vatican and the Pope

Across the Atlantic, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio met Thursday with Pope Leo XIV at the Vatican to discuss Middle East peace efforts. The meeting carried its own diplomatic undertone: Pope Leo XIV has been openly critical of the Iran war, a position that has led to direct friction with President Trump.

Lebanon Talks Set for Washington

In a separate development, direct talks between Israel and Lebanon are scheduled to resume in Washington on May 14 and 15, a U.S. official confirmed Thursday, speaking anonymously to discuss plans for the closed-door sessions.

Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, in televised remarks, said Islamabad was in continuous contact with both Iran and the United States around the clock to stop the war and extend the ceasefire.

“Day and night,” Sharif said.

The creation of the Persian Gulf Strait Authority is Iran doing something subtle and consequential at the same time. By establishing a formal government agency with application forms, fee structures, and an institutional name, Tehran is not just controlling the strait — it is asserting permanent sovereign jurisdiction over it in a way that outlasts any individual military confrontation.

This matters because ceasefires end and wars eventually stop, but agencies persist. If the Persian Gulf Strait Authority is still functioning when a peace agreement is eventually signed, Iran will be in a position to argue that its authority over shipping is an established administrative fact rather than a wartime imposition. Dismantling that claim later becomes harder the longer the agency operates and the more vessels submit applications to it.

Maritime law says Iran cannot do this. The U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea is explicit. But international law without enforcement is a strongly worded document, and Russia and China have already vetoed one Security Council resolution on the strait. The practical question is not whether Iran has the legal right — it does not — but whether any external power is willing and able to make the legal reality stick against Iran’s physical control of the waterway.

Saudi Arabia’s refusal to back Project Freedom is a significant piece of that puzzle. If the United States cannot use Saudi territory and bases for a strait-reopening operation, its military options narrow considerably. The Gulf states have their own calculus — they live next to Iran, and they will be there long after any American administration has moved on to other priorities.

The peace talks through Pakistan remain the most plausible exit from the stalemate. But Iran reviewing a proposal and Iran accepting one are different things, and the gap between the two has a way of widening whenever the pressure momentarily eases.

The Associated Press original

Russia Intensifies Assassination Plots Across Europe, Intelligence Officials Warn

0

Western intelligence agencies are raising alarms over what they describe as a sharp increase in Russian efforts to track and eliminate political opponents and pro-Ukraine figures across Europe, marking a significant escalation in covert operations linked to the war in Ukraine.

Three intelligence officials from different Western countries told The Associated Press that Russian security services have expanded a campaign of targeted attacks since 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information, said the operations now appear more frequent, more aggressive and more willing to target a broader range of individuals.

Among those living under constant threat is Russian activist Vladimir Osechkin, who has been under police protection in France since 2022. French authorities believe his life is in danger due to his work exposing alleged abuses within Russia’s prison system and his support for military defectors.

Court documents reviewed by The Associated Press indicate that in April 2025, a group of Russian nationals monitored Osechkin’s home in southwestern France for hours, recording video and taking photographs. Investigators suspect the surveillance was preparation for a possible assassination attempt. Osechkin has also described earlier incidents that heightened his fears, including a laser-like red dot appearing on his wall, which he believed could have been linked to a weapon sight.

“If it were not for the protection I received, I might not be alive today,” Osechkin said.

Authorities across Europe have uncovered similar plots. In Lithuania, officials disrupted two separate plans targeting activists, including one involving a hidden tracking device placed on a vehicle and another involving an explosive device intended for a mailbox. In Germany, investigators dismantled plots aimed at a senior defense industry executive and a Ukrainian military figure. Polish authorities detained a suspect in 2024 in a case they described as a plan to assassinate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

Spain has also seen deadly consequences. A Russian helicopter pilot who defected was killed there in 2024, with suspicion falling on operatives linked to Moscow.

Intelligence officials say these cases reflect a broader pattern tied to Russia’s strategic goals in Europe. One senior European intelligence officer described the campaign as deliberate and authorized at the highest levels.

“This is not random activity,” the official said. “There is clear political backing behind it.”

The increase in alleged assassination attempts appears to coincide with a wider campaign of disruption attributed to Russia. Western authorities have linked nearly 200 incidents across Europe since the start of the Ukraine war to suspected Russian involvement, including acts of sabotage, arson and espionage.

Investigators say many of these operations rely on intermediaries rather than direct involvement from Russian agents. Individuals with criminal backgrounds or financial incentives are often recruited to carry out surveillance or attacks, making the operations harder to trace.

This approach, according to a former senior British counterterrorism official, gained prominence after the 2018 poisoning of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal in England. The attack, which the United Kingdom blamed on Russian military intelligence, led to the expulsion of hundreds of Russian diplomats across Europe. That crackdown significantly limited Moscow’s ability to operate using official channels.

As a result, analysts say Russia has shifted toward using proxy actors to continue its activities abroad.

Despite multiple plots being stopped, intelligence officials caution that the threat remains persistent. Some believe the operations serve purposes beyond direct assassination, including intimidating critics, discouraging activism and stretching European security resources.

Several individuals targeted in recent plots have refused to retreat from public life despite warnings from authorities.

Ruslan Gabbasov, an activist advocating for independence in a region of Russia, said he declined an offer from Lithuanian authorities to change his identity and relocate after a suspected assassination attempt near his home.

“I cannot disappear,” he said, adding that doing so would undermine the cause he represents.

Similarly, Lithuanian activist Valdas Bartkevičius rejected advice to withdraw from public activity after authorities uncovered a plot involving an explosive device targeting him.

Officials say these responses highlight the broader stakes of the campaign. Beyond physical harm, the operations appear designed to silence opposition voices and weaken support networks for Ukraine across Europe.

Russian authorities have repeatedly denied involvement in assassination attempts abroad. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told AP there was no need to comment on the allegations.

Still, Western officials argue that the pattern of incidents, combined with intelligence findings, points to a coordinated strategy.

The reported escalation in targeted operations signals a shift in how geopolitical conflict is unfolding beyond traditional battlefields. Rather than being confined to Ukraine, tensions are increasingly playing out across Europe through covert means.

Security experts say this trend raises serious concerns for European governments. Protecting high-risk individuals requires significant resources, and the growing number of cases could strain law enforcement agencies already dealing with other security challenges.

There are also broader political implications. If activists, journalists and defectors feel unsafe, it could reduce the flow of information about internal conditions in Russia and weaken international advocacy efforts.

At the same time, the use of proxy actors complicates legal accountability. Unlike state-sponsored operatives, these individuals often operate across borders with limited direct links to official institutions, making prosecution more difficult.

The situation also underscores the evolving nature of deterrence. Traditional diplomatic responses, such as sanctions or expulsions, may have limited impact on covert operations carried out through informal networks.

For European leaders, the challenge lies in balancing security with openness. Increasing surveillance and protective measures could help prevent attacks, but they also risk affecting civil liberties and public trust.

Ultimately, intelligence officials warn that the threat is unlikely to fade soon. As long as geopolitical tensions remain high, individuals seen as adversaries by Moscow may continue to face risks.

“Stopping one attempt does not end the danger,” one intelligence official said. “You have to assume there could always be another.”

Sources: The Associated Press.

Ted Turner, Founder of CNN and Pioneer of 24-Hour Cable News, Dies at 87

0

ATLANTA — Ted Turner is dead. The man who invented the 24-hour news cycle, built a cable television empire from a failing Atlanta UHF station, gave a billion dollars to the United Nations, and said whatever crossed his mind without apology — died Wednesday at 87.

Turner Enterprises confirmed his death. No cause was given. Turner had been living with Lewy body dementia since at least 2018, when he disclosed the diagnosis publicly from his Montana ranch.

“Ted was an intensely involved and committed leader, intrepid, fearless and always willing to back a hunch and trust his own judgment,” CNN chairman and CEO Mark Thompson said in a statement. “He was and always will be the presiding spirit of CNN.”

He was also, depending on who you asked, the Mouth of the South, Captain Outrageous, Terrible Ted, and — for one glorious year — Time magazine’s Man of the Year.

“If I only had a little humility,” Turner once said, “I’d be perfect.”

The Man Who Built the Machine

Robert Edward Turner III was born Nov. 19, 1938, in Cincinnati. His father was a billboard advertising magnate. His mother was Florence Turner. The family moved south when Ted was nine, and the boy was sent to military schools where he became a champion debater and an accomplished yachtsman — two skills that would serve him well in a life defined by argument and competition.

He enrolled at Brown University in 1956, studied classics instead of business against his father’s wishes, got caught with a woman in his dorm room, and never graduated. He went to work for the family company in Savannah, selling billboard space.

At 24, his father killed himself. Turner took over. He repurchased the firm after a family dispute, made it profitable, and in 1970 — against the advice of everyone around him — bought a failing Atlanta UHF television station for $2.5 million.

They called it the Chicken Noodle Network when he launched CNN a decade later. Nobody was laughing by the time the Gulf War played out live on television in 1991 and the whole world was watching.

CNN and the Superstation

The move that changed everything came in the mid-1970s. Turner became one of the first media owners to use satellite technology to broadcast his station nationally, turning a local Atlanta outlet into the country’s first superstation — programming picked up by cable systems across America.

The lineup was cheap and brilliant: old Hollywood films, throwback sitcoms, Atlanta Braves baseball. The station made money. Turner made more channels. TBS, TNT, Cartoon Network, Turner Classic Movies — each one built on the same instinct that had rescued the UHF station. Give people something to watch. Keep the costs down. Own the library.

CNN aired its first broadcast June 1, 1980, anchored by the husband-and-wife team of David Walker and Lois Hart. Turner said he built it to counter what he called sleazy coverage by the major networks. He promised it would stay on the air until the world ended.

It changed everything about how news moved. The format, the speed, the expectation that something was always happening somewhere and you could watch it right now — all of it traces back to that first broadcast from Atlanta. Fox News and MSNBC exist because CNN proved the model worked.

Warner Bros. Discovery head David Zaslav put it plainly in a message to staff Wednesday. “He did not just disrupt media. He transformed it.”

Sports, Wrestling, and One Very Bad Game

Turner bought the Atlanta Braves in 1976 and the Atlanta Hawks in 1977. The Braves won the World Series in 1995 under his ownership. He marketed the franchise as America’s Team with the unapologetic confidence of a man who believed whatever he said loudly enough would eventually become true.

In 1977, during a losing streak, Turner appointed himself manager of the Braves for one game. They lost 2-1 to Pittsburgh. Baseball officials told him to sit down and stay there.

His involvement in professional wrestling was equally colorful. He had aired wrestling on his stations since the 1970s. In 1988 he bought Jim Crockett Promotions and rebranded it World Championship Wrestling. WCW’s head-to-head ratings battle with the World Wrestling Federation through the late 1990s became one of the most fiercely contested periods in the history of the industry — the Monday Night Wars, as it was known. Turner eventually sold WCW to Vince McMahon’s WWF in 2001.

He also skippered his yacht, the Courageous, to win the America’s Cup. He started the Goodwill Games in 1986 as an Olympic alternative during the Cold War. He ran his life the way he ran his businesses — at speed, with maximum exposure, trusting his gut over everyone else’s expertise.

The Colorization War and the MGM Library

In the mid-1980s Turner bought MGM/UA Entertainment, which came with a library of more than 4,000 films. He announced plans to colorize the black-and-white classics. Hollywood erupted.

Film critic Roger Ebert called Turner’s airing of a colorized version of Casablanca “one of the saddest days in the history of the movies.” The Los Angeles Times labeled Turner “The Man Hollywood Loves to Hate.”

Turner eventually backed down, deciding the process was not worth the cost. He sold MGM/UA but kept the movie library. That library became the backbone of Turner Classic Movies, launched in 1994 — now regarded as one of the finest film preservation channels in television history. The man who tried to colorize Casablanca ended up protecting it.

Jane Fonda, Time Warner, and the Fall

Turner married three times and divorced three times. He had five children — two from his first marriage to Judy Gale Nye and three from his second marriage to Jane Shirley Smith.

His third marriage, in 1991, was to Jane Fonda. The union between a hard-charging capitalist and one of Hollywood’s most outspoken progressives raised eyebrows everywhere. It lasted a decade.

“In his heart, Ted is not a wealthy, powerful, privileged person,” Fonda said in the 2018 HBO documentary “Jane Fonda in Five Acts.” “He’s a little boy who likes to play, and who has wild brilliance, and that’s what I was attracted to.”

They divorced in 2001. Turner told documentarians it was the hardest thing he had survived. “I feel like I was happier when I was with her than subsequently,” he said.

In 1996, Time Warner bought Turner Broadcasting System for $7.5 billion, creating the largest communications company in the world. Turner became vice chairman. In 2001, Time Warner merged with AOL in a $99 billion deal Turner voted for. The merger destroyed billions in shareholder value. Turner was stripped of his oversight of the cable networks he had built. He resigned as vice chairman in 2003 and stepped down from the board three years later.

It was, by any measure, a bad ending to the corporate chapter of his life. Forbes pegged his remaining fortune at $2.8 billion.

The Philanthropist and the Land Baron

Turner channeled what came after into causes. In 1997 he announced a $1 billion donation to the United Nations — the largest single philanthropic gift in American history at the time. The funds created the United Nations Foundation. Twenty years later Turner called it “the best investment I’ve ever made.”

He co-founded the Nuclear Threat Initiative with former Senator Sam Nunn in 2001, a nonprofit organization dedicated to preventing the use of weapons of mass destruction globally. He poured millions into environmental causes through his Turner Foundation.

He became one of the largest private landowners in the United States, holding more than 1.9 million acres across six states. He owned a herd of roughly 50,000 bison and in 2002 co-founded Ted’s Montana Grill, a restaurant chain built around what it claimed was the largest bison menu on earth. He owned ranches in Argentina’s Patagonia. He spent much of his later years on his Montana ranch, fly-fishing and hiking and living the kind of life he had always said mattered more than the business.

In 2018 he told journalist Ted Koppel about the dementia diagnosis with characteristic bluntness. “It’s similar to Alzheimer’s. But not nearly as bad. Alzheimer’s is fatal,” he said. He withdrew from public life in the years that followed.

The Last of the Originals

Ted Turner belonged to a generation of American entrepreneurs who built things from scratch and broke the rules doing it. He was not a technologist or a disruptor in the Silicon Valley mold. He was a salesman, a showman, and a genuine visionary who looked at television in 1979 and saw something nobody else saw — that news could run all day, every day, and people would watch.

He was right. Every cable news network that exists today, every breaking news alert on your phone, every scrolling chyron at the bottom of a screen owes something to the decision Ted Turner made to launch CNN from Atlanta on June 1, 1980.

He was also, by his own admission and by the accounts of people who worked for him, difficult. Blunt to the point of cruelty. Prone to statements that landed like grenades. He compared Rupert Murdoch to Adolf Hitler. He called his employees Jesus freaks. He managed a Major League Baseball team for one game and lost.

None of it diminished what he built. The Chicken Noodle Network became the template for how the world receives its news. The superstation concept rewrote the economics of cable television. The MGM library he almost ruined with colorization now lives on Turner Classic Movies, preserving the films future generations will watch.

He was 87. He got to see what he built become the world.

NBC/Reuters