As expected, the motion failed to get the two-thirds majority it needed to pass. Only 175 members of parliament backed the motion, while 360 voted against and 18 abstained.

Romanian nationalist Gheorghe Piperea, the lead sponsor of the motion, had criticized among other things the Commission’s refusal to disclose text messages between von der Leyen and the chief executive of vaccine maker Pfizer during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The decision-making has become opaque and discretionary, and raises fears of abuse and corruption. The cost of obsessive bureaucracy of the European Union such as (tackling) climate change has been a huge one,” Piperea told the parliament on Monday.

During the debate on her leadership, von der Leyen defended her record in parliament, rejecting criticism of her management of the pandemic and asserting that her approach ensured equal vaccine access across the EU.

Although the censure motion had little chance of success, it was a political headache for von der Leyen as her Commission negotiates with US President Donald Trump’s administration to try to prevent steep US tariffs on EU goods.

It was the first time since 2014 that a Commission president has faced such a motion. Then President Jean-Claude Juncker also survived the vote.

These were some of the striking scenes at a mass protest last week against gentrification and the rising cost of living in the Mexican capital city, which some have blamed on an influx of foreigners from the United States and Europe.

While the demonstration was largely peaceful and reflected growing anger about inequality in the Mexican capital, those who vandalized stores in the city’s wealthier neighborhoods and used anti-immigration language were criticized by Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum as being xenophobic.

“No to discrimination, no to racism, no to classism, no to xenophobia, no to machismo, no to discrimination. All human beings, men and women, are equal, and we cannot treat anyone as less,” Sheinbaum said at a Monday press conference.

The US Department of Homeland Security, which has been carrying out an immigration crackdown in the US, reacted to Friday’s protests with an ironic post on X: “If you are in the United States illegally and wish to join the next protest in Mexico City, use the CBP Home app to facilitate your departure.”

The rallies in Mexico City mirror protests that have erupted in cities like Barcelona and Paris against skyrocketing costs, which have been blamed on overtourism, short-term home rentals, and an influx of people and businesses with higher purchasing power.

Frente Anti Gentrificación Mx, one of several groups that helped organize the protest on Friday, compared gentrification on its social media to a new form of colonization in which “the state, institutions, and companies, both foreign and local, provide differential treatment to those with greater purchasing power.”

Anti-gentrification activists say thousands of people in the Mexican capital have been forced out of their homes in recent years as tourists and remote workers, many of whom are believed to be American, take over popular neighborhoods like Roma and Condesa.

But a spokesperson for Frente Anti Gentrificación Mx pushed back against Sheinbaum’s suggestion that their campaign was xenophobic, saying the demonstration was meant to highlight the plight of those priced out of their homes and to demand reforms from the government.

“In Mexico, housing costs have risen 286% since 2005 … while real wages have decreased by 33%,” said Morales, citing data from the National Institute of Statistics and Geography and the Federal Mortgage Society.

She acknowledged that many people have been moving to Mexico for a variety of reasons, from the appeal of its culture to the relative affordability of its houses. At the same time, she urged potential newcomers to consider how such a move could affect the local community.

Not a new phenomenon

Immigration is not the sole cause of Mexico City’s gentrification, which is a phenomenon that has happened for decades, say experts.

“In the debates, there’s a confusion about gentrification being when foreigners arrive. And that’s not true,” activist and lawyer Carla Escoffié said, noting that other causes include inequality, deficiencies in housing policy and land privatization.

“Not all foreigners gentrify, nor are only those who gentrify foreigners, nor is a significant migration process necessary for gentrification to occur. Gentrification is based on inequalities in such a way that it’s not the same thing,” she added.

But the arrival of short-term rentals like Airbnb, and remote work policies during the pandemic, have turbo-charged the gentrification debate in recent years.

“Since 2020, a new phase of gentrification has begun, one that has worsened,” said Escoffié. “It’s been driven by digital nomads and short-term rental platforms like Airbnb.”

Airbnb defended its activities in Mexico City on Tuesday, saying it helped generate more than $1 billion in the local economy last year, and arguing that guests who booked accommodations also spent money on shops and services in the capital.

Mexico City’s government signed an agreement with Airbnb and UNESCO in 2022 to promote the capital as “a global hub for digital nomads and creative tourism.” Sheinbaum, who was the mayor of Mexico City at the time, presented the initiative as a way to boost the local economy.

The appeal was especially attractive for US citizens, who can stay in Mexico without a tourist visa for less than six months before requiring a special temporary residency permit, according to experts. In 2022, 122,758 temporary residency permits were granted to foreigners for Mexico, according to the National Institute of Migration, up from 97,825 in 2019.

But for many residents, the Mexico City initiative was another sign of the displacement happening around them.

A global trend

Anger about gentrification is not unique to Mexico City. Local governments from tourist destinations in Europe, such as Spain’s Canary Islands, Lisbon and Berlin, have announced restrictions on short-term rentals in the past decade.

Barcelona’s leftist mayor, Jaume Collboni, said that by November 2028, the government will scrap the licenses of the 10,101 apartments currently approved as short-term rentals in the popular tourist destination.

Residents in the Catalan capital have documented how renting by the day is more profitable for landlords than renting by the month, which has triggered evictions and the transformation of homes into short-term tourist accommodations.

In Mexico City, Airbnb has over 26,500 listings, according to the rental platform, many of which are concentrated in the areas most affected by gentrification. These listings are concentrated in the central neighborhoods of Condesa, Roma, Juárez and Polanco, according to Inside Airbnb, a project that provides data about Airbnb’s impact on residential communities.

In response to mounting criticism and the protests of 2022, the local government introduced new regulations, but experts argue they fall far short.

Airbnb, meanwhile, says the city needs regulations that support home sharing, not prohibition. It argues that many people in Mexico City rely on the platform as a financial lifeline, with 53% of its hosts saying the service helped them stay in their homes and 74% of hosts saying it helped cover essential expenses.

Activists are now bracing for when Mexico opens its doors to soccer fans for the next World Cup in 2026, which Morales fears could result in the state prioritizing business dealings over residents. “Given the critical state we’re in, who would come up with this?” she asked.

As he hosted five African leaders at the White House, Trump asked Boakai: “Such good English, it’s beautiful. Where did you learn to speak so beautifully?”

Boakai informed Trump of his place of education, prompting Trump to express his curiosity. “That’s very interesting,” he said, “I have people at this table who can’t speak nearly as well.”

Liberia was founded in 1822 by the American Colonization Society whose goal was to resettle freed slaves in Africa. The country declared independence from the American Colonization Society in 1847, and a variety of languages are spoken in the country today, with English being the official language.

Several Liberians voiced their offense over Trump’s comment to Boakai, given the US president’s past remarks on African countries and the colonial legacy left by the US organization in Liberia.

“For him to ask that question, I don’t see it as a compliment. I feel that the US president and people in the west still see Africans as people in villages who are not educated.”

Veronica Mente, a South African politician, questioned on X: “what stops [Boakai] from standing up and leav[ing]?”

The White House Press Office defended Trump’s statement on Wednesday.

White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly said that Trump’s comment was a “heartfelt compliment” and that “reporters should recognize that President Trump has already done more to restore global stability and uplift countries in Africa and around the world than Joe Biden did in four years.”

“What President Trump heard distinctly was the American influence on our English in Liberia, and the Liberian president is not offended by that,” Nyanti said.

“We know that English has different accents and forms, and so him picking up the distinct intonation that has its roots in American English for us was just recognizing a familiar English version,” she continued.

Trump has previously applauded the English language abilities of other leaders during diplomatic meetings. During a press conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Trump complimented his “good English” and asked if it was as good as his German.

Merz laughed and noted that he tries to “understand almost everything” and said he makes an effort “to speak as good as I can.”

The US president has centered the English language as part of this “America First” platform. During a 2015 presidential debate, Trump asserted that the US is “a country where we speak English.” In March, he signed an executive order making English the official language of the US.

Trump has previously landed in hot water for things he has said about the African nations. In 2018, the president referred to migrants from African countries and other nations as coming from “shithole countries.”

In May, he lectured South African President Cyril Ramaphosa on false claims that White South African farmers are the victims of a genocide.

Trump struck a different tone on Wednesday as he met with the leaders of Gabon, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mauritania, and Senegal, praising their countries as “all very vibrant places with very valuable land, great minerals, great oil deposits, and wonderful people.”

In turn, he was met with approval from the African leaders, who heaped praise on the president as they urged him to invest in their countries and develop their plentiful natural resources.

Boakai even remarked that Liberia “(believes) in the policy of making America great again.”

At least two people were killed and more than a dozen were wounded in Thursday’s attacks, which involved multiple drones and cruise missiles, according to Kyiv authorities.

The offensive comes one night after Russia conducted its largest drone assault since the start of its full-scale invasion, launching 728 drones and 13 missiles in strikes that killed at least one person, according to Ukrainian officials.

The damage on Thursday morning appeared to be substantial. Residential buildings, cars, warehouse facilities, offices and other buildings were on fire across the city, Tymur Tkachenko, head of Kyiv’s military administration, said.

Tkachenko urged residents to stay in shelters and avoid windows and balconies, as Ukraine’s air defense systems worked to repel the attack.

“Property can be restored, but human life cannot,” Tkachenko said.

Russia has significantly scaled up its air attacks on Ukraine in recent weeks, launching near-nightly assaults involving hundreds of drones and missiles.

Work towards a peace deal has simultaneously slowed down, triggering frustration in the White House, where US President Trump on Tuesday took aim at Russia’s leader Vladimir Putin.

“We get a lot of bullsh*t thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth,” Trump said in a Cabinet meeting. “He’s very nice all of the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.”

Russia’s sustained assault in recent days has injected new urgency into questions surrounding Washington’s commitment to defending Ukraine, as the Trump administration pledged to send additional defensive weaponry to Kyiv in an apparent policy reversion.

Moscow downplayed Trump’s harsh words in a press briefing Wednesday. A Kremlin spokesperson said it is reacting “calmly” to Trump’s criticism of Putin. “Trump in general tends to use a fairly tough style and expressions,” Dmitry Peskov said, adding Moscow hopes to continue dialogue with Washington.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is expected to meet his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov on the sidelines of the ASEAN summit in Malaysia on Thursday.

Following Wednesday’s record drone attack, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky said there had been “so many attempts to achieve peace and cease fire, but Russia rejects everything.”

International law violations

Thursday’s attack on Kyiv follows a landmark ruling by Europe’s top human rights court Wednesday, which found that Russia committed major international law violations in Ukraine.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled on four cases concerning Russian military operations in Ukraine since 2022, as well as the conflict in eastern Ukraine which began in 2014 and includes the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17.

It found that Russia had committed a pattern of human rights violations in Ukraine since the start of its full-scale invasion in February 2022.

The ECHR also ruled Russia was responsible for the downing of flight MH17 in 2014. Moscow has repeatedly denied responsibility for MH17’s destruction, which killed 298 people.

In the past 48 hours, US President Donald Trump has perhaps said his most forcefully direct words yet on arming Ukraine. And in the same period, the Kremlin have given their blankest indication to this White House that they are not interested in a realistic, negotiated settlement to the war.

Let us start with Trump’s comments on arming Ukraine, a reversion to a basic bedrock of US foreign policy for decades – opposing Russian aggression. “We’re going to send some more weapons,” the president said Monday of Ukraine. “We have to – they have to be able to defend themselves. They’re getting hit very hard.”

Behind him, his Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth nodded, despite this contradiction of the administration’s announcement days earlier of military shipments being stopped. What did Trump actually mean? He was short on detail.

A Pentagon spokesman later said that “at President Trump’s direction, the Department of Defense is sending additional defensive weapons to Ukraine to ensure the Ukrainians can defend themselves while we work to secure a lasting peace and ensure the killing stops.”

The about-face came days after Volodymyr Zelensky’s call with Trump on Friday, in which the Ukrainian leader said the two men spoke of joint weapons production, and air defense.

Zelensky urgently needs more Patriot interceptor missiles, which are the only way of taking down Russian ballistic missiles, and which only the US can authorize trade in. Trump spoke a day earlier with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who has offered to buy Patriots from the US to supply to Ukraine. Enough is afoot to have led Zelensky to declare on Saturday his Trump call was “the best conversation we have had during this whole time, the most productive.”

Trump’s failure to provide details may be strategic, or a by-product of his occasional disdain for them. But while he may sound briefly a little more like his predecessor, Joe Biden, in terms of arming Ukraine, herein lies one stark difference. Biden publicly announced in agonizing detail every capability he gave Kyiv, perhaps hoping the transparency would avoid a sudden unexpected escalation with Moscow.

Instead, Biden ended up with an excruciating public debate with Kyiv about every new system, and arms shipment, during which every seemingly impossible demand – from HIMARS rockets, to tanks, to F-16 fighter jets, to strikes inside Russia by ATACMs – was eventually acceded to. The plain, open ladder of American escalation was laid bare to the Kremlin. Trump perhaps seeks to avoid that by saying less.

But after barely six months in office, Trump finds himself back where Biden always was, after trying almost everything else – cosying up to then criticizing Russian President Vladimir Putin, falling out and making up with Zelensky, and spurning before eventually backing Europe. But the timing of his latest conversion, however enduring, reveals the desperation of this moment in the conflict.

The most recent, record Russian use of drones to attack Kyiv exposed possibly critical shortcomings in the capital’s air defenses. They would only have worsened without being resupplied, at a time when Ukraine has reported 160,000 Russian troops are massing to the north and east of the frontlines. The months ahead will be unpredictable and critical for Kyiv, even with renewed US military support.

Trump’s reversal may have stopped panic edging towards the risk of collapse. Why the shift?

Trump has always tried playing nice with Putin. Patient diplomacy, gentle words, and even last week’s brief pause in military aid – a Kremlin demand for a deal – still did nothing to change Putin’s position. The Kremlin does not want peace. And so Trump has learned slowly, rejecting the travails of recent history, that Russia is an opponent.

The end of the US’ longest war in Afghanistan, in which Biden withdrew fast in the wake of a hasty deal signed by Trump with the Taliban, led to scenes that haunted Trump’s predecessor and remain a potent stick with which Republicans beat Democrats. The repetition of a similar rout of American allies in Ukraine, or Eastern Europe, would be an indelible stain on the Republican or MAGA record. That is not imminent, or even that likely for now. But the seeds of it lie perhaps in any success for Putin’s planned aggression in the coming months.

Meanwhile, after six months of toying with the ideas of diplomacy, the Kremlin is back where it started too: willing to accept a peace only if it is surrender by another name. Its recent goal has been achieved: it has flattered the White House’s belief that it could talk out an end to the war, and taken enough time in talks that Russia’s summer offensive is now adequately manned, and the ground below these troops hard.

As recently as Monday, Putin’s top diplomat was repeating Russia’s most maximalist set of demands. Sergey Lavrov told a Hungarian newspaper that the “underlying causes” of the war must be eliminated, and gave a long, expansive list of impossibles, including the “demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine, lifting sanctions on Russia, rescinding all lawsuits against Russia, and returning the illegally seized Western-based assets.”

He added to that a requirement that Ukraine pledge to never join NATO, and also that occupied Ukrainian territory be recognized as Russian, including parts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson that Moscow hasn’t even seized yet. It was a dizzying echo of Russia’s demands when it engaged in diplomacy for the first time in Istanbul, in the opening weeks of the war, as its soldiers shot civilians dead in the suburbs of Kyiv.

Putin’s rationale for rejecting real diplomacy is simple. He has sold this war (falsely) as an existential clash between Russia and its traditional values, and a liberal, expansionist and aggressive NATO. It is a binary moment in Russian history, his narrative insists. To entertain a short, albeit deceptive ceasefire on American terms would contradict the urgency of that false story, and risk undermining the skimpy morale of his troops, whose lives his commanders often fritter away in brutal, frontal assaults.

Putin can mollify Trump with talk of his desire for peace. But he cannot let slip the façade of the motherland being under assault. His retreat back to type has been shorter and easier than Trump’s. But still the Kremlin sees the enemy where it always has been, and where it always needs to be, for its war of choice to continue ending the lives of so many Russian men early.

And so, for a brief moment, Putin and Trump find themselves back where Russia and the US were in 2022. Moscow has tens of thousands more troops reportedly amassed to invade Ukraine yet again. Diplomacy seems pointless. Washington needs to help defend Ukraine or risk global embarrassment – the demise of its military hegemony. And Ukraine is still there, in the middle, watching both powers on either side vacillate and spin, yet holding on.

The flare up in tensions comes as concerns mount in the EU about Chinese influence on critical technologies and security infrastructure in Europe.

“Putting German personnel at risk and disrupting the operation is completely unacceptable,” said Germany’s Foreign Ministry on social media platform X.

There was no immediate response from China’s Foreign Ministry, and the Chinese Embassy in Berlin did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

Germany’s Defense Ministry said the aircraft, taking part in the EU’s ASPIDES mission which protects international sea routes in the Red Sea, had been contributing a Multi-Sensor Platform, or “flying eye” for reconnaissance of the area since October.

A Chinese warship, which had been encountered several times in the area, had laser targeted the aircraft with no reason or prior communication during a routine mission flight, said a ministry spokesperson. The incident took place at the beginning of July.

“By using the laser, the warship put at risk the safety of personnel and material,” said the spokesperson, adding the mission flight was aborted as a precaution and the aircraft landed safely at a base in Djibouti.

The deployment of the MSP in ASPIDES has since been resumed, he said.

The MSP is operated by a civilian commercial service provider and German armed forces personnel are involved, said the ministry, adding the data collected significantly contributes to awareness for partners.

China has previously denied accusations of firing or pointing lasers at US planes. Incidents involving a European NATO member and China are more unusual.

In 2020, the US Pacific Fleet said a Chinese warship had fired a laser at a US naval patrol aircraft flying in airspace above international waters west of Guam. China said that did not accord with the facts.

Starovoit was dismissed by Putin on Monday morning. The decree announcing his dismissal was published on the official Kremlin website, with his deputy Andrey Nikitin appointed acting minister.

Asked by reporters for the reasons behind Starovoit’s dismissal, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov denied this was due to a “lack of trust,” but he did not give any alternative reason.

The Investigative Committee of Russia said in a statement that Starovoit’s body was found inside a car in Odintsovo, a suburb of Moscow. He was found with a gunshot wound, the committee said. It said the circumstances of his death were being investigated but the “main theory is suicide.”

Before he became a minister in May 2024, Starovoit was the governor of the southern Russian Kursk region. While he left the post before Ukraine’s surprise incursion, he was partially blamed for security failures in the Russian region.

The dismissal came amid a multi-day disruption to air travel in Russia. Russian Federal Agency for Air Transport said 485 flights were canceled, 88 were diverted and 1,900 were delayed over the weekend and into Monday.

The agency said the cancellations were down to “external interference,” without giving any specifics. But the Russian Defense Ministry said more than 400 Ukrainian long-range strikes were intercepted during the same period of time.

The Ukrainian military said it also struck a chemical plant in Krasnozavodsk, north of Moscow early on Monday. It said the plant manufactures “pyrotechnic devices and ammunition, including thermobaric warheads for Shahed-type” drones.

Another deadly night in Ukraine

At least 12 civilians were killed and more than 90 injured in Russian attacks across Ukraine in the 24 hours to mid-morning on Monday, according to Ukrainian authorities.

At least 29 people, including three children aged 3, 7 and 11, were injured when Russian drones hit a residential building, a kindergarten and a commercial area at 6 a.m. local time Monday (11 p.m. ET on Sunday) in Kharkiv in northeastern Ukraine.

At least 17 more people, including a teenage boy, were injured when the same city was struck with drones again just five hours later, according to Kharkiv mayor Ihor Terekhov.

The Ukrainian Air Force said Russia fired four surface-to-air missiles and 101 Shahed-type drones at Ukraine in the past 24 hours, adding that it downed 75 of the drones either by shooting them down or by jamming.

The Land Forces of Ukraine said on Monday that two of its recruitment offices were hit by Russian drones on Monday, the latest in a string of similar incidents.

Six draft offices across the country have been attacked by Russian drones in just over a week, the Land Forces said in a statement, adding that they believed Russia was attacking the offices in an attempt to disrupt the Ukrainian military’s enlistment process.

At least two people have been killed and more than a dozen injured in these attacks, the statement said.

The new beginning that Haim now longs for is a grandchild, created from sperm she had harvested from Yotam’s body upon its return home in December 2023.

Yotam, 28, was kidnapped by Hamas-led militants from kibbutz Kfar Aza on October 7, 2023. After spending 65 days in captivity, he was mistakenly shot by Israeli troops on December 15, 2023 along with two other hostages, Alon Shamriz and Samer Talalka, as they attempted to flee their captors in northern Gaza.

Yotam is the only Israeli hostage whose sperm is known to have been retrieved posthumously, and whose family is lobbying to use it to have a child.

Haim says Yotam, a single man at the time of his death, always wanted children. “Yotam really wanted that – he talked about it a lot,” she said.

A total of 205 hostages have so far been returned, 148 of whom were released alive, and 57 returned dead, according to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office. Most had been dead for weeks, if not months, making the men’s sperm no longer viable for use – except for Yotam’s. That’s where his mother saw an unexpected opportunity to have what would be her first grandchild.

Chances of successful sperm retrieval are highest in the first 24 hours after death, with the cut-off time being 72 hours, according to the Israeli government.

There are currently 50 Israeli hostages held in Gaza, of whom at least 20 are believed to be alive. Both Hamas and Israel have accepted a new ceasefire proposal and indirect negotiations on a deal have restarted, raising hopes that more could return home soon.

Uncharted territory

Haim remembers with painful clarity the moment Israeli authorities came to her home and told her about her son’s death. “Yotam was killed. By friendly fire. While escaping Hamas captivity. He was mistakenly identified as a terrorist,” Haim recalled the officers saying.

Half an hour after they broke the news of Yotam’s death, one officer approached Haim and whispered, “you can request sperm retrieval,” Haim said. The process “immediately got started, immediately,” she said.

Yotam’s sperm was retrieved within the necessary window of time. Ten samples were extracted, “enough for five children,” Haim recalled being told by the doctor who performed the procedure.

Haim now faces an uphill battle to get approval to use his sperm to produce a grandchild. If she succeeds, her next challenge would be to find a woman to carry the child and raise it.

Sperm lives on briefly after death, which is why it’s possible for doctors to retrieve it from testicular tissue. Any live sperm cells found are transferred and frozen in liquid nitrogen.

None, however, can be used without approval from a family court, where Haim now faces an uphill battle to continue her son’s lineage.

In Israel, extracting sperm from a dead body is permitted, but there is no law that clearly defines the process of using the sperm for the purpose of producing offspring.

“In Israeli law, we don’t have a law for this procedure,” Nily Shatz, Haim’s lawyer, said, adding that family courts have only approved posthumous use of sperm by parents of the deceased to produce a child twice in the past; however, the second case was later overturned after an appeal brought by the state. “All the other cases were rejected.”

The first case was that of a woman who after years of court battles was able to have a grandchild after proving that her son, who was killed in Gaza in 2002, wanted children, according to Shatz. The court, however, declared that the ruling should not be perceived as a precedent, saying legislators must decide on the matter in the future. The second case was that of a couple who are still fighting in court to have a grandchild with retrieved sperm of their late son, who died in 2012.

Extreme caution

Meirav Ben-Ari, a lawmaker in Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, is pushing for a bill that formally allows family members to use retrieved sperm even if the deceased had not specifically stated his wish to have a child posthumously, as long as they can prove the deceased would have wanted a child.

Netanyahu’s coalition is made up of some of the most religiously conservative parties ever to hold power in Israel, including ultra-Orthodox and far-right religious Zionist factions whose agendas are reshaping the country’s legal and social fabric.

Shatz, Haim’s lawyer, said that after the horrors of October 7, it was past time for parliament to pass a law on the issue, especially as families of hundreds of fallen soldiers retrieve the sperm of their dead.

But while Haim longs to be a grandmother, the issue of using the sperm of deceased men remains controversial. It raises ethical, religious and legal questions that lawmakers are yet to address.

For now, cases are assessed individually by the family courts, Shatz said. And since there are varying opinions in government about the practice, each case is viewed with extreme caution, she said.

At the moment, for families to use the sperm of their deceased, they must prove to the courts that the person who died wanted children, even after his death.

Yotam’s family is working to prove that he wanted children by providing testimony from relatives, friends and his therapist, but such intangible proof is likely to be harder for many others to present.

“There’s no logical way (where) usually people say that I want a child, even if I’m going from the world,” Shatz said, noting this isn’t something ordinary men think about, especially when young.

Sperm retrievals soared after October 7

Posthumous sperm retrieval (PSR) in Israel was previously open only to partners – provided other relatives did not object – while parents of the deceased had to apply for legal permission. Following the October 7 attacks, the Ministry of Health loosened the rules.

“In previous years, approximately 15–20 such retrievals were performed annually,” the ministry said.

For Haim, having a grandchild is a way to prove that Israel will keep growing despite the massacre.

“Every mother whose child was killed wants to have something from that child, not just photos. She wants something tangible,” Haim said, her eyes briefly filling with tears. “As the people of Israel, we need to understand today that, after October 7, we need to keep growing – to show our enemies that our way, this continuity of our lives here in this country, and in general, is through the creation of new life.”

“That forces you to be in this situation. That’s what war is doing to us,” he said.

Levine advocates for soldiers to decide early whether they’d like to have children, and for them to preserve their sperm while they are still alive.

Some have also called for soldiers to leave a “biological will,” a testament that lays out an individual’s wishes when it comes to posthumous use of eggs or sperm, whether they are retrieved after death or frozen while the person is still alive.

‘The knock on the door’

Bella Savitsky, whose son Jonathan died in combat on October 7, opted to retrieve his sperm and got approval for it, but it came too late.

Savitsky, a senior lecturer in the School of Health Sciences at Ashkelon Academic College, said studies show a maximum of 36 hours since time of death is the only time that retrieved sperm can be usable, a shorter timeframe than that cited by the Israeli government. This window is narrower in Israel because the hot weather can affect the sperm’s quality in dead bodies, she said.

On October 9, 2023, Savitsky received “the knock on the door” from authorities, telling her that her 21-year-old son had been killed in heavy fighting at an army outpost near Gaza.

“He wanted to get married, to have children, a dog, and a home in the countryside.”

It took many hours for Savitsky to obtain a court order allowing the harvesting of her son’s sperm.

“Altogether, it took 70 hours,” she said. “So, when the posthumous sperm retrieval was done, it was not intact. There was no live sperm.”

Ethical considerations

Sperm retrieval after death undoubtedly raises complex moral, ethical, judicial and religious questions. While technology has advanced, critics say the law has not kept up.

Experts say the controversy stems from the lack of clear consent from the father and the idea of bringing a child into the world who is fatherless from the outset.

“You are bringing into the world a child whose parent is known, named and deceased. This has a significant psychological impact and is different from a single-parent family,” Siegal said.

Some may also object to having children that effectively serve as a monument to the deceased father.

In that case, “the grandparents are seeking a ‘memorial’ – a form of commemoration – or trying to recreate something that cannot be recreated,” Siegal said. There are also religious considerations, as “retrieving sperm is an intrusive act, and in Judaism, there is a critical prohibition against desecrating the dead,” he said.

To mitigate these issues, Savitsky believes that young men should be asked whether they would want their sperm to be posthumously retrieved before they enter army service, but said the ministry of defense may be wary of implementing this as it could dent troop morale.

For Haim, despite the difficulties, the battle to have a grandchild gives her strength in the face of the tragedy she faces after October 7, as well as hope for the future.

In May, the State Attorney’s Office gave a green light in principle for Haim to use Yotam’s sperm. That was a first step towards what may be a long journey for her to have a grandchild. The family still needs to present evidence to prove that Yotam would have wanted a child, Shatz, Haim’s lawyer said.

“In the end, the reality did happen to us on October 7. So now – what will we do with that reality? Cry, wail, say, why did this happen to us?” she asked.

“Yes, a disaster happened. Period. But what else happened? A lot of amazing things also happened. That’s where I’m aiming (for).”

Surinamese lawmakers backed Simons as president six weeks after the ruling party and its top opposition nearly tied in the race for legislative seats, leading to a coalition deal to install Simons as president.

Simons’ opposition National Democratic Party won 18 seats and current President Chan Santokhi’s Progressive Reform Party won 17 seats in the May 25 parliamentary election. Smaller parties won the remaining 16 seats.

Suriname’s president is elected indirectly. Following the general election, members of the National Assembly vote for the president, and a candidate must secure a two-thirds majority to win the office.

“I come into this office to serve, and I will use all my knowledge, strength and insight to make our wealth available to all of our people,” Simons, 71, said in a brief speech after lawmakers approved her appointment with a round of applause.

Simons vowed to pay special attention to young people and those who have not yet had the best opportunities.

“I am very aware of the responsibility now placed on our shoulders, a responsibility compounded for me by the fact that I am the first woman to hold this office,” she added. “I do not need many words. My thanks and we will get to work.”

Incumbent President Chan Santokhi, a 66-year-old former police commissioner who stood for re-election, had faced criticism over a lack of protections for the poorer and more vulnerable sectors of society.

Santokhi congratulated Simons on her election and told lawmakers he took responsibility for his shortcomings and hoped he would be remembered for his commitment. He said he would continue to serve the country after the transition as a member of parliament.

A coming boom

Suriname, a former Dutch colony independent since 1975, is expected to see a surge in revenues from the nation’s first big offshore energy development, an oil and gas project led by TotalEnergies TTEF.PA.

The Gran Morgu project is set to begin production in 2028. Discovered reserves may allow Suriname to compete with neighboring Guyana, whose economy grew 43.6% last year, as a prominent producer.

However, campaigning featured little debate about what the next government, which will hold power until 2030, should do with the income.

Simons’ election was agreed in a six-party deal two days after the parliamentary contest, but was not made official until Sunday’s vote. Her inauguration is scheduled for July 16.

Suriname’s parliament backed Simons for the post by acclamation, alongside National Party of Suriname (NPS) leader Gregory Rusland as her vice president.

Simons served as parliamentary speaker for a decade until 2020. She was second in vote tallies behind Santokhi, winning more than 41,700 votes. She is the head of the NDP, founded by former President Desi Bouterse, who dominated Surinamese politics for decades but died a fugitive last year.

NDP founder Bouterse left office in 2020, the year after he was convicted in the 1982 murders of 15 government critics.

When the conviction was upheld in 2023, Bouterse went into hiding, dying at the age of 79 at an unknown location on Christmas Eve.

A 12-member jury reached the verdict after around six days of deliberation following a 10-week trial in Morwell, a tiny town about an hour’s drive from the suburban dining room in Leongatha, Victoria, where the lethal lunch was served in July 2023.

Patterson’s former parents-in-law, Don and Gail Patterson, died along with Gail’s sister Heather Wilkinson. Heather’s husband Ian, their local pastor, survived after a weekslong stay in hospital.

Prosecutors alleged that Patterson deliberately laced the lunch with death cap mushrooms, highly toxic fungi that she picked after seeing their location posted on a public website.

Her defense lawyers argued the deaths were a “terrible accident” and that Patterson repeatedly lied to police out of panic when she realized she may have added foraged mushrooms to the meal.

Under Australian law, none of the jurors can be publicly identified, and they’re prohibited from disclosing jury room deliberations even after the trial ends.

It will never be known which pieces of evidence influenced each juror’s decision, but all 12 were required to agree on the verdict.

The trial has captivated audiences worldwide via news reports and four podcasts dedicated to unpacking each day’s evidence.

Patterson sat in court, listening as prosecutors called witness after witness, whose testimony, they alleged, told a compelling story of a triple murder that the jury found satisfied the legal standard of beyond reasonable doubt.

The fateful lunch

The agreed facts were that Patterson asked five people to lunch on July 29, 2023, including her estranged husband Simon Patterson, who pulled out the day before.

Within hours of the meal, the four lunch guests – Simon’s parents Don and Gail, and his aunt and uncle, Heather and Ian Wilkinson – became ill with vomiting and diarrhea. They went to hospital where they were placed in induced comas as doctors tried to save them.

Gail and Heather died on August 4 from multiorgan failure, followed by Don on August 5, after he failed to respond to a liver transplant. Ian Wilkinson survived and was finally discharged from hospital in late September, after almost two months of intensive treatment.

Death cap mushrooms contain amanita toxins that prevent the production of proteins in liver cells, leading to cell death and possible liver failure from about two days after ingestion.

Native to Europe, the lethal mushrooms have been found growing in several Australian states, and around the time of the lunch, they had been seen within a short drive of Patterson’s home in rural Victoria.

In finding Patterson guilty, jury members indicated they were convinced beyond reasonable doubt that she planned to kill all four guests by hiding death cap mushrooms in the lunch.

During the trial, the prosecution argued that Patterson had the opportunity to pick lethal mushrooms after seeing their location posted on the citizen science iNaturalist website.

The guilty verdict suggests the jury accepted the prosecution’s argument that she likely traveled to two sites in April and May 2023, and deliberately picked the mushrooms used in the meal.

Patterson admitted that on April 28 – the same day as cellphone signals put her in the vicinity of death cap mushrooms – she bought a dehydrator that she later dumped at a waste recycling center on August 2.

It had her fingerprints on it and contained remnants of death cap mushrooms.

The prosecution alleged that Patterson faked illness in the days after serving the lunch and tried to cover her tracks by disposing of the dehydrator and factory resetting her devices to delete evidence.

The prosecution did not have to prove motive.

Prosecutor Nanette Rogers SC accused Patterson of having two faces: One she showed the world that suggested she had a good relationship with the Pattersons, the parents of her estranged husband, and a hidden face she showed only her Facebook friends that suggested she wanted to cut ties with them.

In Facebook messages sent in December 2022, Patterson had expressed anger and frustration over Don and Gail’s reluctance to get involved in their son’s marriage breakdown.

“I’m sick of this shit I want nothing to do with them,” she wrote. “I thought his parents would want him to do the right thing but it seems their concern about not wanting to feel uncomfortable and not wanting to get involved in their son’s personal matters are overriding that so f*** em.”

And another message read: “This family I swear to f***ing god.”

During eight days of testimony including cross-examination, Patterson consistently pleaded her innocence, claiming she inadvertently added foraged mushrooms to the meal.

In his directions to the jury, Justice Christopher Beale said that Patterson’s admission that she told lies and disposed of evidence must not cause them to be prejudiced against her.

“This is a court of law, not a court of morals,” he said.

“The issue is not whether she is in some sense responsible for the tragic consequences of the lunch, but whether the prosecution has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that she is criminally responsible for those consequences,” he said.

The jury found that Patterson had intended to kill all four lunch guests and lied repeatedly on the stand to claim she didn’t.

Patterson will be sentenced at a later date.

This is a developing story. More to come