Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents shot seven rounds into the vehicle of a New York father while his five-year-old son was in the car on the afternoon of Thursday, October 8. Oscar Belgal, a Dominican man, who had just picked up his son from school, was hit in the neck but survived the shooting.

He is currently being detained by ICE in the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn after being discharged from the hospital Thursday night. His lawyers have reported that he still has a bullet lodged in his body more than 24 hours after being shot. 

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said that they were conducting a “targeted enforcement operation,” calling Belgal a “criminal illegal alien.”

Local officials describe the incident differently. In a press conference, held by immigrant rights groups and officials a couple hours after the shooting, speakers described that disguised agents approached Belgal’s vehicle with their guns drawn. When Belgal started to move his vehicle forward at least one agent opened fire. Video emerged online of one of the agents carrying a large gun that reports say was a modified AR-15.

“They wore construction vests and masks that concealed their faces,” said New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani to press later that night.

“There was no reasonable way to identify them as ICE agents.”

The mayor claimed that he attempted to negotiate with President Trump directly for the release of Belgal, but “those negotiations were unsuccessful.” He then described ICE as “vicious” and “cruel,” saying that ICE undermines public safety.

“This is an agency that must be abolished.”

New York politicians face calls to act against ICE

New York City Public Advocate Jumaane D. Williams said that federal officials would certainly try to justify the shooting by painting a narrative that makes Bengal seem like “the worst human being you ever heard of.” But he emphasized that what actually happened is that a father picking up his child was shot by a federal agency after school dismissal in a residential area.

Later that night, in a separate press conference with the mayor, New York City Police Department (NYPD) Commissioner Jessica Tisch announced that Oscar Belgal had been arrested in 2023. Hecklers and protesters then began disrupting the mayor and the police commissioner, accusing them of demonizing the victim and justifying ICE violence.

“Tisch and the NYPD are effectively running cover for the Trump administration” over the federal shooting of a Dominican father, said Andre Easton, candidate for New York’s 15th Congressional District, in a statement on Friday, October 9.

Easton called on the mayor to back up his call to abolish ICE with action. “He must fully enforce his own Executive Order 13 and kick every ICE agent out of our city.”

He also slammed Ritchie Torres, the current representative of NY-15, for only demanding an investigation into the shooting. Torres’ demands represent a “betrayal of the Bronx.”

The same politicians that built the deportation machine won’t dismantle it, he argued.

“We need a mass movement powerful enough to dismantle it and win full, equal, and permanent rights for all immigrants.”

Sparks of that very movement may already be breaking out in New York.

Movement for ICE out of NY re-emerges

Hours after the shooting, hundreds of New Yorkers took to the streets and marched to the hospital where Belgal was being treated. They carried banners and placards reading “Abolish ICE” and “Full Rights for All Immigrants” and “Justice for Lorenzo, Joan, and All Victims of ICE Terror.”

The protests were met with force by the New York City Police Department, who attacked protesters with barricades, pushing and shoving several, including congressional candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier, and making a handful of arrests.

However, New Yorkers have continued pushing for ICE to leave the city, organizing protests on Friday and Saturday.

ICE strikes again

The shooting in New York is yet another in a series of ICE shootings across the United States, including the killings of Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston, and Joan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Maine. Each of these cases has left families and communities traumatized and provoked eruptions in the movement against ICE violence.

Now in New York, demonstrators are elevating the pressure on their elected officials and making a distinction between mere demands for investigation and concrete action that ends ICE operations and takes steps toward abolition.

Last week, EU member states reached a common position on the European Commission Omnibus X ‘Food and Feed’ proposal, in a bid to simplify regulation of pesticides. In reality, however, it will weaken protection against pesticides’ negative effects in Europe. The proposal pleases the chemical industry but goes against the wishes of a vast majority of citizens and many scientists who value people’s health, clean drinking water and biodiversity.

A hearing in the European Parliament on 3 September highlighted the real problem. Under the guise of a ‘discussion with experts’ in the field of health and environment, the parliament handed the megaphone to lobbyists representing a broken, toxic agricultural model.

Representatives of industrial agriculture – sugar beet, apple and cereal growers – parroted industry arguments, justifying their demands to stop banning pesticides that are toxic to public health, the environment and pollute our water resources.

Despite Europe witnessing massive droughts, extreme heatwaves leading to countless deaths, wildfires destroying biodiversity, and devastating crop losses, it seems that a significant share of MEPs are ready and willing to accelerate the degradation of European’s wellbeing and natural resources. 

Listening to them raises a fundamental question: Do farmers truly want to rely on a cocktail of toxic chemicals to maximise yields at low market prices, destroying their own health and local ecosystems in the process? Or do they wish to make an honest living, producing quality food in balance with nature for a fair income?

CAP subsidies

To better grasp this contradiction, we must look at what is actually at stake here.

Agrochemical corporations seek their share of the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) cake – a colossal €58bn budget, accounting for one third of the EU’s total budget.

Their own survival is reliant on keeping as many farmers as possible dependent on pesticides, fertilisers and industrial seeds. By diverting public CAP funds through farmers into the pockets of their shareholders, these companies ensure their long-term profitability.

Many farmers’ unions also represent agri-cooperatives that profit significantly from selling pesticides, which raises questions about whether they truly represent farmers’ long-term interests, or those of the pesticide industry.

Since the European Commission published its ‘simplification’ proposal in December 2025, proponents of pesticide-intensive farming have presented a series of flawed arguments that in fact reveal the dead-end to which intensive agriculture has led us.

Firstly, farmers’ organisations complain about a “lack of pesticide substances” on the market.

Currently around 450 different pesticide active substances are approved in the EU, from insecticides to fungicides, and herbicides. If 450 different options are insufficient, does this not signal an unhealthy addiction rather than a shortage?

Lobbyist groups, furthermore, claim that pest resistance to synthetic pesticides would inevitably lead to dramatic yield losses and hunger, arguing for even more pesticides with diverse modes of action.

And yet, according to scientific research, the  multiple chemical strategy that has been applied for more than 40 years is the very cause of the appearance of resistance. This problem cannot be solved with the mindset that caused it. The only scientific solution is, therefore, not more chemistry but prevention, and the use of alternative methods.

Thousands of farmers across the EU and the rest of the world are already proving this by switching towards Integrated Pest Management (a strategy for low-pesticide-input pest management) or organic practices to reduce pesticide inputs.

Who bares the cost

The call to keep all pesticides on the market – and potentially even use some of the banned ones –  serves only the short-term interests of the pesticide industry, not of the farmers.

Destroying soil life – the basis of soil fertility – with chemicals, and killing insect populations that naturally control pests and pollinate crops, jeopardises the very basis of farming and long-term food security.

The societal costs of this pesticide-dependent model are staggering. Citizens are the ones who bear the healthcare costs for chronic diseases such as cancer and Parkinson’s, which impact not only farmers but also residents of agricultural areas.

We face water pollution that has become nearly impossible to remediate. Fewer pollinators means fewer healthy fruit and vegetables. These ‘externalities’ far outweigh any short-term benefits.

This is the reason why the Paris and Munich water companies financially support farmers in protecting the groundwater, because doing so is up to 45 times cheaper than depollution.

In the meantime, the agrochemical industry enjoys huge profits from pesticide sales, largely supported by CAP subsidies, while society foots the bill for the damage. It is indeed a perfect business model…for them.

Lobbyist circus

The spectacle witnessed in the alleged House of European Democracy is testament to the state of our political world; one that is dominated by corporate interests over citizens and farmers’ wellbeing.

We witnessed the desperate battle of a toxic agricultural model that struggles to survive, and resists being replaced by sustainable farming methods.

The lobbyist speakers in the European Parliament hearing more or less gave the diagnosis to the current pesticide-intensive agricultural system: it is simply broken. 

Citizens have repeatedly expressed their concern on the impact of pesticides on their health and biodiversity. They have also expressed the need that public support for agriculture serves the common good.

The pesticide Omnibus X proposal is merely an attempt to maintain a detrimental status quo that favours the pesticides industry.

With the 1968 Mansholt Plan Europe created a blueprint for the intensification of agriculture.

What is needed now is a new blueprint for a system which financially supports farmers to implement practices that improve soil and plant health, favour beneficial insects, accelerate the availability of alternatives to pesticides such as biocontrol products, and rapidly phase out toxic synthetic pesticides to protect our health, water resources and biodiversity.

Only then can we ensure a sustainable future for European agriculture and our children. Only then, will a greater share of the CAP remain in the hands of farmers who feed us and protect our nature.

First published in Respekt, adapted by EUobserver

Unsavoury news comes from Russia often these days. But the latest unexpected development is the spread of a deadly disease.

Behind the mysterious death of a young woman in Siberia in early October was reportedly pneumonic plague – a disease so contagious it is considered as bad as anthrax, smallpox, and Ebola.

Local authorities in Russia have denied the plague as cause of death, but despite this, they have implemented anti-epidemic measures.

Eva Hrncirova, a spokesperson for the European Commission, said on Thursday (8 October): “Russia should make information about the plague available as soon as possible. This is what we need”.

“We had a meeting with the member states yesterday within the [EU Commission’s] Health Security Committee, and with the WHO [World Health Organization], who are in contact with our delegation in Moscow,” she said.

Russia was asked by the WHO to share “timely, precise, and exact information” about the possible plague in Siberia, she also said.

“We don’t have enough information to assess the epidemiological situation,” she added.

Nothing to see here, says Russia

Pneumonic plague disease can be treated with antibiotics if detected early, but officials beyond Russia’s borders are left with worrying questions.

Did an Irkutsk Anti-Plague Institute lab technician in Shelekhov (Siberia) really die of plague?

If so, was it a natural version of the disease, or a more dangerous bacterium modified in military labs?

And what is the risk of the Middle Ages-era disease spreading?

Pneumonic plague is caused by the bacterium Yersinia pestis — the same one that once brought devastating plague epidemics known as the Black Death.

The pneumonic form of plague, a disease that killed up to half of Europe’s population in the 14th century, spreads through droplets by coughing or sneezing.

It manifests as severe, rapidly developing pneumonia that almost always ends in death if left untreated. But if antibiotics are administered in time (ideally within 24 hours of the onset of symptoms), the disease is treatable.

Independent Russian-language media say that Darya Shipilova, a 28-year-old laboratory technician at the research and hygiene institute in question, accidentally broke a test tube containing plague bacteria in late September, became infected and died in hospital several days later, on 2 October.

Authorities have not confirmed the cause of the woman’s death, letting on only that she died of pneumonia and claiming that no microorganisms connected with her work had been found in her body.

Some 200 of her contacts were subsequently put into quarantine with medical supervision.

Authorities also ordered a three-week quarantine at several hospitals in the wider area, and facemasks for the wider population – even for schoolchildren.

Russia’s neighbours, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan, have all introduced border controls.

Russia said the epidemic situation in the area was stable, that none of the deceased woman’s contacts had shown signs of infection, and that there was no cause for concern.

However, the head of Russia’s public health authority reportedly travelled to Irkutsk to attend a meeting with local officials, while residents of Shelekhov report that people in protective suits are moving around the town.

And epidemiologists say it is simply not possible that Russia’s public health service would resort to such dramatic measures, including closing hospitals, over a single case of ‘pneumonia of unknown origin’ .

The institute where the laboratory technician worked is said to be a civilian facility that, among other things, researches and monitors the incidence of plague.

In Siberia, especially near the borders with China and Mongolia, the bacteria in question still circulate among animals and occasionally infect humans, as they do in some parts of Africa, where the disease is most common.

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

NPR's A Martínez asks Megan Sutcliffe, who focuses on security risks in the Middle East, why Iran would want to target a British air base.

NPR's A Martinez asks Israeli pollster and journalist Dahlia Scheindlin how the political legacy and future of Israel's prime minister have changed since the attacks of Oct. 7, 2023.

NPR's A Martinez speaks with Michael Ratney, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, about the new military offensive launched by Saudi Arabia and Yemeni forces against the Iran-backed Houthis.

Investigators are still searching for the motive behind the midair attack aboard a commercial plane full of passengers heading from Dubai to Tel Aviv last week.

NPR's A Martinez speaks with retired FBI special agent Lara Burns about the investigation into the FlyDubai attack and the lessons for law enforcement agencies worldwide.

NPR's Michel Martin speaks to Philip Mudd, a former FBI and CIA counterterrorism official, about the investigation into the FlyDubai copilot suspected of trying to crash a plane bound for Israel.

NPR's A Martinez speaks with retired military and commercial airline pilot Ron Alvarado about how pilots are trained to avert interference in the cockpit.

Retired Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, who commanded U.S. troops in Iraq, says the withdrawal could strengthen Iran and leave Iraq more vulnerable to ISIS.

(Image credit: Susan Walsh)

NPR's Michel Martin speaks with Robert Malley, a negotiator of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, about where talks stand after President Trump rejected Iran's offer to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

NPR's Michel Martin speaks with retired Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, former U.S. National Security Advisor, about the impact the final withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq will have on the Middle East.

This content is for members only. Visit the site and log in/register to read.

Sentado, de mãos cruzadas e com olhar sério para a câmera, o embaixador dos Estados Unidos no Panamá, Kevin Cabrera, anuncia, em vídeo publicado no canal do Departamento de Estado no YouTube em 13 de agosto de 2026: “Agora, a América tem a oportunidade de estabelecer uma nova ordem”. A frase ecoa a Doutrina Monroe, do princípio do século 19, que tratava o continente americano como área de influência dos EUA. O presidente Donald Trump a resgatou para justificar interferências políticas, militares e econômicas em outros países. Um dos alvos é o Brasil, em pleno ano eleitoral. A Agência Pública apurou que a Agência Brasileira de Inteligência (Abin) tem monitorado a situação por meio de relatórios internos que classificam os discursos de figuras da extrema-direita no Brasil como “facilitadores” de ataques à soberania nacional.

Recentemente, num relatório entregue ao Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (TSE) e à Polícia Federal (PF), a Abin classificou como “crítico” o risco de interferência e influência dos EUA nas eleições brasileiras. O conteúdo do documento foi revelado pela jornalista Mônica Bergamo, da Folha de S.Paulo. A Pública apurou que relatórios semelhantes vêm sendo produzidos desde novembro de 2025, quando a gestão de Trump passou a ampliar o plano de hegemonia na América Latina. 

Parte da extrema-direita no Brasil tem visões ideológicas alinhadas à gestão trumpista. Essa ala extremista é observada, nas análises da Abin, como colaboradora dos interesses americanos no país. Os países latino-americanos já foram definidos como “quintal” de Washington pelo Secretário de Defesa dos Estados Unidos, Peter Hegseth, em entrevista à Fox News no ano passado. A ascensão desta narrativa trumpista foi rebatida pelo presidente Lula em seu último discurso, na abertura da Assembleia Geral da ONU, na última terça-feira, 22 de setembro. “O Brasil não cabe no quintal de ninguém”, declarou o presidente, que também é candidato à reeleição. 

Fontes da Abin contaram à reportagem, sob reserva, que o cerne do interesse dos EUA estaria na extração de terras raras — mais de 20% das reservas mundiais de terras raras estão no solo brasileiro. A Pública mostrou que, no início do mandato, Trump assinou um decreto para acelerar a produção de minerais críticos e reduzir a dependência do governo chinês. “(…) Minerais críticos são essenciais para a prontidão militar americana, já que eles são componentes-chave de jatos, satélites, submarinos, bombas e sistemas de mísseis guiados”, registra um trecho do decreto.

A Pública também apurou que a embaixada dos EUA no Brasil procurou o líder do PL na Câmara dos Deputados, Sóstenes Cavalcanti (RJ), para que ele recebesse dois enviados do Departamento de Estado. Segundo a apuração, a missão da dupla era lançar dúvidas sobre as urnas eletrônicas. O Itamaraty negou os vistos a Riley Bernes e Samuel Samson.

Em meio à tensão diplomática, o Ministério das Relações Exteriores ainda não deu aval à indicação de Donald Trump para a embaixada dos EUA no Brasil. O indicado foi o representante da Flórida  — equivalente a um deputado estadual —, Daniel Perez, cujo nome foi aprovado pelo Senado americano em 7 de agosto. Contudo, ele não pode assumir o cargo sem o agrément — norma da Convenção de Viena sobre Relações Diplomáticas, de 1961. O agrément é a aceitação do país que vai receber o indicado e vem antes da indicação, o que não ocorreu no caso brasileiro. 

O parlamentar é fiel ao movimento nacionalista Make America Great Again (MAGA), amigo pessoal e integrante do mesmo grupo político de Marco Rubio. A Pública mostrou que Perez é peça importante no projeto expansionista de Trump e que seria uma figura relevante na tentativa de interferência no Brasil, inclusive no auxílio à formulação de leis no Congresso Nacional.

Discursos intervencionistas no radar da Abin

O monitoramento da Abin abrange ainda discursos intervencionistas que possam “causar impacto nas instituições” e obter apoio popular e político para uma interferência americana. O acompanhamento dos agentes de inteligência é constante e poderia incluir políticos com mandatos e posicionamentos radicais, bem como pessoas com poder de mobilização, como influenciadores digitais de extrema-direita.

“As eleições brasileiras não têm, como há quatro anos, um cenário de abolição do Estado Democrático de Direito. Agora é um cenário de interferência externa em que o governo dos EUA tem preferência pelo campo opositor e vê nesse campo um facilitador de seus interesses unicamente americanos”, frisou uma fonte da Abin, sob condição de anonimato. 

Ações para estimular o apoio à interferência americana foram intensificadas em 2026. Entre elas, a protagonizada por Marco Rubio em 16 de julho, quando convocou 66 países a se unirem a um projeto de combate ao que classificou como “terrorismo de extrema esquerda”. Sem provas, Rubio — filho de cubanos conservadores e integrante de uma elite econômica estabelecida na Flórida — acusou Cuba de espionagem e de infiltração no território americano. 

Dois meses depois, em 22 de setembro, os 14 países da América Latina, membros do “Escudo das Américas” — aliança bélica criada por Donald Trump — assinaram um acordo para impor sanções às facções criminosas Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) e Comando Vermelho (CV), a exemplo do congelamento de bens e de restrições à imigração e a vistos.