A fierce political feud is tearing through Iran’s ruling elite, exposing deep fractures within a regime long defined by unity in repression and control.

Analysts in Tehran are calling it a “war of wolves” — a brutal contest for survival among insiders as Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s grip weakens and his eventual succession looms ever closer.

The turmoil reached a public crescendo this week when Ali Larijani, a former parliament speaker and one of Khamenei’s most trusted lieutenants, issued a rare public appeal for restraint.

Writing on X, the social media platform banned for ordinary Iranians but routinely used by officials, Larijani warned that senior figures “still fail to grasp the sensitivity and gravity of the current situation,” urging them to “move beyond differences and strengthen national unity.”

For many Iranians, that call rang hollow. Citizens mocked the appeal, noting that the Islamic Republic has lived in “sensitive circumstances” since 1979, yet has never tolerated dissent or accountability.

Behind the public bickering lies a deeper, more dangerous struggle: the competition for wealth and influence in a crumbling, corrupt system.

Since the devastating Israeli air campaign in June 2025, which destroyed key elements of Iran’s nuclear and air defense infrastructure, Khamenei has largely vanished from public view.

His frail appearance and absence from major state functions have left Iran’s elite guessing who actually runs the country.

Former President Hassan Rouhani reignited tensions in July by criticizing the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) for wasting national resources on “inefficient” military programs.

The IRGC struck back, accusing Rouhani of cutting defense budgets and undermining national security during his presidency.

Rouhani went further, warning that Russia’s alliance with Tehran was “self-serving and unreliable,” a rare challenge to the Kremlin-friendly faction now dominant in Iran.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, a former IRGC commander, lashed out at Rouhani and former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif for their remarks.

By early November, the feud had escalated to open confrontation: parliamentary spokesman Abbas Goudarzi urged the judiciary to prosecute Zarif for “anti-Russian statements” and “disturbing national unity.”

The IRGC-aligned hardliners have crushed Rouhani’s reformist bloc since 2020, seizing control of parliament through tightly managed elections. Yet their dominance has not brought cohesion.

Instead, competing factions within the conservative camp are now fighting over who will control Iran’s political and financial machinery once Khamenei — now 86 and visibly frail — is gone.

At the heart of the struggle lies Iran’s crony capitalist economy, which rewards loyalty over competence and has bred staggering corruption.

Most members of the political elite depend entirely on state contracts, monopolies, and subsidies — systems they built and now cling to for survival. “They have no skills to thrive in a free-market economy,” one Tehran economist said. “Without the regime, they lose everything.”

That fragility was laid bare by the collapse of Bank Ayandeh in October, a scandal that revealed decades of insider theft and mismanagement.

The Central Bank’s decision to absorb the institution rather than prosecute its operators provoked outrage — even among loyal conservatives. Seyyed Yasser Jebraily, a regime insider, admitted on X that “nearly one hundred billion dollars of the nation’s capital has been plundered” since 2018.

For many Iranians, this confirmed what they already believed: that corruption, not foreign sanctions, has impoverished the country.

Decades of cronyism have gutted Iran’s productive economy and concentrated power in the hands of a few families and security networks.

As uncertainty grows over Khamenei’s successor, those networks are turning on each other — looting what remains of the state before the system they built begins to devour itself.

David Beckham has been knighted by King Charles III, in what the retired British soccer star described as his “proudest moment.”

The former England soccer captain accepted the knighthood for his services to sport and charity on Tuesday at a ceremony at Windsor Castle, where Japanese-British author and screenwriter Kazuo Ishiguro, and West End and Broadway star Elaine Paige also received honors.

Beckham was named earlier this year in the King’s Birthday Honours list.

“I’ve been very obviously lucky in my career to have won what I’ve won and done what I’ve done but to receive an honor like this, of a knight, is beyond anything that I ever thought that I would receive,”

Beckham told Britain’s PA Media news agency after the ceremony. “To be honest, a young boy from the east end of London, born in Leytonstone, and here at Windsor Castle, being honored by His Majesty the King – the most important and the most respected institution in the world – it’s quite a moment,” he added.

Beckham was accompanied by his wife, Victoria, who made the suit he wore to accept the award.

The father-of-four said the King had “inspired quite a few” of his looks over the years. “I looked at old pictures of him when he was quite young in morning suits and I was like, ‘OK, that’s what I want to wear,’ so I gave it to my wife and she did it.”

The honor comes more than two decades after the 50-year-old, who represented England in 115 international games and won league titles in four different countries, was appointed an officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) by Queen Elizabeth II.

Beckham, who retired from professional soccer in 2013, is also a UNICEF goodwill ambassador. In 2015, he launched the “7” fund to support children at risk of dangers such as the Ebola crisis – a fund named after the number on his Manchester United shirt.

He made a notable return to soccer in 2018 when he was awarded a Major League Soccer franchise in Miami, Florida, and went on to form the football club Inter Miami.

Beckham has a good working relationship with King Charles, having exchanged “beekeeping tips” in the Cotswolds, England, last year, when he became an ambassador for The King’s Foundation.

When flashbangs lit up a quiet Dearborn street before dawn on Halloween, residents thought they were reliving an old nightmare.

The FBI shouted commands in Arabic as agents stormed a family home, detaining several young men. Hours later, FBI Director Kash Patel declared on X that agents had “thwarted a potential terrorist attack” in Michigan.

But days have passed without charges, evidence, or answers — and the community that woke up to sirens, helicopters, and suspicion says it has seen this movie before.

Dearborn, often dubbed “the heart of Arab America,” is home to the largest Arab population in the United States — and for many residents, the government’s handling of this case feels eerily familiar.

In the absence of indictments or details, speculation has rushed to fill the void, and once again an entire city finds itself on trial by perception.

“I don’t believe it,” said Ahmed, a neighbor who described the family in question as kind and quiet. “They’re good people. They help everyone.” Another resident, Laraib Irfan, said he saw FBI agents leading the family out with their hands behind their backs as stunned neighbors looked on. “We heard two loud bangs — it felt like bombs,” he said.

The FBI insists it prevented a “potential mass-casualty event,” citing encrypted online chats referencing “pumpkin day” and a shooting range visit involving legally registered firearms.

But defense attorneys say the claims are flimsy and premature. Amir Makled, representing one of the detainees, argues the so-called plot may have been nothing more than “online gamer chat that was misinterpreted.”

“We are confident that once the facts are reviewed objectively, it will be clear there was never any planned terror attack,” Makled said. “All firearms were legally obtained. This was not a terrorist cell — it was a family.”

So far, no federal charges have been filed, a delay that experts say either suggests a cautious prosecution or a weak case. “It makes me think the plot wasn’t as mature as they led people to believe,” said Colin Clarke, executive director of The Soufan Center. “If this were a credible ISIS-directed plot, there would be more to show.”

What has emerged instead is a deepening unease. Patel’s announcement triggered a wave of online hate, with commenters calling Dearborn “a sleeper cell” or “an Islamic hub for terror.” For a city that the FBI itself ranks as one of Michigan’s safest, such comments sting.

Dearborn’s residents say they are used to being the scapegoat — from airport watchlists to surveillance operations after 9/11, Arab and Muslim Americans have lived under an unshakable shadow of suspicion.

“This community is part of the American fabric,” Makled said. “But we’re tired of being treated like we’re guilty by default.”

The Michigan branch of the Council on American–Islamic Relations (CAIR) condemned the FBI’s lack of transparency, warning that the absence of charges while publicly touting a “foiled terror plot” risks fueling Islamophobia.

“People in the community are tired of this idea of collective guilt,” said Executive Director Dawud Walid. “Muslims in Dearborn don’t owe anyone an apology for the alleged actions of others.”

FBI officials have declined to clarify whether the suspects remain in custody or what specific threats prompted the raid. For now, Dearborn is left in limbo — a city that prides itself on safety and solidarity, thrust again into the national spotlight as a backdrop for a story it didn’t write.

Makled said his client’s mother “hasn’t stopped crying.” And for many in Dearborn, the emotional toll of once again being cast under suspicion feels heavier than any legal burden.

“If the director put out a statement prematurely,” Makled said, “he should apologize. That’s how you heal this community — not by treating it like a suspect, but like a partner.”

Whether the FBI caught a real threat or a misunderstanding will eventually come out in court. But for Arab Americans in Dearborn, the verdict they care about most isn’t legal — it’s social. After decades of loyalty, they’re still waiting for their government to trust them back.

As U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping prepare for their high-stakes summit in South Korea this week, Israeli legal scholar and reform advocate Adv. Shraga Biran has issued a moral challenge that goes far beyond trade or technology: a call for both leaders to sign what he calls the “death warrant for global terrorism.”

Biran — a 90-year-old lawyer, former partisan fighter, and founder of Israel’s Institute for Structural Reforms (ISR) — has sent formal letters to both Washington and Beijing, urging Trump and Xi to use their meeting to jointly declare war on terrorism and antisemitism.

“This is not diplomacy,” he says. “It is a moral and civilizational imperative.”

Biran’s message is built on a simple conviction: only the world’s two largest powers, representing more than half of global output, possess the authority and capacity to crush terrorism’s economic and ideological roots.

“The American eagle and the Chinese dragon can do it,” he says. “They carry not only power but responsibility.”

A Moral Blueprint for a Global Alliance

Biran’s new initiative, The Trump–Xi Summit Imperative, expands on his 2023 book Liberating Gaza and his forthcoming work When Eagle and Dragon Unite: A Global Alliance to Rebuild Gaza and Eradicate Terrorism Worldwide.

His argument is stark: local wars — whether in Gaza, Syria, or Ukraine — will continue to regenerate unless the world’s superpowers coordinate a global campaign to dismantle terrorism’s deeper ecosystem of poverty, fundamentalism, and manipulation.

“The fight against Hamas, ISIS, or al-Qaeda means nothing if their economic and ideological networks are left untouched,” Biran writes. “Terrorism is a cancer — cutting the tail is useless if the head survives.”

He envisions a U.S.–China–led international task force dedicated to “de-Hamasization and denazification in the style of 2025,” pairing economic reconstruction with coordinated intelligence and law enforcement operations.

His proposal calls for diverting one percent of global wealth — roughly $4.5 trillion — toward eradicating poverty in vulnerable regions, which he views as terrorism’s primary incubator. “This is not charity,” he insists, “it is enlightened self-interest.”

Parallels in Power and Principle

Biran argues that Trump and Xi, despite their ideological differences, already share the same moral vocabulary.

Trump’s condemnation of “jihadist terrorism and militant antisemitism,” and Xi’s pledge to combat the “three evils” of terrorism, separatism, and extremism, demonstrate a rare convergence. Both leaders, he says, “speak the same language of necessity.”

He also points to their nations’ moral histories: America’s post-9/11 campaign against extremism and China’s wartime refuge for 20,000 Jewish refugees during the Holocaust. “China is the only civilization where the word ‘antisemitism’ has no translation,” he notes.

A Warning from History

Drawing parallels to the 1930s, Biran warns that populist and nationalist movements — from the far-right to the pseudo-left — are reviving antisemitic and fascist ideologies under democratic guises. “Fascism no longer marches in uniform,” he cautions. “It hides behind slogans of freedom.”

The failure to act now, he says, would mark a moral collapse akin to Europe’s prewar paralysis. “If they miss this summit,” Biran writes, “humanity will have lost a historic moment.”

Toward a New Covenant

Biran’s appeal is already circulating in the United States, China, and the Arab world, with an Arabic edition of his new book published by Jordanian publisher Mohammad Alsharqawi.

It has been distributed in Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Lebanon, and Syria, signaling a rare cross-regional appetite for an economic path out of extremism.

“The enlightened world must unite against global terrorism and antisemitic terror,” Biran says. “History does not decide — people do. If Trump and Xi understand that, they can bring about the first true covenant of the new world.”

After years of stalled discussions and missed deadlines, the African Union (AU) is once again at a crossroads. With the world shifting toward multipolar power and rapid geopolitical change, Africa’s premier continental body faces mounting pressure to reinvent itself — not through rhetoric, but through deep structural reform.

The call for transformation is not new. In 2016, African heads of state tasked Rwandan President Paul Kagame with leading a sweeping reform initiative to make the AU “fit for purpose” in achieving the ambitions of Agenda 2063, Africa’s long-term blueprint for inclusive growth and sustainable development.

Yet nearly a decade later, many of the same institutional weaknesses persist: sprawling bureaucracies, dependence on foreign funding, and fragmented coordination with regional economic communities.

The Case for Urgent Reform
Analysts and official studies have long identified core issues hampering the AU’s effectiveness. The organization’s wide array of overlapping mandates and limited managerial capacity have led to inefficiency and slow decision-making.

Its heavy reliance on external donors — who finance the majority of its programs — undermines both sovereignty and accountability. Meanwhile, poor coordination with regional blocs continues to dilute the AU’s authority on issues of peace, security, and trade.

The reform agenda seeks to change this by focusing on five key areas:

• Institutional Restructuring: Streamlining the AU’s organs and commissions to eliminate redundancy and speed up decision-making.

• Financial Independence: Implementing sustainable funding mechanisms, including improved member-state contributions, to reduce reliance on non-African partners.

• Peace and Security: Strengthening conflict-prevention and rapid-response systems to address Africa’s persistent instability.

• Civic Engagement: Expanding participation of civil society groups to enhance transparency and grassroots inclusion.

• Operational Efficiency: Ensuring all AU initiatives align with a smaller set of continental priorities.

Momentum for reform gained traction again in October 2025, when AU Commission Chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf and Kenyan President William Ruto, the AU Champion for Institutional Reform, convened the first virtual meeting of the Ad-Hoc Reform Committee.

Ruto emphasized Africa’s shared duty to build “a stronger, more coherent, and people-centered Union,” while announcing that Angola’s President João Lourenço will host an Extraordinary Summit on AU Reforms in Luanda on November 26, 2025.

The message from Ruto and Youssouf is that reform is no longer optional. To lead in a rapidly evolving world, the AU must be financially self-reliant, operationally lean, and politically united.

Agenda 2063’s promise of “The Africa We Want” cannot be achieved without an African Union that is empowered to act decisively and funded by Africans themselves.

As the Luanda summit approaches, the question is no longer whether reform is necessary — but whether the continent’s leaders are finally ready to deliver it.