The HighWire with Del Bigtree | March 6, 2025
SUGAR, NOT GENES: THE HIDDEN DRIVER OF CHRONIC DISEASE?
Most U.S. infant formulas contain mainly added sugars, posing a serious risk to babies’ health, researchers say
By Pamela Ferdinand | US Right To Know | February 25, 2025
Most infant formulas in the U.S. contain mostly added sugars instead of natural lactose, which experts say can harm early development, a new report from the University of Kansas shows.
“Infants may consume upwards of 60 grams of added sugars per day, or the equivalent of two soft drinks per day if they are entirely formula-fed,” researchers say in the study, published yesterday [Feb. 24, 2025] in the Journal of Food Composition and Analysis.
The findings reveal “the staggering extent” to which sugar-laden U.S. formulas undermine federal healthy diet recommendations for infants—and cannot be easily avoided, they say.
“[Most] of the formulas that parents and caregivers feed their infants likely present a substantial risk to their infant’s health and development. Ultimately, caregivers and infants in the US deserve a formula market that promotes healthy infant development and does not promote early obesity risk.”
Added sugars provide energy but lack nutritional value, boosting the odds of rapid infant weight gain that can eventually lead to obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and other health problems. They may also make babies develop a stronger preference for sweet foods, increasing the risk of overeating and obesity later in life. And they do not support beneficial gut bacteria as well as lactose.
In contrast, lactose, which is naturally found in breast milk, cow and goat milk, is perfectly designed to support an infant’s nutrition, immune system, and gut health, researchers say. Because lactose digests slowly, it doesn’t cause the sharp spike in blood sugar that can set the stage for long-term health problems. It also satiates hunger and helps the body absorb minerals that are important for bone health.
Dr. David Ludwig, an endocrinologist and researcher at Boston Children’s Hospital who conducted some of the original studies linking sugar-sweetened beverages and fast food to obesity, calls infant formula spiked with added sugars a “metabolic nightmare for infants.”
“You lose the beneficial effects of what lactose does, and you get the harmful effects of what these fast-digesting sugars do,” Ludwig says. “Unless we’re talking about the very rare child who can’t take lactose, that should be the dominant carbohydrate.”
Out of 73 formulas available in the U.S. in 2022, the vast majority of which were for infants up to 12 months old, the researchers found only five contained mainly naturally occurring lactose—and those are no longer available in this country. It is unknown whether any formulas on the current U.S. market contain primarily naturally occurring lactose, they say.
The study also shows the quality and type of sugars in infant formulas varied by formula. Gentle (with marketing claims such as “gentle,” “soothe,” “sensitive,” or “acid reflux”) and lactose-free formulas contain less sugar than standard formulas but much more starch, the study shows.
“Our findings highlight a major problem with the infant formula supply,” says lead author Audrey Rips-Goodwin, who headed the analysis of data from the Nutrition Data System for Research for KU’s Health Behavior and Technology Lab. “Our infant formula market totally contradicts what experts in infant health recommend.”
Children under 2 years should not be given any foods or beverages with added sugars, since they need nutrient-rich diets and are developing taste preferences, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (2020–2025). Yet with few formula options free of added sugars, the researchers say parents and caregivers who can’t breastfeed or access breast milk face tough choices in terms of finding a nutritionally suitable formula due to lax government regulations.
Unlike adult food products, US regulations do not require that added sugars be reported on the nutrition label of infant formulas (only total carbohydrates). The FDA specifies 30 nutrients that must be included in infant formulas but does not regulate the types of carbohydrates or require their clear labeling. That means formula manufacturers can use any type of carbohydrate, including starches or added sugars such as corn syrup solids, fructose, and glucose.
“Consumers are blinded to the fact that added sugars may be present in infant formulas, and in what quantities,” the researchers say. “As a result, parents and guardians may unknowingly feed their infants formula that contains substantial quantities of added sugars.”
The study builds on others that revealed the high sugar content of infant formula. It also comes less than a year after news reports that two of Nestlé’s leading baby-food brands, promoted as healthy in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, contain high levels of added sugar.
To promote healthy development, the researchers say efforts should focus on requiring formula companies to produce products that contain naturally occurring lactose as the only sugar. The amount of lactose present in infant formula should also reflect that of human milk.
At the same time, societal barriers to breastfeeding, including a lack of parental leave and affordable early child care, should be removed, the researchers add.
“[The] focus on an individual-level solution (breastfeeding promotion to women and caregivers) is not well matched to addressing the systemic nature of the problem and places an unfair burden on women and families who are expected to navigate this systemic issue,” Rips-Goodwin says.
Senior author Tera Fazzino agrees.
“Even though breastfeeding is promoted as the best option, the lack of support makes it hard to do exclusively,” says Fazzino, associate director of the Cofrin Logan Center for Addiction Research & Treatment at KU’s Life Span Institute. “Most parents end up using formula, either as a supplement or completely. But our findings suggest that formula itself may pose a serious risk to infant health.”
Reference
Rips-Goodwin AR, Jun D, Griebel-Thompson A, Kong KL, Fazzino TL. US infant formulas contain primarily added sugars: An analysis of the infant formulas on the US market. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis. Published online February 2025:107369. doi:10.1016/j.jfca.2025.107369
The questions they didn’t ask Marty Makary at his confirmation hearing

By Maryanne Demasi, PhD | March 9, 2025
By all accounts, Marty Makary’s confirmation hearing to lead the FDA went smoothly. As an experienced surgeon at Johns Hopkins with impeccable credentials, he handled questions with ease.
But the real issue was not what the senators asked Makary—it was what they didn’t ask him that was most concerning. They sidestepped the FDA’s recent, glaring failures, leaving critical issues unaddressed.
Much of the hearing consisted of senators pressing Makary for commitments on data he had not yet reviewed, such as mifepristone, vaping, and food additives. They also questioned him about recent FDA job cuts—decisions in which he had no involvement. As a result, there were no substantive revelations.
Makary promised greater transparency at the FDA and vowed to restore public trust. But why did no one press him on the agency’s most egregious missteps?
Speedy drug approvals
One of the most troubling trends at the FDA is its increasing reliance on expedited drug approval pathways.
Today, 65% of new drugs are pushed through these faster routes, despite clear evidence linking them to greater safety risks and a higher likelihood of requiring black box warnings.
The case of Aducanumab, the controversial Alzheimer’s drug, exemplifies this problem. It was approved in 2021 based on surrogate markers rather than meaningful clinical outcomes.
Despite an almost unanimous vote against its approval by the FDA’s advisory committee, the agency proceeded regardless, leading three committee members to resign in protest.
Harvard professor of medicine Aaron Kesselheim called it “probably the worst drug approval decision in recent US history.” Yet not a single senator questioned Makary on how he planned to reform this broken system.
When drugs are rushed through accelerated pathways, companies are required to conduct confirmatory trials to confirm efficacy and safety. But these confirmatory trials are frequently delayed, never completed, or ignored when results are unfavourable.
The FDA rarely penalises companies for non-compliance, allowing unsafe or ineffective drugs to remain on the market. Yet, the senators failed to ask Makary whether he would commit to stricter enforcement of these requirements.
A culture of secrecy
The FDA is the only major drug regulator in the world that receives individual participant data from clinical trials—yet it refuses to routinely release these data for independent scrutiny. If the agency stands by its approvals, why not allow external verification?
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the FDA granted Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) for Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine trial in just 22 days—an unrealistic timeframe for proper analysis.

Worse still, it failed to conduct trial site inspections, despite knowing billions of doses would be administered, with experts calling the FDA’s oversight “grossly inadequate.”
When whistleblower Brook Jackson provided documented evidence of scientific misconduct in Pfizer’s pivotal clinical trial, the FDA ignored her.
The agency’s own Office of Criminal Investigations, whose job it is to conduct criminal investigations into illegal activities involving FDA-regulated products, turned a blind eye.
How can the agency expect public trust when it turns ignores such evidence?

Adding to its opacity, the FDA attempted to withhold Pfizer’s vaccine trial data for 75 years, only relenting after a legal battle. The Judge in this case said the court order would “pierce the veil of administrative secrecy.”
This should have been a major topic at the hearing. I personally have had an FOIA request pending with the FDA for over three years, and the last time I checked, the agency claimed it was still “in triage.”
Concealing data
The FDA knew early on that the immunity conferred by Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine waned rapidly, yet it withheld these findings for months, during which time millions of people queued to get vaccinated under the assumption they offered lasting protection.

The agency, despite promising transparency early in the pandemic, consistently delayed releasing safety data, preventing doctors and the public from making informed decisions. None of this was brought up by Senators at the hearing.
FDA’s drug promotion
The FDA is a regulatory body, not a marketing agency—yet it actively promoted Covid-19 vaccines, claiming they prevented long Covid despite no supporting evidence.
Former FDA Commissioner Robert Califf falsely stated that the Pfizer’s antiviral Paxlovid could prevent long Covid and even admitted to deliberately “cheerleading” the drug.

Meanwhile, the agency mocked alternative treatments like ivermectin, infamously tweeting: “You are not a horse, you are not a cow, seriously, y’all. Stop it.” It later removed the tweet after being sued. The FDA has no business dictating treatment choices or engaging in pharmaceutical advertising.
The agency also capitulated to political pressure.
The Biden administration pushed for universal Covid-19 booster approval despite weak data, prompting the resignation of two top vaccine officials, Marion Gruber and Phillip Krause. Senators should have demanded to know exactly how Makary would prevent future political interference.
False advertising
Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla publicly claimed that the company’s Covid-19 vaccine prevented transmission, even though the FDA’s own EUA documents stated this was never assessed.
The agency did nothing to correct this false advertising, yet no senator questioned Makary about how he would address misleading pharmaceutical advertising going forward.
Nor did they raise the issue of banning direct-to-consumer advertising—a policy Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has pledged to end.

Unanswered safety questions
Despite the pandemic ending, Moderna and Pfizer vaccines for young children remain under EUA. Why? There is no emergency justifying this continued authorisation.
Moreover, independent researchers have repeatedly raised concerns about excessive residual DNA in Covid-19 mRNA vaccines. The FDA has refused to investigate these findings, even as scientists continue to warn of potential risks.
Now, legal and medical experts have petitioned the FDA, citing regulatory violations and concluding the vaccines were “unlawfully approved.” Why was this not discussed at the hearing?

Beyond vaccines, the FDA has persistently ignored citizen petitions on other drug safety issues.
One example is its failure to update SSRI labelling to include warnings about post-SSRI sexual dysfunction (PSSD), despite overwhelming evidence. This inaction has led to legal action against the agency. Why did no senator demand accountability?

The task ahead
Makary was not responsible for the FDA’s past transgressions, but when confirmed, he inherits an agency in crisis.
To his credit, he was one of the few who publicly challenged flawed Covid policies during the pandemic.
Many hope he will now use his surgical precision to excise the rot within the FDA.
CHD, Doctors Ask Supreme Court to Hear Medical Free Speech Case
By Michael Nevradakis, Ph.D. | The Defender |March 6, 2025
Children’s Health Defense (CHD), Physicians for Informed Consent and a group of doctors who sued the Medical Board of California after it disciplined them for allegedly spreading COVID-19 “misinformation” have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review their case.
The plaintiffs in Kory v. Bonta submitted their petition on March 1, following the November 2024 dismissal of their case by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta is named in the suit, along with the state’s medical board.
The lawsuit, filed in January 2024, is a follow-up to a previous complaint filed in 2022 and an amended suit filed in 2023, which challenged California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 2098 — a law allowing the medical board to discipline doctors who give “false” information about COVID-19 for engaging in unprofessional conduct.
A federal judge blocked AB 2098 in January 2023, and the law was later repealed. However, according to the lawsuit, the Medical Board of California is still targeting “COVID misinformation” and is threatening physicians with disciplinary action.
Three medical professionals — Dr. Brian Tyson, a board-certified family practitioner who owns an urgent care facility; Dr. LeTrinh Hoang, a pediatric osteopathic physician; and Dr. Pierre Kory, president emeritus of the Independent Medical Alliance, launched the lawsuit.
According to the petition to the Supreme Court, the Medical Board of California and the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, “with the assistance of the California Legislature,” have threatened disciplinary actions against the plaintiffs and other physicians for offering information to patients that departs from official COVID-19 narratives.
In April 2024, a federal district court rejected the plaintiffs’ request for an injunction against the medical board. The 9th Circuit upheld the ruling in November 2024. In January, the Supreme Court rejected the plaintiffs’ emergency application for an injunction.
Lawsuit hopes to set precedent that ‘informed consent is free speech’
The case seeks to resolve contradictory precedents from two federal appeals courts on whether the First Amendment protects physicians’ communications to patients — “a question that is particularly significant in a field like medicine, where scientific understanding is continually advancing and rarely settled.”
In a Physicians for Informed Consent press release, Rick Jaffe, who represents the plaintiffs, said the lawsuit “touches on the foundational rights of professionals to share knowledge and opinions essential for patient autonomy and informed consent.”
Tyson said patients cannot provide informed consent if their physicians are denied the opportunity to speak freely.
“We want doctors and all providers to be able to discuss risks and benefits with our patients, be able to speak out against things that are wrong, and be heard when breakthroughs are made,” Tyson said. “The hope is the Supreme Court will set the precedent that informed consent is free speech.”
Supreme Court asked to decide between competing legal precedents
According to the petition, federal courts have established competing legal precedents relating to medical free speech.
In a 2022 decision in Tingley v. Ferguson, the 9th Circuit upheld the ability of professional boards in Washington to restrict members’ speech, arguing this is similar to the boards’ enforcement of “other restrictions on unprofessional conduct.”
But in a 2020 decision in Otto v. City of Boca Raton, the 11th Circuit struck down local ordinances that limited the speech of therapists and counselors, finding that such content-based and viewpoint-based restrictions violate the First Amendment, which has no carveout for controversial speech.
Tyson said the California Medical Board’s disciplinary proceedings against him jeopardized his career. “I had to defend my position against the [board] and almost lost my license … That would have been devastating to the community I serve and to all those I employ.”
Jaffe said Kory v. Bonta is similar to another First Amendment case relating to medical speech, Stockton v. Ferguson. Filed in March 2024, the lawsuit seeks “to protect the right of physicians to speak” and the public’s right to hear such speech.
CHD is a plaintiff in the lawsuit, as are several doctors facing disciplinary proceedings by the Washington Medical Commission for their public statements criticizing mainstream COVID-19 narratives. Basketball legend John Stockton is also a plaintiff, advocating for the public’s right to access and listen to “soapbox speech.”
In January, the Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs’ emergency appeal in Stockton v. Ferguson. The case remains active before the 9th Circuit. Oral arguments are scheduled for May 14, Jaffe said.
“The two cases represent the entire spectrum of cases involving what physicians say and would allow the court to give a definitive and comprehensive answer to whether and how much the First Amendment protects professionals when they communicate to patients and the public,” Jaffe said.
According to Physicians for Informed Consent, four justices must agree before the full court can hear Kory v. Bonta. If the Supreme Court decides to take the case, it will hear Kory v. Bonta in October.
Jaffe said the Supreme Court may ultimately jointly consider Kory v. Bonta and Stockton v. Ferguson. He credited CHD with its role in supporting both cases.
“We hope to establish the constitutional right of healthcare providers to speak out against the prevailing medical and scientific consensus about COVID-19, as well as whatever public health challenges face the country in the future,” Jaffe said.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
Number of wounded, disabled in IOF rises to 78k: Israeli media
Al Mayadeen | March 9, 2025
The Israeli Ministry of Security has reported that the number of wounded and disabled in the Israeli “army” has reached 78,000 due to the recent war.
The majority of these casualties are reserve soldiers, with over 50% being under the age of thirty.
Notably, 62% suffer from psychological trauma, and 10% are in moderate to critical condition, with 194 soldiers currently hospitalized.
In related news, Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth highlighted growing concerns within the Israeli army’s General Staff over a “severe shortage of manpower.”
The army is facing significant pressure on regular soldiers, many of whom are expected to remain on duty for the foreseeable future.
According to the Operations Division of the Israeli army, “Israel” is expected to experience a prolonged manpower shortage, one not seen since the days of the security belt in southern Lebanon, continuing through to the second intifada.
Tens of thousands of IOF reservists seek psychological treatment: Ynet
Late last month, Yedioth Ahronoth reported that tens of thousands of reservists in the Israeli occupation military were increasingly seeking psychological treatment after completing months of military service.
The report highlighted that 170,000 Israeli soldiers have enrolled in a program launched by the Security Ministry about a month and a half ago, noting that the psychological treatment program is witnessing high demand from reservists.
However, the newspaper pointed to a severe shortage of therapists, adding that the so-called “Amit” therapy program, initiated by the Israeli Security Ministry, is struggling to keep up with the growing demand.
In this context, the Friends of Israel Disabled Veterans’ website revealed on February 5 that around 10,000 soldiers may be officially recognized as suffering from psychological disabilities, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
The website also reported that more than 6,000 new disabled Israeli soldiers have been added to the organization, stating that a total of 14,700 soldiers and security personnel have been wounded since the start of the Israeli war on Gaza and Lebanon.
US envoy confident captive deal with Hamas possible ‘within weeks’
Al Mayadeen | March 9, 2025
Adam Boehler, the US envoy who engaged in direct talks with Hamas, described the meeting as “very helpful” and expressed confidence that a deal to release Israeli captives held in Gaza could be reached “within weeks”.
In an interview for CNN, Boehler acknowledged the unusual nature of the talks, considering that Hamas has been designated a “terrorist” organization by the US since 1997. However, he did not rule out future meetings with the Palestinian group.
Boehler recognized “Israel’s” concerns over the US meeting with Hamas but emphasized his intent to revive “fragile” negotiations.
“In the end, I think it was a very helpful meeting,” he said, adding, “I think something could come together within weeks… I think there is a deal where they can get all of the prisoners out, not just the Americans.”
He hinted at the possibility of further talks, stating, “You never know. You know, sometimes, you’re in the area and you drop by.”
The first phase of a ceasefire concerning the release of some Israeli captives ended earlier this month, but the Palestinian Resistance and “Israel” are now in disagreement over when to transition into the second phase, which aims for a complete end to the war on the Gaza Strip.
While “Israel” wants to extend the first phase until mid-April, Hamas has insisted on moving to the second phase, which is aimed at achieving a permanent end to the war.
During this phase, the Resistance released 25 living captives and the bodies of eight others in exchange for approximately 1,800 Palestinian detainees and prisoners held in Israeli occupation prisons.
Of the 251 individuals taken captive on October 7, 2023, 58 remain in Gaza, including 34 whom the Israeli military has confirmed as dead.
Last week, US President Donald Trump issued a “last warning” to Hamas, threatening additional destruction in Gaza if all remaining captives were not released.
Boehler acknowledged the “consternation” “Israel” felt over the US’ engagement with Hamas, saying, “We’re the United States. We’re not an agent of Israel.”
He also pledged to travel to Syria to secure the release of Austin Tice, an American journalist abducted in 2012.
Tice, a freelance journalist working for outlets such as Agence France-Presse and The Washington Post, was detained at a checkpoint in Syria.
With hopes reignited after the fall of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, Boehler vowed to locate Tice, stating, “If he’s there, I’m going to bring him home. If he’s dead, I’m going to dig up his remains with the FBI… and we’ll bring them home to his mom.”
US-Hamas talks focused on release of American-Israeli captive: Al-Nono
In the same context, senior Hamas official Taher al-Nono told Reuters on Sunday that recent meetings between Hamas leaders and US captives negotiator Adam Boehler have primarily focused on the release of an American-Israeli dual national held by the group in Gaza.
Al-Nono, political advisor to the leader of Hamas, confirmed the direct talks with the US, noting that they had occurred over the past week in the Qatari capital, Doha.
“Several meetings have already taken place in Doha, focusing on releasing one of the dual-nationality prisoners. We have dealt positively and flexibly, in a way that serves the interests of the Palestinian people,” al-Nono pointed out.
He further explained that both sides had also addressed how to implement the phased agreement aimed at ending the war on Gaza.
“We informed the American delegation that we don’t oppose the release of the prisoner within the framework of these talks,” the Palestinian official noted.
Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, emphasized last week that securing the release of Edan Alexander, a 21-year-old from New Jersey believed to be the last remaining American captive held by Hamas in Gaza, was a “top priority”.
Alexander, who served as a soldier in the Israeli occupation military, has been in captivity since the outbreak of the war.
On Saturday, “Israel” and Hamas indicated they were preparing for the next phase of ceasefire talks, with mediators working to extend the fragile 42-day truce that began in January.
A Hamas delegation met over the past two days with Egyptian mediators, reaffirming its commitment to negotiating the second phase of the deal. “Israel” also announced it would send negotiators to Doha on Monday for further discussions on the ceasefire.
On Sunday, “Israel’s” Energy Minister, Eli Cohen, announced that he had instructed the Israel Electric Corporation (IEC) to cease electricity sales to Gaza, a move he claimed was aimed at pressuring Hamas to release captives.
However, the measure is unlikely to have an immediate impact, as “Israel” had already cut off the power supply to Gaza at the start of the war. It could, however, affect a wastewater treatment plant currently relying on the supply.
Al-Nono praised Witkoff for his significant role in securing the ceasefire agreement on January 19 that brought an end to the war on Gaza.
“We hope that he (Witkoff) will work to succeed in the negotiation of the second phase,” he concluded.
UK eyes intelligence alliance to share data with Ukraine
Al Mayadeen | March 9, 2025
The UK government is considering forming a new intelligence-sharing subgroup within the Five Eyes alliance in reaction to US President Donald Trump’s actions toward Ukraine, the Daily Mail reported on Sunday, citing anonymous defense officials.
The requests for the effort apparently arose after the US suspended information collaboration with Kiev and prevented the UK and other allies from sending American intelligence to Ukraine.
A new proposed subgroup would greenlight intelligence cooperation without a US veto, according to the British daily.
According to the Daily Mail, the new project is not about abandoning Five Eyes but rather about establishing a new Four Eyes suborganization within it.
Simultaneously, US allies are mulling lowering the intelligence they share with Washington, citing worries about the administration’s conciliatory attitude to Russia, according to NBC News.
These include “Israel” and Saudi Arabia, as well as Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand, with the latter four being members of the US-led Five Eyes intelligence cooperation.
Officials in New Zealand, Australia, and Saudi Arabia declined to comment, while authorities in the United Kingdom, Canada, and “Israel” refuted the accusations.
The United States has temporarily suspended intelligence sharing with Ukraine following a notable rift between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky, CIA Director John Ratcliffe confirmed on Wednesday.
The decision follows a public row between the two leaders during a meeting in the Oval Office last week, which also led to the suspension of critical US military aid to Ukraine.
Speaking to Fox Business, Ratcliffe stated that the pause in intelligence cooperation is linked to Trump’s concerns about Zelensky’s dedication to the peace process with Russia.
“President Trump had a real question about whether President Zelensky was committed to the peace process,” Ratcliffe said. He noted that the suspension is temporary and expressed confidence that the US would soon resume its close partnership with Ukraine.
For Ukraine, which is engaged in a war with Russia, US intelligence support is as vital as military supplies. The sudden halt in assistance has shocked many Ukrainians, who rely heavily on American backing in their war with Russia.
White House envoy to travel to Doha to push for new Gaza deal: Axios
Al Mayadeen | March 9, 2025
An Axios report on Sunday revealed that White House envoy Steve Witkoff is set to travel to Doha on Tuesday evening to mediate a new deal for the release of captives and a ceasefire between the Israeli occupation and Hamas movement, according to two US officials.
According to the report, this will be the first round of talks since Trump took office, and the first since the original agreement— which secured a 42-day ceasefire in exchange for releasing 33 captives— concluded a week ago.
Witkoff will join Qatari and Egyptian mediators, along with negotiators from both “Israel” and Hamas, to begin discussions on Monday. That said, the Trump administration is seeking a deal that ensures the release of all remaining captives, extends the ceasefire through Ramadan and Passover, and aims for a “long-lasting solution.”
On that note, 59 Israeli captives remain in Gaza, with 35 confirmed dead by the Israeli occupation.
Witkoff is scheduled to travel to Doha after attending a US-Ukraine meeting in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday. However, according to the report, it’s uncertain whether he’ll meet with Hamas directly or only with Israeli and Qatari officials, as well as Egyptian mediators.
A senior Israeli official mentioned that Witkoff intends to bring all parties together for intense negotiations over several days in hopes of reaching a deal. Meanwhile, a Hamas delegation held talks with Egyptian officials in Cairo on Saturday regarding the Gaza ceasefire and prisoner negotiations.
Hamas has urged the parties to stick to the original deal and begin discussions on its second phase, which Israel has yet to seriously engage with.
The Resistance group also conveyed its readiness to form a committee of “national independent personalities” to govern Gaza until elections are held, a move that would relinquish its control over the area’s civilian governance.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu convened senior ministers and security chiefs on Saturday to strategize the next steps for the Gaza deal. His office confirmed that “Israel” accepted the mediators’ invitation and will send a delegation to Doha on Monday to advance the negotiations.
Hamas approves Gaza governance plan
On Saturday, Hamas’ negotiating team finalized its trip to Egypt, where the delegation discussed pathways for the implementation of the clauses of the ceasefire agreement with mediators.
The delegation, headed by Mohammad Darwish, head of Hamas’ Shura Council and Chairman of its Leadership Council, held talks with the head of Egypt’s General Intelligence Service, Major General Hassan Rashad. The two sides discussed several crucial issues, including the ceasefire agreement and the prisoner exchange deal.
A statement released by the Hamas Media Office described the talks as “positive and responsible.”
“The Hamas delegation expressed its gratitude and appreciation for Egypt’s efforts, especially in countering displacement plans,” the Palestinian Resistance movement said, referring to United States President Donald Trump’s plot to “take over” the Gaza Strip.
Welcoming the outcomes of the most recent Arab summit, Hamas highlighted Egypt’s Gaza reconstruction plan and the Palestinian people’s inalienable right to statehood.
In further detail, Hamas’ negotiating team emphasized the need to uphold the terms of the multi-phase ceasefire agreement between the Palestinian Resistance and “Israel”.
The Israeli regime continues to blatantly violate the agreement, which includes the delivery of large amounts of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, as well as multiple acts of aggression against civilians.
Most importantly, the Israeli government ignored a time limit to enter negotiations for the second phase of the agreement, which would have secured the release of the remaining Israeli captives and a lasting ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.
“The delegation emphasized the need to uphold all terms of the agreement, immediately commence negotiations for the second phase, reopen border crossings, and allow the unrestricted entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza,” the statement underlined.
Starlink is ‘backbone’ of Ukrainian military – Musk
RT | March 9, 2025
The Ukrainian military is fully dependent on the Starlink internet system, and turning it off would result in the collapse of the “entire frontline,” Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has claimed.
The system “is the backbone of the Ukrainian army,” Musk said on Sunday in a post on X.
“Their entire front line would collapse if I turned it off,” he wrote, claiming that the Russia-Ukraine conflict has become a stalemate and that peace must be achieved now. “What I am sickened by is years of slaughter in a stalemate that Ukraine will inevitably lose. Anyone who really cares, really thinks and really understands wants the meat grinder to stop.”
In late February, Reuters reported that Musk had been considering cutting off Ukraine’s Starlink internet access in order to provide Washington with leverage in bargaining over a deal for natural resources. At the time, Musk denied the claims, accusing the news agency of “lying” and fabricating the entire report.
SpaceX has provided the Ukrainian military with Starlink internet since the escalation of the conflict with Russia in 2022. More than 40,000 terminals have been delivered over the years, with the system becoming a crucial component in the command and control architecture of the Ukrainian military.
Apart from providing comms, the terminals have seen direct combat use. Starlink dishes have been repeatedly seen rigged to Ukrainian sea and aerial drones, providing the unmanned systems with difficult-to-jam, reliable control access.
Space X has been providing Kiev with access to Starshield, a more secure and militarized version of the system. According to a Bloomberg report, Musk’s company secured a new contract with the Pentagon late last year, with an additional 3,000 Starlink terminals in Ukraine granted access to Starshield.
Von der Leyen hopes to turn EU into ‘defense union’ for $867bln
Al Mayadeen | March 9, 2025
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that she believes her proposed new 800 billion euro ($867 billion) military plan will transform the European Union into a “defense union”.
During Thursday’s EU leaders’ conference on defense, ReArm Europe received unanimous support, according to von der Leyen.
“You are familiar with the 800 billion [euro] package for defense, and that is historic, this can be the foundation of a European defense union,” she said.
“We will drive the ReArm Europe plan forward with full force,” she stated at a news conference in Brussels marking the first 100 days of her second term as President of the European Commission.
Von der Leyen went on to say that the EU should “team up with other like-minded countries,” such as the United Kingdom, Norway, and Canada, to “unleash the full potential in the face of concrete threats.”
Von der Leyen recently put forward an initiative to attract loans of up to 150 billion euros to the defense industry over the next four years and to allow EU countries to free up another 650 billion euros to increase defense purchases and develop the defense industry.
The European Union is ramping up efforts to develop its military-industrial sector, drawing insights from the Ukraine war. A statement issued following a European Council meeting on Thursday outlined key areas for defense investment, particularly in air defense, advanced drone technology, and precision-guided weaponry.
According to the European Council’s conclusions, the bloc is focusing on strengthening its military capabilities in coordination with NATO and the European Defence Agency. The document specified that priorities include air and missile defense, long-range artillery, missile stockpiles, and anti-drone technologies.
“[The European Council] identifies the following first list of priority areas for action at EU level in the field of capabilities taking into account the lessons learned from the war in Ukraine, in accordance with the work already done in the framework of the European Defence Agency and in full coherence with NATO: air and missile defence; artillery systems, including deep precision strike capabilities; missiles and ammunition; drones and anti-drone systems…,” the statement read.
This move comes as part of a broader strategy known as ReArm Europe, an initiative aimed at significantly boosting the EU’s defense capabilities while reducing reliance on external allies. Under this plan, EU leaders have proposed unlocking up to €800 billion to finance military advancements, primarily through defense loans, budget repurposing, and private capital mobilization. The European Investment Bank (EIB) may also lift restrictions on lending to defense firms to support this push.
Von der Leyen has described this as a necessary response to “a clear and present danger” facing the region, marking a shift in the EU’s traditional defense posture. The initiative also aligns with recent calls from the US for Europe to take greater responsibility for its own security, especially amid concerns about potential shifts in American foreign policy under a future administration.
Thousands protest in Paris against Macron’s defense policies
RT | March 9, 2025
Thousands of protesters marched through Paris on Saturday to oppose what they see as French President Emmanuel Macron’s militaristic approach to foreign policy and his lack of interest in achieving peace in the Ukraine conflict.
The demonstration was organized by Florian Philippot and his party, The Patriots. Chanting slogans and carrying signs such as “We don’t want to die for Ukraine,” and “Macron, we don’t want your war,” the crowd moved from the Place du Palais Royal to the Place Pierre Laroque.
Macron on Wednesday proposed expanding France’s nuclear deterrent to protect EU nations and urged European members of NATO to take more responsibility for their own defense. He cited uncertainty over Washington’s commitment to Ukraine, especially as relations between Kiev and US President Donald Trump’s administration experienced a setback after Vladimir Zelensky rejected calls to negotiate peace with Russia.
Macron has argued that continued aid to Ukraine was crucial, warning that if Russian President Vladimir Putin succeeded in Ukraine, he wouldn’t stop there – a claim that Moscow has repeatedly dismissed as nonsense. Russia has identified NATO’s expansion toward its borders and the US-led bloc’s promise of eventual membership for Ukraine as being among the key reasons for the conflict.
Many demonstrators at the Paris rally criticized Macron for prioritizing military matters over domestic issues. “When you declare war, it’s to erase all the other failures,” one protester said. Another accused Macron of pursuing conflict while leaders such as Trump and Putin are talking about peace.
Addressing the crowd, Philippot condemned Macron’s approach, declaring that the president “absolutely does not want peace.” Philippot, formerly a member of the National Front, has been a vocal critic of Macron’s administration and EU’s policies. His party opposes what it perceives as unnecessary military interventions and advocates for a more independent French foreign policy.
Macron’s push for increased defense spending faces hurdles as France grapples with a budget deficit and pressure to rein in spending. Approval of the 2025 budget has been delayed due to a divided parliament. In January, Budget Minister Amelie de Montchalin announced plans to cut €32 billion ($34.6 billion) in public spending while raising taxes by €21 billion.
Critics argue that these measures would burden middle-class families, small business owners, and retirees already struggling with rising costs. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Francois Bayrou has rejected calls for public consultation on major defense policies, insisting such decisions are the government’s responsibility. When asked on Friday whether the French people should have a say in increased military spending and a shift toward a “war economy,” Bayrou was firm: “The government’s responsibility is to say, no, we can’t let the country be disarmed. It’s vital.”
