World
Why is South Africa upset about Iran joining BRICS naval drills?
South Africa has launched an inquiry into Iran’s participation in joint naval drills with BRICS nations last week, apparently against the orders of President Cyril Ramaphosa.
BRICS is a group of 10 countries: Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, South Africa and the United Arab Emirates. The acronym BRICS represents the initial letters of the founding members, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
list of 4 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
The group, formed in 2006, initially focused on trade, but has since expanded its mandate to include security and cultural exchanges.
It concluded a week of joint naval drills in South African waters on January 16. The drills have caused controversy in the country and drawn the ire of the United States.
Although South Africa regularly holds drills with Russia and China, the latest maritime training comes amid heightened tensions between the US and many of the group’s members, particularly Iran, which until last week was grappling with mass protests at home that turned deadly.
Pretoria said the exercise, named Will for Peace 2026, was essential for ensuring maritime safety and international cooperation. The training “brings together navies from BRICS Plus countries for … joint maritime safety operations [and] interoperability drills”, a statement from the South African military noted before the exercises.
However, US President Donald Trump’s administration, which has previously accused BRICS of being “anti-American” and has threatened its members with tariffs, has strongly criticised the naval exercises.
Here’s what we know about the exercises and why they were controversial:
What were the drills for?
South Africa hosted the BRICS naval exercise, which included warships from participating countries, on January 9-16.
China led the training, which took place near the southwestern coastal city of Simon’s Town, which is home to a major South African naval base.
Exercises in rescue and maritime strike operations as well as technical exchanges were planned, according to China’s Ministry of National Defense. All BRICS countries were invited.
Captain Nndwakhulu Thomas Thamaha, South Africa’s joint task force commander, said at the opening ceremony that the operation was not just a military exercise but a statement of intent by BRICS countries to forge closer alliances with each other.
“It is a demonstration of our collective resolve to work together,” Thamaha said. “In an increasingly complex maritime environment, cooperation such as this is not an option. It is essential.”
The purpose, he said, was to “ensure the safety of shipping lanes and maritime economic activities”.
South African Deputy Defence Minister Bantu Holomisa told journalists that the drills had been planned before the current tensions between some BRICS members and the US.
While some BRICS countries may face issues with Washington, Holomisa clarified that they “are not our enemies”.
Who participated and how?
China and Iran deployed destroyer warships to South Africa, while Russia and the United Arab Emirates sent corvettes, traditionally the smallest warships.
South Africa, the host country, dispatched a frigate.
Indonesia, Ethiopia and Brazil joined the exercises as observers.
India, the current chair of the group, chose not to participate and distanced itself from the war games.
“We clarify that the exercise in question was entirely a South African initiative in which some BRICS members took part,” India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement. “It was not a regular or institutionalised BRICS activity, nor did all BRICS members take part in it. India has not participated in previous such activities.”
Why is South Africa facing US backlash over the drills?
The US is angry that South Africa allowed Iran to participate in the drills at a time when Tehran was accused of launching a violent crackdown on antigovernment protests that had spread across the country.
The protests broke out in late December, when shopkeepers in Tehran closed up their businesses and demonstrated against inflation and the falling value of the rial. These protests swelled into a broader challenge to Iran’s rulers, as thousands of people took to the streets nationwide to demonstrate over a few weeks.
Security forces in some areas cracked down on the crowds, resulting in the deaths of “several thousands”, according to a statement on Saturday by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. While activists said thousands of protesters were killed, the Iranian government said this was an exaggeration and claimed police officers and security service members formed a significant chunk of those who were killed.
The Iranian authorities also claimed the US and Israel had armed and funded “terrorists” to inflame the protests. They said agents affiliated with foreign powers, and not state forces, were responsible for the deaths of civilians, including protesters.
The mass uprising is one of the most disruptive the country has witnessed since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. Tens of thousands of people are believed to have been arrested.
Before the BRICS drills, the US warned South African President Cyril Ramaphosa that Iran’s participation would reflect badly on his country, according to a report by the Daily Maverick, a South African newspaper.
Ramaphosa subsequently ordered Iran to withdraw from the exercises on January 9, the paper reported.
However, three Iranian vessels that had already been deployed to South Africa continued to participate.
In a statement on January 15, the US embassy in South Africa accused the South African military of defying orders from its own government and said it was “cozying up to Iran”.
“It is particularly unconscionable that South Africa welcomed Iranian security forces as they were shooting, jailing, and torturing Iranian citizens engaging in peaceful political activity South Africans fought so hard to gain for themselves,” the statement read.
“South Africa can’t lecture the world on ‘justice’ while cozying up to Iran.”
South African political analyst Reneva Fourie said Washington was merely fishing for reasons to criticise South Africa for bringing a genocide case against Israel before the International Court of Justice for its war in Gaza.
“The US is looking for an entry point,” she said.
The US “is facing increased infringement on freedom of expression and association, democracy and human rights as well as increased militarisation. The US should focus on its own dire state instead of meddling in the affairs of others.”
Tensions over the military drills are only the latest point of contention between the US and Iran.
During the 12-day war between Iran and Israel in 2025, Washington sided with Israel, and on June 22, the US bombed three nuclear sites in Iran. Initial assessments from US officials noted that all three were severely damaged. Iran retaliated by bombing a military base in Qatar where US troops are positioned, in what was largely seen as a face-saving exercise.
Which other BRICS members have tensions with the US?
Nearly all members of BRICS have problems with the current US government.
Besides the dispute over Iran joining the naval drills, South Africa is also caught up in a battle of narratives with the Trump administration, which alleges, without any evidence, that the country’s minority white population is being subjected to a “genocide“. In 2025, Trump established a refugee programme for white Afrikaners wishing to “flee” to the US.
The US has also condemned South Africa’s decision to take Israel to the International Court of Justice in December 2023.
The US currently levies tariffs on South African exports of up to 40 percent as a result.
China has been locked in a tense trade war with the US for more than a year. After slapping each other with tariffs exceeding 100 percent early last year, these were suspended pending trade talks. But China then restricted exports of its rare earth metals, which are required for technology crucial for defence, and Trump again threatened more tariffs before the two sides reached an agreement in late October, under which China agreed to “pause” restrictions on the export of some metals.
Russia is also on Washington’s radar because of its war in Ukraine.
Just three days before the drills began, the US seized a Venezuela-linked Russian oil tanker in the North Atlantic due to its sanctions on both countries.
On January 3, the US military abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, from the capital, Caracas. Both now face drugs and weapons charges in a New York federal court. In September, the US had begun a campaign of air strikes on Venezuelan boats in the Caribbean, claiming they were trafficking drugs to the US, but providing no evidence.
India has been hit with 50 percent tariffs on its exports to the US, partly as punishment for continuing to buy Russian oil.
This month, the US withdrew from the India-led International Solar Alliance, although this withdrawal was part of a broader move to pull the US out of several international bodies.
Harsh V Pant, a geopolitical analyst at the New Delhi-based Observer Research Foundation think tank, told Al Jazeera that, for India, keeping out of the naval drills was “about balancing ties with the US”.
Pant added that in India’s opinion, “war games” were never part of the BRICS mandate.
While BRICS was founded as an economic bloc, it has widened its mandate to include security.
What has the response been in South Africa?
Ramaphosa’s government has also faced some backlash over the drills at home.
The Democratic Alliance (DA), a former opposition party that is now part of the governing coalition and largely represents the interests of the white minority, blamed Minister of International Relations Ronald Lamola for failing to hold the Department of Defence to account.
Lamola is from the African National Congress (ANC) party, which, until 2024, governed South Africa alone.
“By allowing the Department of Defence to proceed unchecked in these military exercises, Minister Lamola has effectively outsourced South Africa’s foreign policy to the whims of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF), exposing the country to serious diplomatic and economic risk,” the DA said in a statement two days after the exercises started.
“South Africa is now perceived not as a principled non-aligned state, but as a willing host for military cooperation with authoritarian regimes.”
What is the South African government saying now?
South African officials have shifted from initially justifying the drills to distancing themselves from the Iran debacle.
Despite initial statements from officials that the drills would go ahead as planned, Ramaphosa eventually appeared to bow to US pressure and, on January 9, ordered that Iran be excluded, local media reported.
Those instructions do not seem to have been followed by the South African Defence Department or the military, however.
In a statement on January 16, Defence Minister Angie Motshekga’s office said Ramaphosa’s instructions had been “clearly communicated to all parties concerned, agreed upon and adhered to as such”.
The statement went on to say that the minister had established an inquiry board “to look into the circumstances surrounding the allegations and establish whether the instruction of the President may have been misrepresented and/or ignored as issued to all”.
A report on the investigation is expected on Friday.
This is not the first time South Africa has been criticised for its military relations with Iran.
In August, its military chief, General Rudzani Maphwanya, prompted anger from the DA when he embarked on a trip to Tehran and affirmed that South Africa and Iran had “common goals”.
His statement came just weeks after the Iran-Israel war. He was also reportedly critical of Israel while in Tehran.
Some ANC critics called for Maphwanya’s firing, but he has remained in office.
Bulgarians headed to the polls Sunday for the eighth time in five years, with anti-corruption candidate and former president Rumen Radev’s bloc tipped to win.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The European Union’s poorest member has been through a spate of governments since 2021, when large anti-graft rallies brought an end to the conservative government of long-time leader Boyko Borissov.
Eurostat data shows Bulgaria consistently ranks last in the EU by GDP per capita. In 2025, Bulgaria (along with Greece) was at 68% of the EU average.
Radev, who has advocated for renewing ties with Russia and opposes military aid to Ukraine, was president for nine years in the Balkan nation of 6.5 million people.
He stepped down in January to lead newly formed centre-left grouping Progressive Bulgaria, with opinion polls before Sunday’s vote suggesting the bloc could gain 35% of the vote.
The former air force general has said he wants to rid the country of its “oligarchic governance model”, and backed anti-corruption protests in late 2025 that brought down the latest conservative-backed government.
“I’m voting for change,” Decho Kostadinov, 57, told reporters after casting his ballot at a polling station in the capital, Sofia, adding corrupt politicians “should leave — they should take whatever they’ve stolen and get out of Bulgaria”.
Polls are forecasting a surge in voter participation, with more than 3.3 million Bulgarians expected to cast ballots according to the Bulgarian News Agency.
Voting will close at 1700 GMT, with exit polls expected immediately afterwards. Preliminary results are expected on Monday.
‘Preserve what we have’
Borissov’s pro-European GERB party is likely to come second, according to opinion polls, with around 20%, ahead of the liberal PP-DB.
“I’m voting to preserve what we have. We are a democratic country, we live well,” said Elena, an accountant of about 60, who did not give her full name, after casting her vote in Sofia.
Front-runner Radev has slammed the EU’s green energy policy, which he considers naive “in a world without rules”.
He also opposes any Bulgarian efforts to send arms to help Ukraine fight back Russia’s 2022 invasion, though he has said he would not use his country’s veto to block Brussels’ decisions.
Pushing for renewed ties with Russia, Radev denounced a 10-year defence agreement between Bulgaria and Ukraine signed last month – drawing fresh accusations from opponents of being too soft on Moscow.
The ex-president also stoked outrage online for screening images at his final campaign rally of his meetings with world leaders including Russia’s Vladimir Putin.
“We need to close ranks,” he told around 10,000 cheering supporters at the rally, presenting his party as a non-corrupt “alternative to the perverse cartel of old-style parties”.
Borissov, who headed the country virtually uninterrupted for close to a decade, has dismissed suggestions that Radev brings something “new”.
At a rally of his party earlier this week, he insisted GERB had “fulfilled the dreams of the 1990s” with such achievements as the country joining the eurozone this year.
‘No one to vote for’
Radev is aiming for an absolute majority in the 240-seat parliament.
A lack of trust in politics has affected voter turnout, which slumped to 39% in the last election in 2024.
But with Radev rallying voters, high turnout is expected this time, according to analyst Boryana Dimitrova from the Alpha Research polling institute.
Miglena Boyadjieva, a taxi driver of about 55, said she always votes, but the “problem is that there is no one to vote for”.
“You vote for one person and get others. The system has to change,” she told reporters.
Political parties have called on Bulgarians to show up for the polls, also to curb the impact of vote buying.
In recent weeks, police have seized more than one million euros in raids against vote buying in stepped-up operations.
They have also detained hundreds of people, including local councillors and mayors.
A 3-D rendering of an Iranian Shahed-136 drone, a device with two triangle-shaped wings attached to a central fuselage. It has an engine the size of a small motorcycle’s and carries 110 pounds of explosives.
Engine the size of a small motorcycle’s
Carries 110 pounds of explosives
One of the biggest takeaways of the war with Iran is that it has proven itself to be a surprisingly capable adversary against the United States. In addition to its willingness to go on the offensive, Iran has forced the U.S. and its regional allies to confront the rise of cheap drones on the battlefield.
Iranian drones, made with commercial-grade technology, cost roughly $35,000 to produce. That is a fraction of the cost of the high-tech military interceptors sometimes used to shoot them down.
Cheap drones changed the war in Ukraine, and they have enabled Iranians to exploit a gap in American defense investments, which have historically prioritized accurate but expensive solutions.
Countering drones has been a major priority for the Pentagon for years, according to Michael C. Horowitz, who was a Pentagon official in the Biden administration. “But there has not been the impetus to scale a solution,” he said.
In just the first six days, the U.S. spent $11.3 billion on the war with Iran. The White House and Pentagon have not provided updated estimates, but the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative-leaning think tank, estimated in early April that the U.S. had spent approximately between $25 and $35 billion on the war, with interceptors driving much of the cost. Many missile defense experts also fear interceptor stockpiles are now running dangerously low.
Here is a breakdown of some of the ways the U.S. and its allies have countered Iran’s drones, and why it can be so costly.
Air-based strikes
In an ideal scenario, an early warning aircraft spots a drone when it is still several hundred miles out from a target, and a fighter jet, like an F-16, is dispatched from a military base. The F-16 can then use Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) II rockets to shoot a drone from about six miles away.
A 3-D rendering of an F-16 fighter jet firing an APKWS II rocket from under one wing. Two to three rockets are fired per drone, as per air defense protocol. Two APKWS II rockets and an hour of F-16 flight cost approximately $65,000, a little less than twice that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Two to three interceptors fired per drone
These types of defensive air patrols are cost-efficient, but haven’t always been available because of the vast scope of the conflict. Iran has also targeted early warning aircraft that the U.S. needs to detect a drone from that distance, according to NBC News.
The other option for detecting and shooting down drones is a variety of different ground-based detection systems, but these systems are all at a disadvantage, as their ability to spot low-flying drones is limited by the curvature of the earth.
Anti-drone defense systems
One ground-based defense system the U.S. and its allies have built specifically to counter drones at a shorter range is the Coyote. It can intercept drones up to around nine miles away.
A 3-D rendering of a Coyote Block 2 interceptor, which looks like a three-foot tube with small rockets at one end. Two Coyotes cost approximately $253,000 or about seven times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
The Coyote is significantly cheaper than many of the other ground-based defense systems available to the U.S. and its allies and historically effective at defending important assets. But despite being both effective and cost-efficient, relatively few Coyotes have been procured by the U.S. military in recent years.
When Iran-backed militias launched attacks on U.S. ground troops in the region in 2023 and 2024, there were so few Coyotes available that troops had to shuffle the systems between eight different bases in the region almost daily, according to a report from the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank.
Ship-based anti-missile defenses
Many of the longer-range ground-based defense systems the U.S. and its allies can use to combat drones are more expensive, as they are designed to shoot down aircraft and ballistic missiles, not drones. A Navy destroyer’s built-in radar system, for instance, can detect drones from 30 miles away and shoot it down with Standard Missile 2 (SM-2) interceptors. As in the air-based strikes, military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of the deck of a Navy destroyer firing an SM-2 missile from a built-in launcher, which looks like a 15-foot missile launching from a grid of openings on the ship’s surface. Two SM-2 missiles cost approximately $4.2 million, about 120 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
This misalignment between America’s defense systems and current warfighting tactics started after the Cold War, when the anticipated threats were fewer, faster, higher-end projectiles, not mass drone raids.
Iran often launches multiple Shahed-136 drones at a time, given their low price tag. The drones are also programmed with a destination before launch and can travel roughly 1,500 miles, putting targets all across the Middle East within reach.
“This category of lower-cost precision strike just didn’t exist at the time that most American air defenses were developed,” said Mr. Horowitz.
Ground-based anti-missile defenses
The Army’s standard air-defense system is the Patriot. Typically stationed at a military base, it can shoot down a drone from up to around 27 miles away with PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement interceptors. Military protocol stipulates that at least two missiles be fired.
A 3-D rendering of a Patriot launcher loaded with 17-foot PAC-3 MSE missiles, which looks like a tilted shipping container with scaffolding. Two PAC-3 MSE missiles cost approximately $8 million, about 220 times that of the Iranian Shahed-136.
Patriot missile defense system
Air defense training teaches service members to prioritize using longer-range defense systems first to “get as many bites at the apple as you can,” but those are the most expensive, said Stacie Pettyjohn, a senior fellow and director of the defense program at the Center for a New American Security.
But a costly defense can still make economic sense to protect a valuable target, especially those that are difficult to repair or replace, such as the nearly $1.1 billion radar at a military base in Qatar and the $500 million air defense sensor at a base in Jordan that were damaged early in the conflict.
Ground-based guns
Finally, there is what one might call a last resort: a ground-based gun. When a drone is about a mile away or less than a minute from hitting its target, something like the Centurion C-RAM can begin rapidly firing to take down the drone.
A 3-D rendering of a Centurion C-RAM, which looks like a gun mounted to a rotating, cylindrical stand. The gun fires 75 rounds of ammunition per second. Five seconds of firing the gun costs $30,000, slightly less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Centurion Counter-Rocket, Artillery and Mortar
Fires 375 rounds of ammunition in 5 seconds
Even though it is fairly cost-effective, the Centurion C-RAM is not the best option because it has such a short range.
Interceptor drones
There’s also what one might call the future of fighting drones: A.I.-powered interceptor drones. Interceptor drones like the Merops Surveyor can theoretically hunt and take down enemy projectiles from a short range.
A 3-D rendering of a Surveyor drone, which looks like a three-foot tube with wings and a tail. The Merops drone costs approximately $30,000, a little less than a single Iranian Shahed-136.
Merops system: Surveyor drone
Eric Schmidt, the former Google chief executive, founded a company to develop the Merops counter-drone system in conjunction with Ukrainian fighters, who have already been combatting Iranian drones in the war with Russia for years.
The U.S. sent thousands of Merops units to the Middle East after the conflict began, but it is unclear whether they have been deployed. The military set up training on the system in the middle of the war, as reported by Business Insider.
Other attempts to lower the cost-per-shot ratio of taking out a drone have failed.
The Pentagon invested over a billion dollars in fiscal year 2024 researching directed energy weapons, or lasers, that would cost only $3 per shot and have a range of 12 miles. Those systems have yet to be used in the field.
Despite the cost imbalance, the real fear for many in the defense community is the depleted stockpile of munitions.
“What scares me is that we will run out of these things,” said Tom Karako, the director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “Not that we can’t afford them, but that we’ll run out before we can replace them.”
World
Moscow-born gunman dead after Kyiv shooting rampage leaves at least 6 dead, 14 wounded: Zelenskyy
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A Russian gunman was killed by special forces Saturday in Ukraine after opening fire at a supermarket in Kyiv, killing six people and wounding 14 others — including a 12‑year‑old boy.
The 58-year-old shooter long resided in the Donetsk region and was born in Moscow, according to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Interior Minister Ihor Klymenko.
He took at least four hostages, killed one of them, and fatally shot four others on the street, Zelenskyy said. Another woman died at a hospital from her injuries.
Graphic video captured by witnesses showed the gunman shooting at a victim within close range on the street. Other bodies were seen lying on the pavement and in courtyards.
The gunman was seen walking with a weapon on the street. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
MANHUNT UNDERWAY AFTER GUNMEN STORM CHICK-FIL-A LEAVING 1 DEAD
Ukranian special forces stormed the convenience store after 40 minutes of failed negotiations, according to Klymenko.
At least fourteen people were wounded in the attack, though officials cautioned the number may rise as people continue to seek medical assistance.
Among the injured is a 12‑year‑old boy and a supermarket security guard, according to Kyiv Mayor Vitali Klitschko.
The gunman was pictured dead in the convenience store. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
NINE DEAD, 13 WOUNDED IN SECOND TURKISH MASS SHOOTING IN TWO DAYS
Zelenskyy said the shooter also set fire to an apartment prior to the attack, though it is unclear if any injuries resulted from the arson.
“My condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims,” Zelenskyy wrote in an X post. “…We wish all the wounded a swift recovery.”
The gunman had previously been prosecuted for criminal offenses, but held a valid weapons permit, according to authorities. Investigators from the National Police and the Security Service of Ukraine are investigating.
The gunman was seen holding and shooting a weapon in the street. (Obtained by Will Stewart)
GUNMAN OPENS FIRE AT HIGH SCHOOL IN TURKEY, WOUNDING AT LEAST 16
Ukraine’s security service labeled the attack an act of terrorism.
“All available information about him and the motives behind his actions is being thoroughly investigated,” Zelenskyy said. “Every detail must be verified.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
One of the shooter’s neighbors, Hanna Kulyk, 75, described him as an “educated, refined man,” who lived alone and did not socialize often.
“You’d never guess he was some kind of criminal,” Kulyk told The Associated Press.
-
World3 minutes agoBulgaria votes in eighth election in five years
-
News33 minutes agoReal estate investors are buying up long-term care facilities. Residents can suffer
-
Detroit, MI3 hours agoFormer Piston shows Detroit what they’re missing as he dominates next to LeBron
-
San Francisco, CA3 hours agoEastbound I-80 closure in San Francisco snarls traffic, slows business
-
Videos3 hours agoCan Keir Starmer survive the latest Mandelson revelations? | BBC News
-
Dallas, TX3 hours agoPetar Musa’s Brace Not Enough as FC Dallas Draws LA Galaxy 2-2
-
Miami, FL3 hours agoMLS: Messi double helps Inter Miami slay Rapids in front of huge crowd
-
Boston, MA3 hours agoFrom across Boston they flock to play for Latin Academy boys’ tennis, a co-op of 29 schools – The Boston Globe