Blockchain analytics data shows that outflows from local platforms surged sharply immediately following the weekend attacks, with hourly transfers exceeding $2 million at times and total outflows reaching roughly $10 million between Feb. 28 and March 2.

On Iran’s largest crypto exchange Nobitex, outgoing transaction volumes spiked as much as 700 % within minutes of the first strikes, as users moved funds off the platform and, in many cases toward foreign exchanges.

Analysts say the activity reflects heightened risk perceptions among traders and investors amid the conflict. Some transfers may represent ordinary Iranians safeguarding assets, while others could be exchanges repositioning liquidity or participants seeking to move capital internationally.

The U.S. is also examining whether crypto channels are being used to circumvent sanctions, although blockchain data cannot conclusively determine who is behind the recent transfers.

The surge underscores the growing role of digital assets in Iran’s economy and how geopolitical shocks can trigger rapid on-chain movements.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Extraordinary Session Called on Iran Crisis

The special meeting was convened at the request of Russia and backed by Iran to discuss the implications of recent strikes by the United States and Israel against Iranian territory. Russia’s request for the session underscores mounting diplomatic pressure on the IAEA to address how military actions might affect nuclear sites, safety systems and the agency’s monitoring activities.

Iran formally asked the IAEA to hold the session in response to what Tehran describes as “aggression” by U.S. and Israeli forces. The extraordinary session precedes the board’s regularly scheduled meeting for the week, which is expected to cover broader technical and policy issues related to nuclear oversight in multiple regions.

IAEA Assesses Nuclear Facilities After Strikes

In his opening remarks, IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi emphasised the agency’s commitment to monitoring nuclear safety, particularly given the heightened tensions in the Middle East. Grossi told governors that, based on initial observations, there is “no indication” that Iran’s major nuclear installations have suffered radiation damage following the recent strikes by U.S. and Israeli forces though contact with Iranian nuclear authorities remains limited.

Grossi also insisted on the need to restore full communication lines with Iranian regulators to ensure continued verification of nuclear materials and safeguards obligations under international agreements.

Despite the absence of detectable radiation increases at facilities such as the Bushehr nuclear plant, Tehran has acknowledged that its Natanz enrichment site sustained an attack, raising concerns about potential longer‑term consequences and the need for thorough inspections.

Board Members Stress Nuclear Oversight and Safety

The IAEA Board of Governors comprises 35 member states elected based on geographic and technical representation. It meets regularly usually five times per year to approve reports, assess safeguards implementation and set policy direction. Special sessions, like the one convened this week, are called when urgent global developments demand attention.

Delegates from Western nations attending the session are expected to emphasise the importance of unimpeded access for IAEA inspectors to all nuclear facilities in Iran and other concerned regions. The issue of resumed verification of enriched uranium inventories and compliance with safeguards remains top of the agenda, as it has been in previous board meetings related to Iran’s nuclear programme.

Broader Nuclear Safety and Non‑Proliferation Context

While this session focuses on developments around Iran and the impacts of recent hostilities, the Board typically also addresses a spectrum of global nuclear issues from technical cooperation on peaceful uses of atomic energy to safety concerns at nuclear power plants worldwide. Previous sessions have tackled nuclear safety risks in conflict zones, the status of inspector access and the implementation of non‑proliferation commitments by member states.

The IAEA plays a central role in enforcing the Treaty on the Non‑Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) by reporting on compliance and facilitating verification protocols a responsibility that this week’s extraordinary session reinforced amid geopolitical tensions.

Implications for International Diplomacy

The Vienna meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors comes at a critical juncture as geopolitical fault‑lines deepen and the risk of confrontations near nuclear facilities grows. Diplomats and analysts say that how the board responds whether through resolutions, statements, or calls for increased cooperation could influence diplomatic dynamics between Iran, Western capitals and other global powers.

With uncertainty over continued communication with Iranian nuclear regulators, the agency’s findings and the board’s conclusions will be closely watched by governments, international institutions and the public worldwide. Many hope that the board’s actions reinforce nuclear safety norms without further escalating tensions in an already volatile region.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The announcement comes as a new reveal only one in four Americans supports the current strikes against Iran, underscoring growing domestic unease over the widening Middle East war and presenting a potential political liability for President Donald Trump.

Combat Intensifies Across Region

The U.S.-led military campaign, often described by officials as Operation Epic Fury, entered its second day after the United States and Israel launched coordinated strikes targeting Iran’s military infrastructure, nuclear facilities and leadership. President Trump has claimed that at least 48 Iranian leaders have been killed and that U.S. forces have destroyed multiple Iranian naval vessels statements that could not be independently verified at press time.

The U.S. military says more than 1,000 targets including hardened missile sites have been struck since the offensive began, with B-2 stealth bombers and naval assets playing key roles.

Iran has responded with counterattacks, including missile and drone strikes against U.S. positions across the Gulf region, highlighting the conflict’s rapid escalation beyond Iranian borders. Gulf monarchies historically aligned with Western powers now find themselves facing direct security threats from Tehran’s retaliation, complicating regional diplomatic and strategic calculations.

First U.S. Casualties Confirmed

On Sunday, U.S. Central Command confirmed that three U.S. soldiers were killed and five were seriously wounded during ongoing operations marking the first American combat deaths since Trump took office for his current term. Multiple other troops suffered minor injuries.

While specific details of the incident have not been disclosed, reports indicate the casualties occurred at a U.S. base in Kuwait as Iranian retaliatory strikes intensified across the region.

President Trump addressed the nation in a videotaped statement, mourning the service members’ deaths and warning that “there will likely be more before it ends.” He pledged that the U.S. would deliver a “most punishing blow” to what his administration terms terrorist threats emanating from Iran.

Public Opinion Turning

Despite initial support among some Republican voters, the broader U.S. public appears skeptical of the current military strategy. A poll conducted during the early stages of the conflict found that just 27% of Americans approve of U.S. military strikes on Iran, while 43% disapprove and nearly 30% remain undecided.

The poll also highlights bipartisan concern over Trump’s use of force:

• 56% of Americans say the president is too willing to use military action to advance U.S. interests.
• Nearly half say they would be less likely to support continued military action if it resulted in higher fuel prices or additional U.S. casualties.

Even within Trump’s Republican base, 42% of supporters indicated they might withdraw support if American troops were killed in the Middle East.

Political analysts warn that as casualties mount and the conflict prolongs; Trump could face mounting pressure on Capitol Hill and from voters particularly with midterm elections looming and the U.S. electorate increasingly focused on domestic economic concerns.

Geopolitical and Domestic Fallout

Experts suggest that Trump’s decision to escalate the conflict especially without a clear multinational backing or United Nations mandate risks long-term regional instability. Critics argue the strategy appears aimed not just at immediate military objectives but at broader regime-change aims in Tehran, a calculated move fraught with humanitarian and geopolitical risks.

Meanwhile, the formation of a temporary leadership council in Iran following the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has introduced new uncertainty to the conflict’s direction. Iranian officials have publicly vowed retaliation and signaled that Iran’s military doctrine may shift toward a more confrontational stance with the U.S. and its allies.

What Happens Next?

As the military campaign unfolds, key questions remain: Will Iran escalate further? Can diplomacy still play a role? And how will the American public react as the human and economic costs rise?

President Trump has suggested that the campaign “could last about four weeks,” but analysts say this timeframe is speculative as battlefield conditions evolve.

For now, the first U.S. combat fatalities in this conflict and the tepid public support mark a pivotal moment in both U.S. foreign policy and domestic politics.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The military action ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump has underscored Washington’s willingness to use force against adversaries it views as nuclear threats. That signal is being closely studied in North Korea, where leader Kim Jong Un has long tied his country’s security to its nuclear deterrent.

Experts say the developments could cut two ways. On one hand, the strikes may reinforce Pyongyang’s belief that nuclear weapons are essential to deter external intervention. Unlike Iran, North Korea already possesses a developed arsenal and delivery systems, making the strategic equation fundamentally different.

On the other hand, some analysts argue the heightened global uncertainty could create incentives for renewed diplomacy. Trump and Kim previously held unprecedented leader-to-leader summits, breaking decades of diplomatic stalemate, though talks ultimately stalled over disagreements on sanctions relief and denuclearization steps.

Publicly, North Korea has condemned the Iran strikes, framing them as destabilizing. But Pyongyang has also historically left the door open to negotiations under what it calls “new conditions” typically involving security guarantees and sanctions easing.

For Washington, the question is whether the demonstration of military resolve strengthens its negotiating leverage or hardens North Korea’s resistance. For Pyongyang, the calculation may center on whether engagement with Trump could yield tangible benefits amid rising global tensions.

As the international community watches the fallout from Iran, the episode is emerging as a potential inflection point not only for the Middle East, but for the stalled nuclear diplomacy on the Korean Peninsula.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In an official statement released late Thursday, Afghan authorities said unmanned aerial vehicles were deployed to strike what they described as “legitimate military objectives” inside Pakistani territory. The announcement follows days of heightened hostilities and accusations between Afghanistan and Pakistan over cross-border attacks.

Pakistani officials have not immediately confirmed the extent of the reported strikes but condemned what they called a violation of sovereignty, warning that any aggression would be met with a “strong and proportionate response.”

Kabul’s Justification

Afghan defense officials said the drone operation targeted positions allegedly linked to cross-border shelling and militant activity affecting Afghan border provinces. The government insisted the strikes were defensive in nature.

“We will not allow our territory to be destabilized, nor will we tolerate attacks originating from across the border,” an Afghan spokesperson said, framing the drone use as a calibrated response rather than an attempt to broaden the conflict.

The Afghan administration led by the Taliban, has repeatedly accused Pakistan of conducting airstrikes and artillery attacks inside Afghan territory in recent weeks. Islamabad in turn, blames militant networks operating from Afghanistan for carrying out deadly assaults on Pakistani security forces.

Pakistan’s Response

Pakistani authorities strongly rejected Kabul’s claims of justification, calling the reported drone strikes a “dangerous provocation.” Security officials in Islamabad said Pakistan reserves the right to defend its territorial integrity.

Tensions between the two countries have intensified amid Pakistan’s crackdown on the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which Islamabad accuses of launching attacks from safe havens across the border. Afghan leaders have denied providing sanctuary to the group, though they acknowledge the presence of various armed factions in remote border areas.

Residents in Pakistan’s frontier regions reported hearing explosions overnight, though independent verification of the strikes remains limited due to restricted access and conflicting official narratives.

Escalating Military Posture

Military analysts say the reported use of drones by Afghanistan represents a notable development. While cross-border artillery exchanges have occurred sporadically over the years, confirmed drone strikes would signal a technological and strategic escalation.

The porous and historically disputed Durand Line border has long been a flashpoint. Both sides have increased troop deployments in recent days, and there are concerns that further retaliatory strikes could spiral into sustained confrontation.

Regional and International Concerns

The growing hostilities have alarmed regional observers, who fear that continued escalation could destabilize South Asia at a time of fragile economic and security conditions.

The United Nations has previously urged both Kabul and Islamabad to resolve disputes through dialogue and avoid actions that risk civilian casualties. Humanitarian groups are also warning of potential displacement if violence spreads along densely populated border districts.

What Comes Next?

Diplomatic channels between Afghanistan and Pakistan remain formally open, but rhetoric on both sides has hardened. Analysts suggest that back-channel mediation by regional powers could become critical in preventing further escalation.

For now, both governments appear to be balancing domestic pressure to appear strong with the broader risks of an open conflict. As drone warfare enters the equation, the stakes and the unpredictability of the standoff have grown significantly.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mostaqur Rahman a seasoned entrepreneur and financial governance specialist with more than three decades of experience will lead Bangladesh Bank for a four‑year term, according to official notifications issued by the Financial Institutions Division of the Ministry of Finance.

A New Era for Bangladesh’s Central Bank

The government’s gazette notification on Feb. 25, 2026 confirmed that Rahman’s appointment takes immediate effect and supersedes the remaining tenure of former governor Dr Ahsan H. Mansur, whose contract was cancelled in the public interest. Rahman’s term will begin upon his formal assumption of office and is contingent on his relinquishing all external professional ties.

Rahman who is a fellow member of the Institute of Cost and Management Accountants of Bangladesh (FCMA) who holds advanced degrees from the University of Dhaka, brings extensive expertise in corporate finance, export economics, institutional governance and financial systems management. Prior to this appointment, he served as managing director and CEO of Hera Sweaters Limited and chaired the Bangladesh Garment Manufacturers and Exporters Association’s (BGMEA) standing committee on Bangladesh Bank affairs, among other industry and trade roles.

Context of the Leadership Change

The replacement of Mansur an economist who initially joined the central bank’s leadership following the 2024 political transition aligns with broader restructuring by the new government led by Prime Minister Tarique Rahman. Political sources indicate a push to align key institutions with the administration’s economic agenda as it consolidates governance after a decisive electoral victory this month.

Mansur’s sudden departure earlier this week was the subject of speculation and came amid reported tensions between central bank officials and the finance ministry. Some central bank staff reportedly expressed discontent over internal administrative moves before the leadership transition was formalised.

Challenges and Priorities Ahead

As governor, Rahman will oversee monetary policy, regulation of the banking sector, financial stability initiatives and efforts to contain non‑performing loans, issues that have persisted as core challenges for Bangladesh’s financial system. Observers expect his blend of private sector insight and governance experience to be tested immediately as the central bank seeks to sustain investor confidence and support economic growth in a transitional political setting.

His appointment highlights both continuity and change: while banking reform and institutional accountability remain high priorities, the leadership shift underscores the government’s intent to shape the central bank’s strategic direction as part of broader economic stewardship.

What Does This Mean for Bangladesh’s Economy?

The central bank governor plays a critical role in setting macroeconomic policy, influencing inflation trends, exchange rates and banking regulation, areas of keen interest for both domestic businesses and international markets. With Rahman at the helm, analysts will be watching closely how the bank balances stability with ambitions to deepen financial sector reforms and expand support for export‑focused industries.

The leadership change at Bangladesh Bank also comes at a time when the economy is navigating global headwinds, including inflation pressures, currency volatility and credit quality concerns all of which demand decisive regulatory oversight from the country’s monetary authority.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Profit‑Taking After Strong Rally

Spot gold, the benchmark for immediate delivery, fell about 1.2% from its recent highs, wiping out a four‑session winning streak that pushed bullion to its best levels since early January. U.S. gold futures for April delivery also eased, reflecting the broader cooling in investor appetite for gold after a strong run.

Market analysts noted that the recent gains in gold which saw prices rise more than 2% in the previous session prompted some traders to lock in profits. “We had a meaningful rally yesterday. We have a bit of digestion here,” said Ilya Spivak, head of global macro at Tastylive, adding that the lack of panic in Asian markets suggested a controlled retreat rather than a broader sell‑off.

Dollar Strength Weighs on Bullion

A firmer U.S. dollar index exerted additional pressure on gold prices. Because gold is priced in U.S. dollars, a stronger greenback makes bullion more expensive for holders of other currencies, reducing demand from overseas buyers. This price dynamic often intensifies sell‑offs during periods of dollar appreciation.

The dollar’s uptick comes against a backdrop of mixed economic signals from the United States, including uncertainty over the Federal Reserve’s interest rate path. While some policymakers have signalled openness to holding rates steady if economic indicators strengthen, markets continue to debate the timing and scale of potential rate cuts ahead.

Geopolitical and Market Backdrop

Although gold retreated from its recent high, some of the macroeconomic and geopolitical drivers that previously supported bullion remain in focus. Market participants watched headline risks including trade‑policy uncertainty and continuing global tensions, which historically encourage safe‑haven demand for precious metals.

Asian equity markets showed signs of stabilising after an earlier sell‑off, which had rattled investor sentiment following volatility in U.S. stock markets. Concerns over trade policies and geopolitical tensions have contributed to swings in risk assets and safe‑haven flows.

Mixed Performance Across Precious Metals

Other precious metals also experienced mixed trading on Tuesday. Silver prices declined after spiking to recent highs, while platinum lost value amid broader market headwinds. Palladium, however, showed modest gains, underscoring divergent performance across the metals complex as traders recalibrate positions.

Looking Forward

Market watchers say the next key drivers for gold will include upcoming U.S. economic data, central bank guidance, and shifts in risk appetite tied to global developments. If inflation expectations or geopolitical uncertainties rise again, gold could reclaim some of its recent losses. For now, however, profit‑taking and a firmer dollar are steering prices lower in the short term.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

RECAPITULATION: THE DSA’S FASCIST AND PREDATORY INTEREST IN MANDANI’S WIN

And now onto our main discussion, being “A Post Analysis of the 2025 New York Mayoral Elections”, and more accurately, an analysis of the cost of or issues with Zohran Mamdani’s leadership in New York. Now, to begin with, the terms “fascist” and “fascism” are continuously bandied about today. But those who use these words most seem to understand them least, such that many of today’s self-styled anti-fascists paradoxically take on the central features of fascism to an extraordinary degree – and this paradox is essentially a recurring theme in ZM’s candidacy and claimed legitimate election as mayor of New York.

In greater detail, and as a point of recapitulation, we see this paradox of self-proclaimed anti-fascists taking on the central features of fascism to an extraordinary degree in the relationship between Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists of America. You’d recall that we’ve discussed here on The War Room that while  Americans generally value democracy, fairness and freedom of thought, a movement has emerged that directly challenges those ideals — and this is the Democratic Socialists of America (or the DSA), which is the actual entity behind Zohran Mamdani’s candidacy, and not the Democrat party. In fact, as the leaders of the DSA repeatedly state, the DSA are NOT Democrats. They are an external force that has infiltrated the Democratic Party to reshape it in their own image. If successful, this project would transform one of America’s notable political parties (being the democrat party) into an unrecognisable entity hostile to the institutions that define America. In other words, think the democrat establishment that we already know to be diabolical – but worse!

Now, this characterisation of the DSA is not intended to be an exaggerated depiction of a socialist boogeymen: rather, this narrative is an inference from the communication of the DSA’s leadership and membership base. Furthermore, on the 1st of September this year, Canary Mission released its first report on the DSA. The findings revealed that the DSA is not only engaged in a hostile takeover of the Democratic Party, but has itself been further radicalised through its ties to the terror-linked Palestinian Youth Movement. These influences have created an organisation whose goals and alliances make it one of the most destabilising political forces in American history.

The combined goals of this alliance include: (1) To destroy Empire (the USA); (2) Replacing the market economy with state-controlled Marxism; (3) Defunding the police and using the funds for DEI programs; (4) Supporting terrorist groups and terrorist entities, i.e., Hamas and Hezbollah; (5) Normalising antisemitism and supporting violent extremist groups; and (6) Promoting foreign policies that align with authoritarian regimes. Here’s more on the predatory relationship between the DSA and the Democrat party – from the words of DSA members themselves – including how Zohran Mamdani features in their plans to infiltrate and destroy the Democrat party.

I believe additional proof of the longstanding relationship between Mamdani and the DSA, as well as additional proof of their aim towards infiltration of the democrat party is that Mamdani was also actually elected to the New York State Assembly for Queens in 2020 on the Democratic Socialists of America ticket. As a member of the State Socialists in Office bloc in Albany, he can take credit for a negligible three bills and a lot of missed Assembly votes. But, the progression from that was the New York mayoralty, in which the DSA served him up as a trojan horse to the democrat party – which is ironic because it takes a page from the Democratic establishment’s own playbook that has created neo-cons and rhinos like Lindsay Graham and Niki Haley.

ZOHRAN MAMDANI’S CANDIDACY REPRESENTS THE COMMUNIST PROBLEM

Well… a notable American political commentator once quipped that he would rather be governed by the first 2,000 names in the Boston phone book than by the Harvard faculty. These remarks were once a commercial comment on the state of academia and the people it produces, AND YET, in the status quo, this presents an unfortunate reflection, as it appears that (if not careful), New York City is about to be governed by the Columbia University student body. A city that used to think of itself as grown up, and reflective of the ideals of liberty that are so intrinsic to the American socio-political fabric – this very city has just elected a mayor who seems the very embodiment of the American college student: which is uninformed, entitled and self-important, enjoying a regal quality of life that depends parasitically upon a civilization about which he knows nothing, yet for which he has nothing but scorn. American college students regularly act out little psychodramas of oppression before an appreciative audience of diversity deanlets and associate vice-provosts of inclusion and belonging. This is how I would characterise Mandani’s policy focuses.

Now, Mamdani’s campaign focused on four proposals, all allegedly inspired by what he says is the city’s alleged affordability crisis. First, he promulgated that he would freeze rents; second, he would make city buses free; third, he would offer free universal childcare; and fourth, he would open a government-operated grocery store in each of the city’s five boroughs. Now, these four proposals run the gamut from sweeping to weirdly narrow. But they all treat urban governance primarily as a means of shrinking the role of for-profit enterprise, expanding public control and redistributing wealth from its creators to the so-called poor – which sounds a lot like communism (specifically the kind that is pretentiously presented as well-meaning socialism).

And I highlight this because (as has been noted by a number of political analysts and historians), the Marxian message of ‘exploitation of the poor’ helped sweep communists into power in countries around the world in the twentieth century, at a pace and on a scale seldom seen in history – despite those communism claiming ot be well-meaning socialists. Which means that not only is there a political market for the Marxian message of ‘exploitation of the poor’ (hence ZM has a support base), but it also means that communists have a well-documented history of capitalising on this message, and have used it to garner support for their plans, despite how disastrously that turned out to be for millions of other human beings living under communist dictatorships. This is one of the biggest issues associated with Mandami’s candidacy.

AN ANALYSIS OF ZOHRAN MAMDANI’S POLICY FOCUSES: THE 4 YEAR RENT FREEZE

With this in mind, let’s proceed to an analysis of Zohran Mamdani’s campaign promulgations and policy focus. And well, proposal one from the Mamdani camp pertains to decommodifying housing. In particular, Mamdani has advocated for a rent freeze in New York, and this rent freeze would apply to nearly half of all rental units in the city: those whose rents are set by an appointed “Rent Guidelines Board,” not by the housing market. And those million or so rent-stabilised apartments make up one-third of the city’s homes, including owner-occupied homes.

Well, in response to this, even left-wing economists have concluded that rent controls produce only housing shortages. Yet for those with a communist mindset, landlords are greedy for wanting to earn a market rent, whereas tenants enjoying a below-market rent are merely receiving their due. But, what this four year rent freeze would amount to is a decimation of New York’s housing stock. The city’s small landlords are already struggling due to maintenance costs having risen by 28 percent over the last five years, and the regulated rents failing to cover repairs, property taxes or the costs of tenants that do not pay rent. Meanwhile, thanks to the city’s advocate industry it takes about two years to evict a nonpaying renter, during which time the landlord has to provide him/her the same services as paying tenants. Apartment owners shell out their own lawyers’ fees; activist-assisted tenants do not.

In addition, there are also already 50,000 to 60,000 abandoned rental properties in the city. That number would balloon under a rent hike moratorium, adding to the city’s blight. Ripple effects could spill over to the banking sector. But more abandoned properties merely mean more opportunities to move “toward the full de-commodification of housing,” as Mamdani puts it. AND YET, in all this, the rent freeze would do nothing to lower the cost of other housing in the city, in which the majority of New Yorkers live.

MAMDANI’S CAMP HAS AN A-HISTORICAL VIEW OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Let’s proceed to proposal number 2 from the Mamdani camp, and this pertains to farebeating for all, through which Mamdani wants to make city buses free, at the cost of almost three-quarters of a billion dollars a year in canceled fares. This sounds nice on the surface, until you consider what is the cost of this, and who bears it? I say this considering two things: first, nearly half of all New York City bus passengers already do not pay for their rides; second, through the full transit fare – which is $2.90 a ride, with discounts for  those with weekly or monthly passes – is already heavily subsidized, the city offers half-priced transit fares to lower-income residents. But fewer than 40 percent of those eligible have signed up for the half-price fare program.

SO, if the principle of free bus rides is established, farebeating in the subways, which is already pervasive, will actually skyrocket. The cost of this is that the loss to the city will be more than monetary. The greater loss will be in the further degradation of public order in the public transportation system. But, I think truly, the Mamdani camp has an entirely a-historical understanding of public transportation in America, and the contrast in the role of the private sector and that of the government in ensuring its functionality.

It has been noted by many that in politics, highly expensive proposals to have the government provide various benefits ‘free’ to everyone can be very appealing to some voters, when the additional costs to the government are said to be paid for by collecting higher tax revenues from ‘millionaires and billionaires, regardless of whether there is any factual accuracy to such a proposal. But, while such an outcome might seem desirable to some voters (especially from a social justice perspective), it is important not to miss that desirability does not preclude questions of feasibility.

THE DECEPTION OF CONVENIENCE: MAMDANI’S FREE CHILDCARE PROMISE

But, let’s then proceed to proposal number three from the Mamdani camp, and in essence Mamdani is promising $5 billion worth of free childcare to all New Yorkers, starting from the sixth week after birth. He was not very specific about where this new army of social-service workers will come from, but there is an immediate and obvious problem here, which is the encouragement for parents to see it as easy to outsource the care of their children. Make no mistake, Mamdani does not care about the wellbeing of your child more than you.

If anything, this is supposed to make it seemingly cheaper for parents not to be present in the upbringing of their children, thus leaving those children vulnerable to the influence or even abuses of external actors, in what amounts to a conduit of the agenda of creating children of the state.

And I say this considering that governments have a history of using social welfare programmes to undermine the family unit, in a manner that amounts to the destruction or indoctrination of children. This occurs because welfare programmes give greater benefits to unmarried individuals than to a married couple of otherwise identical income. The resulting marriage penalty discourages marriage and rewards single parenthood. Combined marriage penalties across federal and state welfare programs can reach tens of thousands of dollars per year for a given family.

As a n example, one component of the marriage penalties comes from state-level free or subsidized preschool programs. In addition to a failed track record in providing high-quality preschool education, the majority of government-funded preschool programs also have severe marriage penalties. Marriage is highly beneficial to adults, children, and society as a whole. Therefore, policymakers clearly have ignored the implications of their programs on marriage and, in fact, probably see this as a plausible outcome (during the previous administrations) that made identity politics and feminist ideals central to their policy objectives.

Now, as far as strong refutation towards Mamdani’s social welfare aspirations is concerned, I will concede that – from a politician’s point of view, there is not a variety of gentle language available to sell the need to decrease dependency through welfare programmes, but I will not go as far as to say that is something that can or should hamstring pursuing stringent measures to reduce those relying on the state. And the reason is that the issues with welfare programmes are well documented in the US, and even other parts of the world. In essence, welfare states generate systematic and often chronic problems such as excessive bureaucracy, soaring costs, and labour market rigidities—that sometimes even threaten to bring the whole state enterprise into disrepute. And we see this with two primary issues from state welfare programs.

First is the issue of unsustainable funding. This is to say that welfare programs can be expensive to administer, and their costs can escalate due to factors like an aging population, increasing demand, and rising healthcare costs. In addition, finding sustainable funding sources for welfare programs can be a major challenge, especially during economic downturns or when there are competing demands on public resources (such as when a government takes in an influx of illegal immigrants that also receive welfare benefits). Then, some welfare systems are also just heavily reliant on economic growth to generate the revenue needed to fund programs, which can then make them vulnerable to economic fluctuations.

The second issue with welfare programmes is the potential for dependency, which is perhaps the most represented argument in light of the medicaid debate. The gist of this argument is that welfare programs can create a disincentive to work, especially if benefits are generous or easily accessible. Meanwhile, long-term reliance on welfare can also create a cycle of dependency, making it difficult for individuals to become self-sufficient. And I should state here that this argument does not account for all citizens indiscriminately, but rather focuses on individuals who are able-bodied but neither work or volunteer to meet the 80 hour a month requirement – so it targets people who just do not want to contribute to society.

Then, in addition to these two issues, I’d say (especially in light of the American context), there is also the issue of corrupt or inefficient bureaucracies; where bureaucratic inefficiencies and administrative challenges can hinder the effective delivery of welfare services. This is why under the Biden-Harris administration, we saw Americans who pay tax be less prioritised for housing benefits over illegal immigrants. So that was a clear case of a failure to prioritise the state’s duty to care for its citizens first, while corrupt practices were adopted to prioritise illegal immigrants in welfare programmes.

But, the purpose behind this is to highlight that welfare programmes have certain innate and re-occurring issues, and that these programmes do not have the great record that we think they do. In fact, about three years ago, we heard GOP senators express continued opposition to Biden’s Build Back Better policy, on the basis that it was creating an expensive social welfare state in the US.

MAMDANI’S RESPONSE TO FOOD INSECURITY IS ALSO A-CONTEXUAL

We then come to proposal number four from the Mamdani camp, which is a city-run grocery store in each borough. In an October 16 mayoral debate, Mamdani stated that children in New York were going hungry. Now, this is not necessarily a point to disagree with, seeing as the Master Jesus taught us that there will always be those who are poor among us. But, in making this the basis of his response to food insecurity, Mamdani has not considered nuance when it comes to the food issues in New York – especially since obesity is among the health concerns of children in the city.

Furthermore, a significant consideration in the food problem in New York is the relative scarcity of grocery stores in some areas, and not exclusively the cost of their contents. There would be more options if the city reduced shoplifting, but grocery stores have been bombarded by a deluge of crime. For instance, a notable grocery store chain opened its first Manhattan branch in East Harlem in 2010 to great fanfare. The East Harlem outlet boasted a multicultural inventory and low-cost fresh food. BUT, it then proceeded to shut down in 2023 due to retail theft and crime risk to its employees. And so, it would appear that the left’s soft on crime approach in New York, is culpable in issues of food insecurity. This is why I believe Mamdani’s approach to food insecurity in New York is a-contextual: it ignores the very crucial consideration that these shortages are often driven by people and bad government policy. In fact, even his approach to the minimum wage has dire consequences for affordability.

DEFUNDING THE POLICE: A PRECURSOR TO THE CREATION OF A POLICE STATE

Finally, we ought to discuss Mandani’s DSA-inspired inclinations towards defunding the police. For some context, during the COVID era, almost all of the world’s population was locked up in their houses (especially in 2020), and police were given added powers to terrorise those who protested the measures that were put in place at the time. So much so that, people were even terrorised for simply going on a walk! But once the lockdowns happened, all bets were off. In the US, they also had a policy that most directly trampled on all freedoms that some had taken for granted. Schools, businesses, and churches were slammed shut, with various levels of enforcement. The entire workforce was divided between essential and nonessential, and there was widespread confusion about who precisely was in charge of designating and enforcing this.

Ultimately, it seemed like martial law; as if all normal civilian law had been displaced by something else. THAT “something” allegedly had to do with public health, but there was clearly more going on, because suddenly people’s social media posts were censored and people were being asked to do things that made no sense, like putting on a mask for a virus that apparently also evaded mask protection and walk in only one direction in grocery aisles. BUT here’s the caveat: despite all those stringent measures and increased police presence, crime rose ever further, even inciting citizen anger – especially during the George Floyd riots.

Well, ironically, this provided a pretext to bring in the police state in the form of the National Guard, which was tasked with cracking down on crime in the transportation system. But, how could it be that these outbursts of crime took place despite restrictions on movement, except there was a manufacture of crime? Well, it seems that crime is manufactured through calls to defund the police and also through the creation of legislation that makes it difficult for people to protect or defend themselves, like anti-gun laws, while simultaneously, ignoring border security and devastating the economy to the extent that emergency services cannot fully perform their duties due to a need to cut costs!

For instance, a 2022 report detailed that police in Pittsburgh would no longer be responding to calls that are not deemed to be “in-progress emergencies,” meaning theft, harassment, criminal mischief, and burglary alarms would essentially be ignored. Such calls would instead be redirected to an answer machine, according to the report which also notes that from 3 am to 7 am, the city’s six police stations would operate without desk officers present. In addition, Only around 20 officers will be available for overnight shifts to cover the entire city, due to “understaffing.”

This was a clear fallout from a ‘defund the police’ mentality. Pittsburgh was essentially experiencing the ramifications of defunding the police mentality, with the municipal city council having approved a budget that called for a reduction in police staffing in previous years. Police enforcement was thus at an all-time low, according to city reports, with arrests in the city having dropped from over 18,000 in 2013 to 6,710 in 2022. Traffic stops also dropped from close to 29,000 in 2013 to a record-low 6,883 in 2022. Meanwhile, violent crime had risen since 2019. Meanwhile, NY had suffered a similar experience since 2020. Gun violence was said to be up 358% in New York City since June 2019 as police are being stripped of resources in Democrat run cities nationwide. A report even stated that “It has been nearly a quarter century since New York City experienced as much gun violence as it did in June 2020 – which was a year after the law was implemented. The report further stated that the city “logged 125 shootings in the first three weeks of the month of June 2020, which is more than double the number recorded over the same period last year.

And yet, legal enforcement experts have spoken out against this. Which makes us question why they were not listened to. But, this is yet another cost of the defund the police mentality that Zohran Mandani advocates for, in alignment with the DSA’s priorities. It is about manufacturing crime that will later serve as a precursor for a police state.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso

The announcement followed days of unrest, with opposition supporters clashing with security forces as early results pointed to Biya’s victory in the October 12 election. The government has not yet commented on the outcome but has consistently denied allegations of electoral misconduct.

After the results were made public, Tchiroma reported on social media that gunfire erupted outside his home in Garoua, killing two civilians. He did not specify who was responsible or address the election directly. Last week, he had declared himself the winner and vowed not to recognise any other result.

Tensions remain high across the country, particularly after at least four people were killed in recent protests in Douala. Analysts warned of potential instability, with one noting,

“We expect unrest to escalate as Cameroonians widely reject the official result, and we cannot see the Biya government lasting much longer.”

Another expert observed that

“Biya now has a notably shaky mandate given many of his own citizens don’t believe he won the election,” urging him to “urgently initiate a national mediation to prevent further escalation.”

Biya first assumed office in 1982 and consolidated his control by abolishing presidential term limits in 2008. Announcing the final results, Constitutional Council president Clement Atangana declared,

“Hereby declared elected President of the Republic, having obtained the majority of the votes cast, the candidate, Biya, Paul.”

Tchiroma, a former government minister, ran with backing from several opposition parties and civic groups, drawing large crowds throughout his campaign.

]]> https://ln24international.com/2025/10/27/cameroons-paul-biya-wins-eighth-term-at-92-after-contentious-election/feed/ 0 https://ln24international.com/2025/10/27/protesters-clash-with-police-in-cameroon-as-election-results-loom/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=protesters-clash-with-police-in-cameroon-as-election-results-loom https://ln24international.com/2025/10/27/protesters-clash-with-police-in-cameroon-as-election-results-loom/#respond Mon, 27 Oct 2025 07:04:09 +0000 https://ln24international.com/?p=28394 Douala, Cameroon — Clashes erupted across parts of Cameroon’s commercial capital, Douala, on Sunday as hundreds of opposition supporters took to the streets ahead of the official announcement of presidential election results.

Protesters barricaded roads, burned tyres, and chanted slogans accusing the government of electoral fraud, prompting a heavy security response. Police deployed teargas and water cannons to disperse demonstrators supporting opposition candidate Issa Tchiroma, who claims victory over long serving President Paul Biya in the October 12 vote.

Opposition Disputes Vote Count

Tchiroma’s supporters allege that vote-rigging is underway to secure yet another term for Biya, who at 92 years old has ruled Cameroon since 1982, making him one of the world’s longest serving leaders.

“We will not accept stolen results,” said one protester in Douala. “The people have spoken, and the government must respect our vote.”

Partial tallies published by local media suggest Biya is on course to win, though opposition figures insist their own parallel vote counts show Tchiroma leading.

Government Response

Authorities have rejected claims of manipulation, urging citizens to remain calm and wait for the official results from the National Elections Commission (ELECAM).

Government spokespersons accused opposition leaders of “inciting unrest” and warned that security forces would act to maintain order. Meanwhile, independent observers have called for transparency in the tabulation process to preserve public confidence in the outcome.

Tense Political Climate

The protests underscore growing political tension in a country that has faced years of unrest, particularly in its Anglophone regions, where separatist movements continue to challenge central government authority.

Analysts say the outcome of this election could either stabilize the political landscape or spark renewed confrontation if opposition supporters reject the official results.

As the nation awaits the final announcement, the situation remains volatile, with reports of heightened security in major cities including Yaoundé, Douala, and Bafoussam