British counter-terrorism police have arrested five men, including four Iranian nationals, on suspicion of planning a terrorist act, a statement from London’s Metropolitan Police said on Sunday.

The investigation relates to a suspected plot to target a specific location, according to the statement, which added that the men were arrested during raids at a number of addresses across the country on Saturday.

“This is a fast-moving investigation and we are working closely with those at the affected site to keep them updated,” said Commander Dominic Murphy, head of the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command.

The Met Police have not said which site was the target of the alleged attack. It said the men were arrested in the Greater Manchester and London areas, as well as in the southern town of Swindon.

“The investigation is still in its early stages and we are exploring various lines of enquiry to establish any potential motivation as well as to identify whether there may be any further risk to the public linked to this matter,” said Murphy.

Four of the men are Iranian nationals, ranging in age from 29 to 46, and have been detained under Britain’s Terrorism Act, the police statement said. The nationality of the fifth man, whose age was not provided, was still being established and the Met statement said he had instead been detained under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act.

All five remain in police custody.

“We understand the public may be concerned and as always, I would ask them to remain vigilant and if they see or hear anything that concerns them, then to contact us,” Murphy said.

Additional details of the suspects arrests:

This is a developing story and will be updated.

The Israel Defense Forces said Saturday it will mobilize thousands of reservists in the coming days, in what appears to be an expansion of its offensive in Gaza.

The move, which comes amid a deadlock in ceasefire talks, follows reports that the IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir on Friday presented a plan for intensifying pressure on Palestinian militant group Hamas to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz.

Israel’s public broadcaster, Kan 11, reported that Zamir’s plan included evacuating Palestinian civilians from northern and central Gaza ahead of expanded operations in those areas, mirroring tactics used earlier this year in southern Gaza’s Rafah.

Citing unnamed officials, Kan 11 said Netanyahu’s Security Cabinet was expected to approve the plan Sunday.

The news has prompted concern among families of the 59 hostages still held by Hamas in Gaza.

In what it described as “an urgent and heartfelt” appeal, the Hostages and Missing Families Forum Headquarters warned Saturday that “any escalation in the fighting will put the hostages — both the living and the deceased — in immediate danger.”

“The vast majority of the Israeli public views the return of the hostages as the nation’s highest moral priority,” it added.

Negotiations to secure the release of the remaining hostages have been stalled for weeks.

Talks mediated by Egypt and Qatar have repeatedly collapsed. Hamas is demanding a permanent ceasefire and full Israeli withdrawal, while Israel has accused Hamas of rejecting “reasonable offers.”

On Thursday, Netanyahu said explicitly for the first time that defeating Israel’s enemies was more important than securing the release of the remaining hostages, in remarks that drew a backlash from representatives of their families. Previously, he had described defeating Hamas and securing the release of the hostages as the primary goals of Israel’s war in Gaza.

Meanwhile, the Prime Minister’s Office announced Saturday it was rescheduling Netanyahu’s May 7-11 visit to Azerbaijan “to a later date.”

Citing an “intense diplomatic and security schedule,” it said the change came following “developments in Gaza and Syria.”

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Singapore’s People’s Action Party won its 14th successive election on Saturday to extend its unbroken six-decade rule, delivering a strong mandate to its new premier as the city-state braces for economic turbulence from a global trade war.

The PAP, which has ruled since before Singapore’s 1965 independence, won 87 of the 97 parliamentary seats up for grabs, with victories by huge margins in many of the 33 constituencies as the opposition failed to extend gains in previous contests.

The election was a bellwether of the popularity of the PAP amid some signs of disenchantment with its tight grip on power in the Asian financial hub, whose six million people have known no other kind of government.

Though the PAP has consistently won about 90% of seats, its share of the popular vote is closely watched as a measure of the strength of its mandate, with Prime Minister Lawrence Wong eager to leave a mark on his first election in charge after one of the PAP’s worst performances on record last time.

The PAP had yet to be formally declared winner but took 65.57% of the vote, according to local media, surpassing the 61.2% achieved in the 2020 contest.

The outcome will be seen as a ringing public endorsement of US-educated Wong, 52, who became Singapore’s fourth prime minister last year, promising continuity as well as new blood and a new style of leadership.

He took over at the end of the two-decade premiership of Lee Hsien Loong, the son of former leader Lee Kuan Yew, founder of modern Singapore.

Recession risk

Wong must address high living costs and a shortage of housing: persistent problems in one of the world’s most expensive cities, which faces a risk of recession and job losses if its trade-dependent economy takes a hit from the trade war triggered by steep US tariffs.

Wong thanked his constituents, saying: “We are grateful once again for your strong mandate, and we will honor it.”

Though the PAP win maintains the status quo, the margin of victory in most races was significant, with the opposition decimated and PAP candidates winning more than two-thirds of the vote in 18 of 33 constituencies.

“The voters have spoken and they have voted for stability, for continuity, for certainty – and they voted to give Prime Minister Lawrence Wong a strong mandate,” said Mustafa Izzuddin, adjunct senior lecturer at the National University of Singapore.

Although a PAP defeat was always extremely unlikely, some analysts had said the election could have altered the future political dynamic if the opposition had made more gains, with some younger voters keen for fresh voices, greater scrutiny and more robust debate.

But that could take time. Like previous elections, Saturday’s was a lopsided affair, with 46% of all candidates representing the PAP.

The ruling party ran in all seats, compared to just 26 for the Workers’ Party, which won the 10 seats PAP did not win.

The PAP has a big membership to draw from, influence in state institutions and far greater resources than its untested opponents.

Joshua Kurlantzick, senior fellow for Southeast Asia and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, said the PAP’s decisive win came down to Singaporeans backing a known quantity at a time of uncertainty.

“It’s a flight to safety – not wanting to change to a new party amidst the greatest global trade tensions in decades,” he said.

“Just because they are a rock in times of trouble – the same issues are there (that) they need to address.”

Australians will cast their final votes Saturday in a national election campaign dominated by cost-of-living concerns that’s being closely watched abroad for signs of a Donald Trump-inspired swing against conservative candidates.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of the Labor Party is facing off against Peter Dutton’s center-right Liberal Party, which is promising to get the country “back on track” after three years in opposition.

Pre-election opinion polls firmed in Labor’s favor, but Australia’s preferential voting system and the declining dominance of the two major parties makes it difficult to predict who’ll make up the 150-member House of Representatives.

Observers will be examining the results for signs of blowback against Australia’s conservative candidates from US President Trump’s whirlwind 100 days in office – after comparisons were drawn between Dutton’s policy offerings and those of the US leader.

Another center-left prime minister, Mark Carney of Canada – which like Australia is a G20 and Commonwealth nation, as well as US ally – recently scored an election win widely chalked up to anti-Trump sentiment.

In Australia, almost half of the 18 million registered voters cast their ballots before election day, and the remainder are expected to attend voting centers to comply with compulsory voting laws, with the threat of fines for no-shows.

Polling centers on election day often resemble a series of small community fairs, taking advantage of the guaranteed flow of customers by selling what’s known as “democracy sausages” – a sausage, sauce, and maybe onions, on a slice of white bread.

The tradition began decades ago but in recent years has become more organized with an online map built by volunteers showing where voters can find a ballot box with a barbecue.

“Everybody has to show up to vote. As long as you’re showing up anyway, why not connect with the community through the fair-like atmosphere of a sausage sizzle and whatever other fundraisers are available on the day,” said Alex Dawson from the Democracy Sausage Team.

International influence

Over the last five weeks, the two major parties have been locked in a battle for votes, using the promise of tax cuts, rebates and other relief measures aimed at easing a cost-of-living crisis.

Australian elections tend to focus on domestic issues – housing, health and the economy – but this one has been influenced by international events.

Albanese called the election in late March, just before Trump announced his “Liberation Day” tariffs, sending global markets into a tailspin.

As with almost all other US allies, Australia was not spared from the tariffs, something Albanese criticized as “against the spirit of our two nations’ enduring friendship.”

On the campaign trail, the incumbent government has presented itself as a steady pair of hands as the initial hit to stocks broadened into fears of an impending global recession. Now, Labor says the Australian economy is turning the corner, pointing to a recent fall in inflation to 2.9%, the lowest since December 2021.

Dutton has placed the blame for inflationary pressures firmly on the Labor government, routinely questioning whether voters feel “better off than they were three years ago.”

Both parties say they’ll make it easier for first-time buyers to get a house, by either cutting the size of the minimum deposit, or offering tax deductions on mortgage repayments – both measures analysts say will likely drive house prices higher.

Pitch to young voters

This year, for the first time, younger voters will outnumber older demographics and analysts expect them to extend the decline of the two-party system with more votes for minor parties and independents.

A fierce competition for young voters has played out on social media, making this election “drastically different” from those of the past, said Andrea Carson, a professor of political communication at La Trobe University in Melbourne.

“Instagram and TikTok (are) really taking over some of the space that was occupied by Facebook,” Carson said.

However, the lack of any regulation requiring truth in political advertising has allowed political parties, as well as third-party campaigners, to say whatever they like about their rivals.

Many electorates, such as the hotly contested Wentworth in Sydney’s east, have seen a deluge of flyers and signs pushing personal attacks against candidates. The Australian Electoral Commission stated in April that it “cannot, and has never been able to, regulate truth.”

Commentators will be watching this year to see if more seats go to so-called Teal candidates, independents backed by funds raised through campaign group Climate 200.

The Teals were the talk of the last election three years ago, when Australians turfed out the Liberal-National Coalition after nine years of rule, in a vote dubbed Australia’s “climate election.” This year, 35 are competing as independents with a shared goal of promoting integrity, gender equality and greater climate action.

In 2022, the new Labor government committed to net-zero targets and immediately began the work of driving carbon emissions down in a country which derives a significant portion of its wealth from extracting fossil fuels.

However, despite escalating the rollout of new renewable projects, it’s been criticized for also approving new coal and gas projects.

The Liberal Party’s response to the country’s energy demands has been to propose a shift to nuclear power, with a plan to build seven nuclear power stations in the coming decades, funded by taxpayers.

This time around, there has been no promise of bolder climate action from Labor, even as activists have ambushed leaders on the campaign trail.

“When will you listen to young people?” one protester yelled at Albanese on April 8 at a press conference to announce more funding for mental healthcare.

For the candidates who’ve worked for weeks to push their message through the noise of competing election campaigns, Saturday could turn into a long, tense evening.

The last polls close at 6 p.m. on the west coast (6 a.m. ET) and a result is expected within hours – if one of the major parties receives enough votes to win a coveted majority.

Voters are also electing 40 of 76 seats in the upper house (Senate), replacing senators who are at the end of their six-year term.

Singapore is holding an election on Saturday almost certain to perpetuate the unbroken rule of the People’s Action Party, in a test of public approval for its new prime minister as the city-state braces for economic turbulence from a global trade war.

The election is a bellwether for the popularity of the PAP, which has ruled since before Singapore’s 1965 independence, with attention on whether the opposition can challenge the ruling party’s tight grip on power and make further inroads after small but unprecedented gains in the last contest.

Though the PAP has consistently won in landslides with about 90% of seats, its share of the popular vote is closely watched as a measure of the strength of its mandate, with premier Lawrence Wong keen to improve on the PAP’s 60.1% in the 2020 election – one of its worst performances on record.

Wong, 52, became the Asian financial hub’s fourth prime minister last year, promising continuity, new blood and to lead Singapore his own way.

He took over at the end of the two-decade premiership of Lee Hsien Loong, the son of former leader Lee Kuan Yew, the founder of modern Singapore.

Polls opened at 8 a.m. and will close at 8 p.m. (8 a.m. ET), with a result expected in the early hours of Sunday.

Living costs and housing availability in one of the world’s most expensive cities are key issues for the 2.76 million voters and a continued challenge for Wong, whose government has warned of recession if the trade-dependent economy becomes collateral damage in the war over steep U.S. tariffs.

Lopsided contest

The PAP has long had the upper hand in politics, with a big membership to draw from, influence in state institutions and far greater resources than its untested opponents, which are each running in only a small number of constituencies.

The election will be a lopsided affair, with 46% of all candidates representing the PAP, which is contesting all 97 seats compared to 26 for its biggest rival, the Workers’ Party, which won 10 last time, the most by an opposition party.

But though a PAP defeat is extremely unlikely, some analysts say the election could alter the dynamic of Singapore politics in the years ahead if the opposition can make more headway, with younger voters keen to see alternative voices, greater scrutiny and more robust debate.

“It is to be expected that (its) overall electoral support will gradually, gradually dip from general election to general election,” said National University of Singapore political scientist Lam Peng Er.

“Would Singaporeans be that surprised if the PAP’s electoral support were to dip to 57% or 58%? It will surprise nobody. I don’t think it will even surprise the PAP at all.”

The PAP for its part is keen to avoid upsets and warned voters of the consequences of seat losses for key cabinet members, whom Wong said were critical to balancing ties between the United States and China and navigating Singapore’s highly exposed economy through potentially choppy waters.

“I have backups … sure. But everyone knows that the team cannot function at the same level,” Wong told the 1.4 million-strong labor union on Thursday.

Earthquakes are devastating for those who have lost loved ones, homes and livelihoods, but for military dictators clinging to power, such disasters can also bring opportunity.

Myanmar’s military rulers have spent the past four years waging a brutal civil war across the Southeast Asian country, sending columns of troops on bloody rampages, torching and bombing villages, massacring residents, jailing opponents and forcing young men and women to join the army.

The junta is headed by a widely reviled army chief who overthrew the democratically elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi and installed himself as leader.

But like with most aspiring strongmen, Sen. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing’s rule is precarious. He and his cronies have been sanctioned and spurned internationally, the economy is in tatters, and his military is losing significant territory in a grinding, multi-front war against a determined resistance.

By some accounts, he barely controls 30% of the country.

So when a powerful 7.7-magnitude earthquake struck central Myanmar on March 28, killing more than 3,700 people and causing widespread devastation, the general moved rapidly to bolster his position with a rare plea for international help.

“Min Aung Hlaing is leveraging the earthquake for regional engagement and electoral legitimacy,” said Kyaw Hsan Hlaing, a PhD student in political science at Cornell University.

“The humanitarian crisis gives him a pretext to open channels he’d long shut.”

Those openings included a face-to-face meeting last month between the junta leader and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim of Malaysia, which currently holds the rotating chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The regional bloc had shunned high-level talks with Myanmar since the coup, to avoid legitimizing the junta.

Following the meeting in the Thai capital Bangkok, Anwar said he had a “frank and constructive discussion” with the general, focused on humanitarian assistance for quake-hit communities and the extension of a military-declared ceasefire to facilitate aid deliveries.

“For Min Aung Hlaing, securing even a veneer of regional legitimacy now lays political groundwork: He can argue ‘Look, neighbors trust me enough to talk,’ even as democratic leaders and exile groups remain excluded from the table,” said Kyaw Hsan Hlaing.

Specter of elections

Some say now is the time for countries to engage with Myanmar’s military rulers, to push for dialogue and peace.

Four years of war has ravaged the country; 3 million people have been displaced by the fighting and the earthquake has only deepened an already dire humanitarian crisis in which at least 20 million people need aid.

“The main concern is the humanitarian situation. Sometimes, when we have this kind of crisis, it’s an opportunity for all the parties to try to come together, to think of the interests of the people… maybe it could lead to some kind of dialogue process,” said Sihasak Phuangketkeow, a former deputy foreign affairs minister of Thailand who has been part of his country’s efforts to engage the State Administration Council, the junta’s official name.

In recent months, Min Aung Hlaing has enjoyed a series of diplomatic engagements.

As bodies were still being pulled from the rubble of the quake, the general was shaking hands with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of a regional meeting in Bangkok.

Rights groups and civil society organizations said his presence at the BIMSTEC summit amounted to the gathering lending legitimacy to a war criminal.

India said its bilateral meeting, set up to facilitate disaster relief, provided an opportunity to push the junta for “inclusive dialogue” and underline that there could be “no military solution to the conflict.”

That meeting came a month after Min Aung Hlaing’s high-profile state visit to Russia to boost cooperation with President Vladimir Putin, his longtime ally and main arms supplier.

Above all for the junta leader, domestic legitimacy is key in order to maintain his regime. And regional support for his planned elections, slated to be held later this year, is the first step in securing that.

Since seizing power, Min Aung Hlaing has repeatedly promised elections.

But with most of the democratic camp in exile or jail, Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy dissolved, and the military’s widespread repression of the people, such a vote would never be considered free or fair, observers say.

Min Aung Hlaing’s March invitation to election observers from Belarus – Europe’s last dictatorship – appeared to underscore their point.

“We have to make it very clear that for the election to be credible, it has to have inclusive dialogue,” said Sihasak, who is now secretary-general of the Asian Peace and Reconciliation Council.

“It is not a blank check,” he added. “It’s an opportunity for us to engage, but not engage in a way that supports legitimacy, but to impress upon the regime that they have to also make concessions.”

Stopping the violence

Some observers say the junta cannot be trusted to make concessions, when the military’s history is littered with false promises masking an unending stream of atrocities.

Even as Malaysia’s Anwar was touting the military’s so-called ceasefire to help quake-hit communities, the junta was restricting aid and intensifying its deadly campaign with airstrikes in opposition areas that have reportedly killed dozens of civilians.

Analysts warn that the military will use greater engagement as a pretext to normalize diplomatic ties and entrench its authoritarian rule.

“If you negotiate with the devil without red lines, that is complicity,” said Adelina Kamal, an independent analyst and member of the Southeast Asian Women Peace Mediators network.

Kamal said the international community risks being “deceived into the military’s stage performance,” where elections would be “an illusion of democratic transition.”

In 2008, when parts of the country were ravaged by powerful Cyclone Nargis, the military regime at the time pushed ahead with a constitutional referendum that paved the way for a semi-civilian government but cemented the military’s influence on the country’s politics.

With a new military-drafted constitution in place, the regime – called the State Peace and Development Council – held elections in 2010 widely regarded as a sham.

Today’s junta is “taking a page from the SPDC’s playbook to assert and retain its political role,” said Moe Thuzar, coordinator of the Myanmar studies program at the ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.

“The people of Myanmar have made it amply clear since 2021 about their mistrust in the military’s statements about elections, and view elections in the current situation as potentially leading to more violence.”

Those who have firsthand experience of that violence say actions speak louder than words.

“Talking to Min Aung Hlaing will not bring any political solution and satisfy what the majority of people want,” said Khun Bedu, chairman of the Karenni Nationalities Defense Force, which is fighting the military in the country’s southeast.

The Karen National Union, which has been fighting the military since independence from Britain more than 70 years ago, said inclusive dialogue cannot happen without first a ceasefire and the delivery of humanitarian assistance.

There is hope, however, from some quarters that progress could be made this year.

Following his talks with the junta leader, Malaysia’s Anwar also held a widely praised virtual meeting with Mahn Win Khaing Than, prime minister of the National Unity Government, in ASEAN’s first public face-to-face with Myanmar’s shadow administration of lawmakers deposed in the coup.

The NUG, which considers itself the legitimate government of Myanmar, has repeatedly insisted on engaging all stakeholders to solve the crisis.

“I see 2025 as the year, with the election coming in and with this crisis, that we can either win the peace or we can lose the peace,” said Sihasak, the former Thai minister.

To get there, international partners should “tie any dialogue to verifiable steps” including “genuine humanitarian corridors, release of political prisoners, and binding guarantees of inclusive talks,” said Kyaw Hsan Hlaing at Cornell.

“Otherwise, engagement simply extends the junta’s lifeline at the expense of the Burmese people’s aspirations for democracy,” he said.