What's actually moving the world right now.
Iran
The 2026 Iran-US war, fully built, with verified and disputed claims kept apart.
Four wars and two crises, tracked in full - verified facts kept apart from disputed claims, real headlines from across the spectrum, no synthesis into one voice.
Story Rooms
The 2026 Iran-United States War
Coverage spectrum
How ten outlets across the political and funding spectrum are covering this war right now - headline, snippet, and a link to the original in every case; Rozana doesn't republish anyone's reporting. Two things are rated separately below: political lean (where independent bias trackers place the outlet's news coverage) and funding & control (who pays for the newsroom, and how much editorial independence that leaves it). A source can be state-funded and still do real reporting, or independent and still be unreliable - collapsing those into one label was the mistake we didn't want to make.
Why two of these cards aren't plotted on the left-right dial methodology note
Xinhua and Press TV are rated by Media Bias/Fact Check as "Left" and "Right" respectively - but that scale is calibrated to domestic media systems (largely the US one), and applying it across a state-controlled foreign broadcaster doesn't mean the same thing it means for CNN or Fox. Rather than force a false equivalence onto one dial, we show their funding/control status plainly and leave the lean field unplotted. Treating "the UN is neutral" as a fact rather than a framing was a mistake we caught before shipping this panel - the UN item below is labeled as a multilateral institution, not scored on a media-bias scale at all, for the same reason.
What happened
The war opened at 06:35 UTC on February 28, 2026, when US Central Command struck Iranian ballistic-missile facilities under "Operation Epic Fury," minutes after Israeli jets hit a compound where Khamenei and senior officials were meeting - a strike that killed him and was described by analysts as a "decapitation strike." Iran retaliated within three hours, firing roughly 170 ballistic missiles at Israel and US bases across Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and the UAE. Within 48 hours the war had pulled in Lebanon (Hezbollah entered March 2), Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, and, through contested strikes, Azerbaijan and Cyprus.
The most intense fighting ran February 28 through roughly March 10: US and Israeli strikes hit Iranian nuclear, military, government and media infrastructure; the US Navy sank multiple Iranian warships and a submarine. A first ceasefire, mediated by Pakistan, was declared April 8 and broke down almost immediately. A more comprehensive 60-day ceasefire framework signed June 12-17 mostly held until early September, when strikes resumed - a September 1 strike killed four people at a wedding party in Sirik. Since roughly September 8-9, both sides have held fire, but no new ceasefire has been signed: the current calm is a pause, not a peace.
Why it matters
This is the first war in which a sitting Supreme Leader of a major power was killed in a targeted strike, a precedent other governments are watching for what it implies about norms around targeting heads of state. It is a live test of the nuclear non-proliferation regime: several analysts argue the campaign may have pushed Iran from latent nuclear capability toward a nuclear grievance, making proliferation more likely, not less. It is reshaping global energy markets in real time - the Strait of Hormuz carries roughly a fifth of the world's oil. And it's an early test of wartime accountability: the September 17 UN mission is one of the first formal findings of possible war crimes by a US-led coalition this decade.
What is verified
Rozana's bar: corroborated by two or more independent sources without a shared incentive to agree, or by a body with direct technical access (IAEA, UN mission).
What remains disputed
Competing narratives
Each party's own framing, in its own terms - not Rozana's paraphrase of what it "really" means.
Frame the campaign as defensive necessity against, in Trump's words, "a wicked, radical dictatorship" and 47 years of hostility; Netanyahu called it removing "the existential threat posed by the terrorist regime."
Rejects the strikes as "wholly unprovoked, illegal, and illegitimate," launched during active negotiations. Frames retaliation as lawful self-defense.
Initially opposed military action, reversed after being struck themselves, then pushed the US to escalate - while framing Iranian strikes on their territory as sovereignty violations throughout.
Condemned the Khamenei strike as a "grave violation of Iran's sovereignty" and requested an emergency IAEA session - but provided minimal concrete military or economic support to Iran.
Largely urged restraint; condemned Iranian retaliation while stopping short of endorsing the US-Israeli campaign. Some UN-level voices compared the erosion of norms to the invasion of Ukraine.
Key actors
| Actor | Role |
|---|---|
| United States | Co-belligerent from Feb 28; CENTCOM led strikes; set war aims and ceasefire terms |
| Israel | Co-belligerent from Feb 28; IDF conducted the Khamenei strike and extensive Tehran/Lebanon operations |
| Iran | Principal target; IRGC conducted retaliatory strikes; leadership passed to Mojtaba Khamenei; Pezeshkian remains president |
| Gulf states | Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait hosted US bases, absorbed Iranian retaliation, suffered major oil/port disruption |
| Lebanon / Hezbollah | Hezbollah entered Mar 2; ~700,000 displaced by Israeli bombing per UNHCR |
| Russia, China | Formal Iranian partners; rhetorical condemnation of the campaign, minimal concrete support |
| UN fact-finding mission | Independent UN-mandated body; published the Sep 17 war-crimes findings |
| Pakistan | Mediated the Apr 8 ceasefire and the Jun 12-17 framework |
Timeline
Markets & economy
Hormuz traffic collapsed from ~100 vessels a day pre-war to as few as 5 at the low point. Gulf crude production fell nearly half, from ~17M bbl/day in 2025 to ~9M by August 2026. Oil spiked above $130/bbl in April before settling ~20% above pre-war levels; by Sep 18 it had fallen to ~$102 as Saudi Arabia announced pipeline capacity that partly routes around Hormuz.
The burden has fallen unevenly: the US has largely absorbed its costs through monetary policy, while Iran's economy is in acute crisis - food inflation at 127.5%, the rial near 2.31 million to the dollar, crude loadings down ~85%. That asymmetry is one of the more under-covered stories of the war's later phase.
What to watch
- Whether the Sep 8-9 pause holds - both prior ceasefires broke down, one almost immediately.
- Iran's Basij mobilization - defensive consolidation, or preparation for renewed offense.
- Follow-through on the UN findings, and whether Amnesty's parallel findings gain traction.
- Iran's economic trajectory - whether collapse forces a shift in Tehran's position, or hardens it.
- The Lebanon and Houthi fronts, which could reignite the wider war independently.
Sources
How this Story Room was built methodology note
This story was chosen as a stress test: an active war, a killed head of state, casualty figures that vary 3× by source, and an open, contested war-crimes finding against the more powerful belligerent. The hardest call was the UN school-strike finding - the draft avoids both "the US committed a war crime" (overclaiming) and a flattened "both sides accuse each other" (hiding that one claim rests on a named investigation and legal standard, the other so far does not). Iran's own contested claims got the same claimed-denied treatment as US and Israeli ones, rather than more skepticism by default. Whether that reads as genuinely symmetric is exactly the kind of question a named standards editor would need to check before this format runs on a story this live.
Sudan's Civil War
Coverage spectrum
How outlets across the political and funding spectrum are covering this war right now - headline, snippet, and a link to the original in every case; Rozana doesn't republish anyone's reporting. As with every room here, political lean and funding & control are rated separately, because a source can be state-funded and still report accurately, or independent and still be unreliable.
What happened
Sudan's war has roots in an unfinished democratic transition. The 2019 uprising that ousted longtime ruler Omar al-Bashir led to a fragile power-sharing government, which army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan "Hemedti" Dagalo jointly overthrew in an October 2021 coup. The two men then fell out over a plan to integrate the RSF, a paramilitary force descended from the Janjaweed militias used against Darfur civilians in the 2000s, into the regular army: the RSF wanted a ten-year timeline, the army insisted on two. On April 15, 2023, the RSF attacked SAF bases across the country, including in Khartoum, and full-scale war began.
Fighting quickly acquired an ethnic dimension in Darfur, where the UN estimates RSF and allied militias killed 10,000 to 15,000 people, mostly ethnic Masalit civilians, in West Darfur's El Geneina in 2023. The war became a rough territorial split through 2024, before the army regained momentum in early 2025, retaking Wad Madani on January 11 and Khartoum's presidential palace on March 21. The RSF, in turn, declared a rival "Tasis" government from Darfur on July 26, 2025, and shifted its main offensive toward the besieged city of El Fasher, which fell to the RSF on October 26 to 27, 2025, after an 18-month siege, followed by mass killings and sexual violence that a UN mission later concluded bore the "hallmarks of genocide." Through 2026 the front line moved into Kordofan, drone warfare intensified on both sides, and repeated ceasefire efforts by a US-led group with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE stalled, most recently in September 2026 when the US reportedly withheld Burhan's UN visa over truce terms.
Why it matters
UN agencies now describe Sudan's war as the world's largest displacement and hunger crisis, but its stakes extend beyond Sudan's borders. It has destabilized an already fragile region, pushing refugees into Chad, Egypt, South Sudan and Libya, while becoming a proxy arena for competing outside powers: a September 2026 UN report documented foreign recruitment networks, including up to 2,000 former Colombian military contractors, plus arms and financing networks from the UAE, Chad, Libya and Somalia sustaining both sides. Sudan also sits on the Red Sea, giving the war direct relevance to global shipping and Horn of Africa security. And the UN's February 2026 genocide finding against the RSF, paired with the International Court of Justice's dismissal of Sudan's related case against the UAE on narrow jurisdictional grounds in May 2025, has become a test of whether international law can hold outside states accountable for arming atrocities - so far, largely not.
What is verified
Rozana's bar: corroborated by two or more independent sources without a shared incentive to agree, or by a body with direct access (UN mission, named NGO with methodology).
What remains disputed
Competing narratives
Each party's own framing, in its own terms - not Rozana's paraphrase of what it "really" means.
Frames the RSF as an illegitimate "rebel militia" that must be militarily defeated before any political settlement, and casts the army as defending Sudan's sovereignty: "We are determined to end the rebellion forever, and we will not allow it to exist again."
Frames itself as fighting entrenched elements within the old regime structure and presents its "Tasis" parallel government as an alternative, inclusive Sudanese state: "if they want it to go on for 40 years, it will continue until they are uprooted."
Denies any support role, framing accusations as politically motivated: "there is no substantiated evidence that the UAE has provided any support to the RSF or any warring parties."
Frames both warring leaderships as illegitimate and unfit to govern, applying pressure to force a humanitarian truce: "the conduct of each leader of the warring factions renders them ineligible to govern."
Grassroots Sudanese mutual-aid networks frame the war as an elite power struggle inflicted on civilians, arguing aid should route through local responders rather than either armed faction.
Key actors
| Actor | Role |
|---|---|
| Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) | National army led by Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Burhan; controls the Port Sudan-based government, reclaimed Khartoum in 2025 |
| Rapid Support Forces (RSF) | Paramilitary led by Mohamed "Hemedti" Dagalo, descended from Janjaweed militias; controls most of Darfur, declared the rival "Tasis" government |
| United Arab Emirates | Repeatedly accused by UN experts and rights groups of arming and financing the RSF; denies all such claims |
| Egypt | Backs the SAF politically, hosts large numbers of Sudanese refugees, joins US-led mediation |
| Saudi Arabia | Mediation participant; hosts Burhan diplomatically; reportedly threatened to withdraw from talks in Sep 2026 over the visa dispute |
| United States | Leads ceasefire diplomacy with Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE; has sanctioned RSF commanders |
| UN fact-finding mission | Independent UN-mandated body; published the Feb 2026 genocide finding |
| Emergency Response Rooms | Grassroots Sudanese volunteer networks delivering frontline humanitarian relief where formal aid access is blocked |
Timeline
Economy & humanitarian funding
Sudan isn't a major global commodity or financial market driver, so this is best read as a humanitarian and regional-economy story rather than a global-markets one. Domestically the collapse has been severe: the Sudanese pound's black-market rate fell from about 600 to the dollar before the war to roughly 7,500 by September 22, 2026, while annual inflation stood at 41% in July 2026. Sudan's economy has contracted by more than 40% during the war, roughly a third of businesses have closed, and the extreme-poverty rate rose from 48% in 2023 to 59% by 2025.
The clearest commodity thread is gold: Sudan produced roughly 70 tons in 2025, but at least half of that is estimated to be smuggled out annually, a major informal revenue stream reportedly helping finance both warring parties. Humanitarian funding has consistently fallen far short of need - response plans never exceeded 38% funded between 2023 and 2026, and by April 2026 only about 8% of that year's humanitarian needs had been met.
What to watch
- Whether US pressure (withholding Burhan's UN visa) forces renewed ceasefire talks, especially after reports Saudi Arabia threatened to pull out of the mediation process.
- Whether the RSF's Kordofan offensive, with El-Obeid described as a potential "next El Fasher," produces another atrocity on that scale.
- Whether any accountability mechanism follows the UN's genocide finding, given the ICJ route against the UAE is now closed.
- Whether reported senior RSF commander defections translate into a meaningful fracture of the group's structure.
- Whether the humanitarian funding gap narrows enough to stabilize the 8.58 million still displaced.
Sources
How this Story Room was built methodology note
The hardest call in building this room was what to do with the death toll. Every plausible number found here, 20,000, 62,000, 130,000, 150,000-plus, 400,000, comes from a credible source using a defensible method, and none of them agree, because they measure genuinely different things: direct event-tracked deaths versus academic models applying historical mortality multipliers versus totals that fold in disease and starvation. Picking one number as "the" death toll would have flattened a dispute that is substantive, not just rhetorical, so this room shows the range as a dataset instead.
Russia's War on Ukraine
Coverage spectrum
How outlets across the political and funding spectrum are covering this war right now - headline, snippet, and a link to the original in every case. As with every room here, political lean and funding & control are rated separately, because a source can be state-funded and still report accurately, or independent and still be unreliable.
Why two of these cards aren't plotted on the left-right dial methodology note
TASS, RT and Xinhua are all state-controlled broadcasters whose output does not map cleanly onto a domestic left-right scale calibrated for outlets like CNN or Fox. Rather than force a false equivalence, this room shows their funding/control status plainly and leaves the lean field unplotted, while still linking each to an independent rater's assessment of their factual reliability.
What happened
Russia's war on Ukraine did not begin in 2022, it escalated then. In February-March 2014, Russian forces seized and later annexed Crimea, and Moscow began arming separatist proxies in the eastern Donbas, triggering a war that killed roughly 14,000 people over the following eight years despite the 2015 Minsk ceasefire agreements. On February 24, 2022, Vladimir Putin ordered a full-scale invasion from the north, east and south, calling it a "special military operation," a characterization rejected by Ukraine and Western governments as a pretext for territorial conquest. Russian forces failed to take Kyiv and withdrew from the capital's suburbs by early April 2022, after which investigators documented mass killings of civilians in the town of Bucha. Russian forces did capture the port city of Mariupol in mid-May 2022 after a brutal siege.
Ukraine regained momentum with a counteroffensive that retook Kharkiv Oblast in September 2022, followed by the liberation of Kherson city that November, even as Russia formally annexed four partially occupied Ukrainian regions on September 30, 2022 in a move the UN General Assembly declared illegal. A grinding war of attrition followed: Russia captured Bakhmut in May 2023 after the war's longest battle; Ukraine's 2023 summer counteroffensive failed to break through fortified Russian lines in the south. Ukraine opened a new front by invading Russia's Kursk Oblast in August 2024, holding territory there for months before being pushed back. Through 2025 and into 2026, Russian forces slowly ground forward across the Donetsk front, capturing the key logistics hub of Pokrovsk in February 2026. By September 2026, front-line movement has slowed to a near-stalemate - Russia holds roughly a fifth of Ukraine - while diplomacy under the Trump administration has produced repeated short-lived truces but no comprehensive peace agreement.
Why it matters
This is the largest state-on-state war in Europe since 1945, and its outcome is widely seen as a test of whether borders can be redrawn by force in the 21st century, with direct implications for how China calculates the risks of action against Taiwan and for the credibility of NATO's collective-defense guarantees. It has also reordered global energy and food markets, triggered the largest sanctions regime ever imposed on a major economy, and pulled the US, EU and Russia into their most dangerous direct confrontation since the Cold War, including recurring incidents of Russian drones and aircraft crossing into NATO airspace in Poland, Romania and the Baltics.
What is verified
Rozana's bar: corroborated by two or more independent sources without a shared incentive to agree, or by a body with direct access (UN monitors, independent open-source trackers).
What remains disputed
Competing narratives
Each party's own framing, in its own terms - not Rozana's paraphrase of what it "really" means.
Frames the war as a defensive response to NATO's eastward expansion and the protection of Russian-speakers, casting Ukraine's government as a Western-controlled "regime" and dismissing documented atrocities like Bucha as fabrications.
Frames the war as an unprovoked war of conquest by a nuclear-armed neighbor, with Zelensky telling the UN "Putin is patient zero. He must be stopped."
Consistently characterizes the conflict as "Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine," framing continued military and financial support as necessary to uphold the post-1945 prohibition on territorial conquest by force.
Maintains official neutrality, calling for dialogue and a ceasefire while avoiding attribution of blame to Russia, a position critics note aligns China closer to Moscow in practice given continued trade.
Frames the war primarily as a negotiable transaction to be resolved through direct US-brokered diplomacy, pressing both sides toward a narrower ceasefire on energy-infrastructure strikes rather than backing Ukraine's full territorial demands.
Key actors
| Actor | Role |
|---|---|
| Vladimir Putin | President of Russia; ordered the 2022 invasion and directs Russia's war aims and negotiating position |
| Volodymyr Zelensky | President of Ukraine; leads wartime government, seeks Western security guarantees and continued military aid |
| Donald Trump | US President; drives 2025-2026 peace diplomacy, pushing both sides toward negotiated limits on strikes |
| Sergey Lavrov | Russian Foreign Minister; represents Russia's negotiating red lines on NATO membership and annexed territory |
| European Union / NATO members | Provide the bulk of Ukraine's financial and military support; debating use of frozen Russian central bank assets |
| Institute for the Study of War | US-based think tank providing daily independent open-source assessments of front-line movement |
| Mediazona / Meduza | Independent Russian journalists (Meduza operating in exile) maintaining the most transparent independent count of Russian war dead |
Timeline
Markets & economy
The war has reshaped global energy and food markets. Ukraine's long-range drone campaign against Russian oil refineries has cut Russian refining capacity by an estimated 20 to 40%, contributing to a spike in diesel prices that topped $6.50 a gallon in the US in September 2026. Black Sea grain exports, on which import-dependent countries across Africa and the Middle East depend, have repeatedly stalled amid reciprocal energy-infrastructure strikes. Western sanctions have cumulatively slowed but not crashed the Russian economy - GDP grew just 1.1% in 2025 with a 2.6%-of-GDP budget deficit - while Ukraine's economy has been devastated: GDP down 21.2% cumulatively since 2022, its 2025 deficit financed almost entirely by Western aid, and power-generation capacity cut from 33.7 GW to roughly 14 GW after sustained Russian strikes on the grid.
Reconstruction costs keep climbing: the World Bank's February 2026 joint assessment put the 10-year recovery bill at nearly $588 billion, almost three times Ukraine's projected 2025 GDP. Much of the 2026 financing debate has centered on whether the EU can legally convert roughly 210 billion euros in frozen Russian central bank assets, held mostly in Belgium, into a "reparations loan" for Ukraine, a plan repeatedly stalled by Belgian legal objections and unanimity requirements.
What to watch
- Whether the narrow "energy infrastructure ceasefire" floated at the September 2026 UN meeting is formalized, or collapses like the April 2026 Easter truce.
- Whether the EU resolves the legal fight over using frozen Russian assets for a reparations loan, which could determine Ukraine's financing through 2027.
- Winter 2026-27 resilience of Ukraine's power grid, already reduced to roughly 14 GW of available capacity.
- Further Russian drone or aircraft incursions into NATO airspace and whether they trigger a more forceful NATO response.
- Whether Russia attends the December 2026 G20 summit in Miami, and whether that becomes a vehicle for broader negotiations.
Sources
How this Story Room was built methodology note
The hardest call here wasn't the front-line facts, which are unusually well triangulated by ISW, DeepState and UN monitors; it was how to present the casualty numbers at all. Every party to this war has an incentive to shade its own losses down and the enemy's up, and the spread between Russia's claim about Ukraine, Ukraine's claim about Russia, the closest thing to an independent number (Mediazona/Meduza's confirmed Russian dead), and Western officials' own rough estimate isn't one dataset, it's three different things measured three different ways and flattened into round numbers by press offices. Rather than pick a "most likely" figure, this room shows them side by side, labeled by source and by what each one actually counts.
Taiwan Strait: Sovereignty Under Pressure
Coverage spectrum
How outlets across the political and funding spectrum are covering this dispute right now - headline, snippet, and a link to the original in every case. As with every room here, political lean and funding & control are rated separately, because a source can be state-funded and still report accurately, or independent and still be unreliable.
What happened
Tensions accelerated through 2025 after Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te delivered a March 13, 2025 national security speech labeling China a "foreign hostile force" and unveiling 17 counter-infiltration strategies. Beijing responded with "Strait Thunder-2025A," a two-day live-fire exercise on April 1 and 2, 2025, involving roughly 76 aircraft on the first day, 37 of them crossing the median line, and warships approaching within 20 nautical miles of Taiwan. The year closed with "Justice Mission 2025" on December 29 and 30, 2025, China's largest single show of force in the cycle: up to 130 aircraft, at least 14 PLA warships, 14 coast guard vessels and 27 rockets fired, disrupting over 100,000 travelers. A parallel and largely separate crisis opened on November 7, 2025, when Japan's prime minister told parliament a Chinese attack on Taiwan could constitute a "survival-threatening situation" justifying Japanese military intervention; Beijing responded with ambassador summonses, trade restrictions on seafood and rare earths, and a wave of PLA naval activity. That crisis remains unresolved as of September 2026.
Through 2026, Taiwan has responded with record defense spending, proposing roughly $35.3 billion (3.01 to 3.32% of GDP, an 18% increase) for its 2026 budget, and conducted its largest-ever reservist mobilization exercise in August 2026. Beijing has meanwhile shifted tactics: PLA aircraft incursions into Taiwan's air defense zone fell roughly 52% in the first seven months of 2026 compared to the same period in 2025, even as naval and coast guard presence stayed essentially steady, while Taiwan's defense ministry warned in September 2026 that China's drills increasingly emphasize blockade-style operations. Trump-Xi summitry became central to the dispute: a May 2026 meeting in Beijing was followed by Trump pausing a $14 billion Taiwan arms package and saying he was "not looking to have somebody go independent," with continued Chinese pressure on Washington heading into the September 23 to 25, 2026 summit in Washington, where Taiwan's defense ministry said it hoped procurement would "proceed as planned."
Why it matters
Taiwan's fate is entangled with the global economy in ways few sovereignty disputes are: Taiwan, chiefly TSMC, produces over 90% of the world's most advanced semiconductors, and the Taiwan Strait carries roughly a fifth of global maritime trade by value, including the large majority of Japan's and South Korea's energy imports. A serious disruption, even short of war, could ripple through global GDP by trillions of dollars. Beyond economics, Taiwan functions as a test case for how far Beijing's growing military and economic leverage can reshape the Indo-Pacific order, and for whether US commitments still hold under an administration that has explicitly floated Taiwan arms sales as a negotiating chip with China.
What is verified
Rozana's bar: corroborated by two or more independent sources or official data (Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense publishes daily reports and is treated as a legitimate primary source here).
What remains disputed
Competing narratives
Each party's own framing, in its own terms - not Rozana's paraphrase of what it "really" means.
Frames Taiwan as inalienable Chinese territory whose "reunification" is historically inevitable, and casts its own military and coast guard operations as legitimate sovereign law enforcement rather than "gray zone" tactics, a term it calls "made in USA."
Frames itself as a self-governing democracy never ruled by the PRC, whose 23 million people alone have the right to decide its future, emphasizing deterrence: "never a day that is a good day to invade Taiwan."
Officially maintains a "one China" policy while continuing arms sales, but under the Trump administration has signaled a more transactional approach: "I'm not looking to have somebody go independent. I want China to cool down."
Frames a Taiwan contingency as a potential direct threat to Japan's own security, a sharper break from Japan's traditional strategic ambiguity on the issue.
Some regional leaders publicly lean toward Beijing's sovereignty framing while officially maintaining non-alignment; Malaysia's PM called Taiwan "part of China, period," before partially walking the comment back.
Key actors
| Actor | Role |
|---|---|
| Xi Jinping | PRC President and CCP General Secretary; sets Beijing's "reunification" timeline and doctrine |
| Lai Ching-te | Taiwan's President since May 2024; leads Taiwan's defense build-up and rejects Beijing's sovereignty claims |
| Donald Trump | US President; controls arms-sale approvals to Taiwan, has floated Taiwan as a negotiating chip with Beijing |
| Sanae Takaichi | Japan's Prime Minister; triggered the ongoing 2025-2026 Japan-China diplomatic crisis |
| Taiwan's Ministry of National Defense | Publishes daily PLA activity reports; Taiwan's primary official military data source |
| People's Liberation Army | Conducts incursions, drills and blockade-style exercises around Taiwan |
| TSMC | Produces over 90% of the world's most advanced chips; central to the dispute's economic stakes |
Timeline
Markets & economy
Taiwan sits at the center of the global technology supply chain: TSMC alone manufactures over 90% of the world's most advanced semiconductor chips, and Taiwan's ports handled roughly $517 billion in trade in 2024. The Taiwan Strait carries over a fifth of all global maritime commerce by value, and US allies Japan and South Korea are especially exposed to any disruption, as is regional energy security, since most of their crude oil transits the strait. Markets have shown real sensitivity to tension spikes: Taiwan's tech sector saw a sharp selloff in July 2026 amid a broader Asia chip-stock rout, though that coincided with AI-valuation jitters more broadly, illustrating how hard it is to cleanly separate "tension" reactions from ordinary tech-sector volatility.
Even so, Taiwan's stock market notably set six records in 2025 and is aiming to become the world's sixth-largest by some measures, showing investors have not fully priced in worst-case scenarios despite the drumbeat of military drills.
What to watch
- Whether the September 2026 Washington summit results in a resumed or further-paused $14 billion Taiwan arms package.
- Whether the unresolved Japan-China diplomatic crisis escalates further or begins to de-escalate.
- Whether PLA aircraft activity, down sharply in 2026, resumes its prior tempo, and whether blockade-style drills intensify.
- Taiwan's 2026 local elections and how cross-strait policy debates shape the legislature's willingness to fund the record defense budget.
- Any shift in US declaratory policy explicitly linking Taiwan arms sales to trade or other negotiating leverage with Beijing.
Sources
How this Story Room was built methodology note
The hardest editorial call here was not the military statistics, which are relatively well corroborated by Taiwan's own MND daily reporting cross-checked against independent trackers, but how to describe Taiwan's sovereignty status without smuggling in either government's contested legal claim as settled fact. Beijing's "Taiwan has always been China's" and Taipei's "Taiwan is not part of the PRC" are both, legally, political positions rather than adjudicated facts under international law, since Taiwan's status was left deliberately unresolved by the 1952 San Francisco Peace Treaty. This room consistently labels both capitals' core sovereignty claims as "official claim" rather than fact, while still verifying discrete, checkable sub-claims like defense budgets, drill statistics and diplomatic actions against multiple sources. A related judgment call was resisting the instinct to fold this into the same "active war" template used for other rooms here, and instead foregrounding the counter-intuitive 2026 data point that PLA aircraft incursions actually fell sharply even as rhetoric and reservist mobilizations intensified.
EU–China Trade: A Hybrid-Car Truce, and Tougher Tools Still Coming
Coverage spectrum
How outlets across the political and funding spectrum are covering this story right now - headline, framing note, and a link to the original in every case. As with every room here, political lean and funding & control are rated separately, because a source can be state-funded and still report accurately, or independent and still be unreliable.
What happened
EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič and Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao co-chaired the second EU–China Trade and Investment Consultations in Beijing on October 8–9, 2026. Xinhua reported a list of 16 points of consensus covering trade and investment balance, export controls, intellectual property and WTO reform. The two sides reached an 'understanding' on hybrid-vehicle trade. China agreed to keep facilitating licences for rare earths and permanent magnets bound for the EU through a 'green channel', and to explore tariff cuts on some EU goods. The EU puts those goods, including car parts, olive oil and footwear, at almost €4 billion of current exports, with at least €225 million in duty savings. Beijing secured a technical dialogue on the EU's Foreign Subsidies Regulation and an EU pledge to work on pending dual-use export licences to China. A ministerial video call is set for January 2027 and a third round of consultations for March 2027.
The talks followed a deadline both sides set at their first consultation round in Brussels on June 29, 2026: 'tangible' progress by October. Pressure built in the weeks before Šefčovič's trip. On October 5, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz and French President Emmanuel Macron wrote to Commission President Ursula von der Leyen. They called for a fast-acting instrument modelled on US Section 301 tariffs, plus sector-based investigations. The European Parliament backed a non-binding resolution for a more assertive China policy. Reuters reported that draft conclusions for the European Council summit on October 15–16 ask the Commission to keep talking to Beijing, make full use of trade defence and add new instruments. China's commerce ministry called the Franco-German idea protectionist and promised a 'resolute response' to any discriminatory measures.
Why it matters
The October package is the first concrete result of a dialogue Brussels set up to shrink a deficit worth about €1 billion a day. But it covers a small slice of trade. Bruegel's Alicia García-Herrero called it 'a first step, but no real rebalancing'. More important is the change in Europe's politics. Germany opposed EV duties in 2024. In 2026 it co-signed a call for a tool that one official said could shut China out of the EU market within 24 hours. That moves the debate from case-by-case anti-dumping work toward broader, faster instruments. China still holds leverage through its rare-earth licensing, and its pause on the October 2025 controls ends on November 10. European carmakers, wind-turbine makers and defence firms remain exposed while the EU builds its new tools.
What is verified
Rozana's bar: corroborated by two or more independent sources or official statistics.
What remains disputed
Competing narratives
Each party's own framing, in its own terms - not Rozana's paraphrase of what it "really" means.
Brussels calls the Beijing outcome 'a crucial first step – but only a first step'. Its approach runs on two tracks: dialogue with China, and stronger defences against what it calls market-distorting practices. It points to the €1-billion-a-day deficit and says it will use 'every available tool'.
France and Germany say the current trade-defence toolbox is unfit for purpose. They want a Section 301-style instrument, possibly a reworked Anti-Coercion Instrument that only a qualified majority of member states could block, plus urgent action on Chinese chemicals and PET plastic. For Germany this is a sharp change from its 2024 opposition to EV duties.
Beijing presents the 16 points as proof that institutionalised dialogue works. It stresses non-discrimination and WTO rules, and says any EU 'unilateral' tool would erode trust and hurt European manufacturers and consumers. It has promised a 'resolute response'.
Analysts at Bruegel and elsewhere see the deal as small next to the imbalance. They warn that the biggest risk is EU leaders treating it as a reason to delay tougher measures.
Commentary in outlets such as Brussels Signal argues that Paris and Berlin weakened European industry through energy and climate policy. It casts the new 'China threat' push as late and doubts the Commission can use such a tool well.
Key actors
| Actor | Role |
|---|---|
| Maroš Šefčovič | EU Trade Commissioner. Led the June and October 2026 consultation rounds with Beijing. |
| Wang Wentao | China's Commerce Minister. Co-chairs the consultation mechanism. |
| Ursula von der Leyen | European Commission President. Recipient of the Merz–Macron letter. Warned of a 'second China shock' in her September 2026 State of the Union. |
| Friedrich Merz | German Chancellor. Co-authored the October 5 call for a fast-acting trade instrument. |
| Emmanuel Macron | French President. Co-author of the Franco-German trade-defence blueprint. |
| China's Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) | Runs China's trade remedies (brandy, pork, dairy) and export-control licensing. Has threatened countermeasures against new EU tools. |
| Bernd Lange | Chair of the European Parliament's trade committee. Called the October deadline 'not realistic at all'. |
| Nexperia / Wingtech | Dutch chipmaker and its Chinese parent, at the centre of the 2025 Dutch state intervention, Chinese chip-export curbs and ongoing lawsuits. |
Timeline
Markets & economy
Cars are where the fight is now. After the 2024 EV duties, Chinese brands shifted to hybrids, which the duties do not cover. A Financial Times report cited by CnEVPost says monthly EU imports of Chinese hybrids rose from about 3,800 units in October 2024 to around 50,000 in July 2026. Carmakers' association ACEA says Chinese brands held 14% of the EU hybrid market and 25% of plug-in hybrids in the first half of 2026, up from 2% in 2024. Meanwhile the EV price-undertaking route, first used for VW's China-built CUPRA Tavascan, ties market access to minimum prices, volume limits and EU investment.
In industrial inputs, the new steel regime and its 'melt and pour' origin rules raise costs for steel buyers and close off re-routing through third countries. The EU's restrictions on Chinese solar inverters in EU-funded projects affect a market where about 70% of inverters come from Chinese makers, a step Beijing wants revisited. Rare-earth and magnet supply is the main risk for EU automotive, wind and defence firms until it is clear what happens to China's paused October 2025 controls after November 10.
What to watch
- November 10, 2026: whether China extends, narrows or reinstates its paused October 2025 rare-earth export controls.
- How the hybrid understanding is put into practice. Watch whether an EU-wide, country-neutral import ceiling (reported at 350,000 a year) is adopted, and whether China invokes its WTO rights.
- The Commission's diversification and trade-defence package, due by the end of 2026 and based on the Franco-German blueprint, including any change to Anti-Coercion Instrument voting.
- Follow-up on the 16 points: the January 2027 ministerial video call and the third consultation round in March 2027.
- Nexperia: Wingtech's lawsuits and compensation claims against the Dutch state and Nexperia's European entities, and the risk to auto chip supply.
Sources
How this Story Room was built methodology note
The hardest call was how to describe the hybrid-car deal. Brussels says it could cut China's hybrid exports 'by more than half'. Beijing says it allows them to grow from 2025 levels. Both claims come from officials, and neither side has published the mechanism or the baseline. We report both statements with attribution and note that they may rest on different baselines (a four-year projection versus 2025 actual volumes). We label the widely reported 350,000-a-year ceiling as reported rather than confirmed. Where Eurostat data exist, we use them over other figures. EUobserver's 'record' September deficit is treated as provisional because it probably comes from Chinese customs data. State-media items are included to show Beijing's framing, not as independent confirmation of facts.
Venezuela after Maduro: an interim government, a US oil pact, and no election date
Coverage spectrum
How outlets across the political and funding spectrum are covering this story right now - headline, framing note, and a link to the original in every case. As with every room here, political lean and funding & control are rated separately, because a source can be state-funded and still report accurately, or independent and still be unreliable.
What happened
On January 3, 2026, a US military operation struck targets in Caracas and captured Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, who were flown to New York to face narco-terrorism, cocaine-importation and weapons charges. The operation followed a US naval buildup in the Caribbean from August 2025 and a campaign of lethal strikes on alleged drug boats that began in September 2025. Venezuela's Supreme Tribunal ordered Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez to assume the presidency, and she was sworn in as acting president on January 5. President Trump backed her rather than opposition leader María Corina Machado, whose camp says its candidate Edmundo González won the disputed July 2024 election.
Since then, Rodríguez has moved closer to Washington: diplomatic relations were restored, the US embassy reopened in March, sanctions on oil dealings were progressively loosened through Treasury general licences, and an amnesty law was signed in February. On August 28 Trump announced a deal covering 65 billion barrels of reserves; Chevron later said it would invest more than $7 billion to double output from its joint ventures. US-backed talks with the 2015 National Assembly opposition bloc began on August 6 and entered a third round on October 14. In New York, prosecutors added a torture-conspiracy charge on October 8, to which Maduro and Flores pleaded not guilty on October 15.
Why it matters
Venezuela holds the world's largest proven oil reserves and was the source of one of the largest displacement crises globally, with roughly 7.9 million citizens abroad. The arrangement now in place, with chavismo still governing under US tutelage, opens the oil sector to foreign capital while leaving the core democratic question from 2024 unresolved. Whether the Caracas talks produce a new electoral council and a credible election date will determine if the post-Maduro period becomes a democratic transition or a managed continuity of the same party in power. The outcome also tests a US policy that removed a head of state by force and is now trading sanctions relief and recognition for oil access and gradual reforms.
What is verified
Rozana's bar: corroborated by two or more independent sources or official statistics.
What remains disputed
Competing narratives
Each party's own framing, in its own terms - not Rozana's paraphrase of what it "really" means.
Presents the January operation as law enforcement against a narco-trafficking regime, describes the Caracas talks as 'concrete progress' in a three-phase plan of stabilisation, recovery and transition, and calls the oil pact 'the biggest oil deal in world history.'
Stresses sovereignty and reconstruction, saying Venezuela is 'being reborn' and keeps ownership of its oil. It promises elections on a Venezuelan timetable and treats prisoner releases as separate from the negotiations.
Calls the Rodríguez government illegitimate, says 'the enemies of the United States in Venezuela are today in Miraflores,' demands elections and a truth commission, and says Washington has excluded her from talks. She has also said she would respect oil contracts that comply with Venezuelan law.
Continue to call Maduro and Flores 'kidnapped' and frame each new US charge as a judicial manoeuvre, while largely avoiding criticism of Rodríguez's rapprochement with Washington.
Frame the US role as resource grabbing and neo-colonialism, giving prominence to Trump's claims of 'takeover' of Venezuelan oil and to Rodríguez's sovereignty assurances.
Key actors
| Actor | Role |
|---|---|
| Delcy Rodríguez | Acting president since Jan 5, 2026; Maduro's former vice-president, now negotiating with Washington |
| Nicolás Maduro | Former president, held in New York; has pleaded not guilty to narco-terrorism, drug, weapons and torture-conspiracy charges |
| María Corina Machado | Opposition leader and 2025 Nobel Peace laureate; abroad and seeking to return |
| Edmundo González Urrutia | 2024 opposition candidate whom opposition tally sheets show as the winner; went into exile in Spain in Sep 2024 |
| Jorge Rodríguez | National Assembly president and head of the government delegation in the talks |
| Dinorah Figuera | Leader of the 2015 National Assembly bloc heading the opposition delegation; backed publicly by Marco Rubio |
| Donald Trump / Marco Rubio | US president and secretary of state who ordered the operation, recognised Rodríguez and brokered the oil deal |
| Foro Penal | Venezuelan human rights NGO whose prisoner counts are the main independent benchmark |
Timeline
Markets & economy
Oil is the main channel. Venezuela produces roughly 1.1 to 1.2 million barrels a day, about 1% of world supply, despite reserves of more than 300 billion barrels. Since March, OFAC General License 52 has broadly authorised established US entities to deal with PDVSA, although restrictions remain on Venezuelan debt, CITGO equity and counterparties tied to Russia, Iran, Cuba and China. Chevron's plan to double its joint-venture output to about 600,000 b/d is the clearest commitment so far. Exxon says its position has not changed, and analysts warn that rebuilding the sector will take years and tens of billions of dollars.
The deal comes as US gasoline averaged about $4.12 a gallon in early September, with the Iran war pushing prices up, and the US Treasury argues that more Venezuelan supply will lower prices. On the financial side, the interim government launched a formal external debt restructuring in May, and Rodríguez discussed sovereign debt with Trump in September. Creditors' recoveries depend on sanctions on government and PDVSA debt being eased, which has not yet happened.
What to watch
- Whether the third round of talks begins appointing a new National Electoral Council, the opposition's stated precondition for setting an election date.
- Whether Machado manages to return to Venezuela, and how authorities and the US respond if she does.
- Rulings on Maduro's and Flores's immunity-based motions to dismiss before the June 2027 trial.
- Foro Penal's next political-prisoner counts, and whether laws on 'hate' and terrorism are repealed or only amended.
- The legal structure of the 65-billion-barrel oil deal and any further OFAC licences touching debt or CITGO.
Sources
How this Story Room was built methodology note
The hardest call was how to describe who governs Venezuela and on what authority. Delcy Rodríguez was installed by a Supreme Tribunal ruling, recognised by Washington and is now negotiating with part of the opposition. Yet her mandate derives from a 2024 election that independent observers did not consider democratic and whose official results were never published at table level. We call her 'acting' or 'interim' president, the term used by wire services, without implying democratic legitimacy, and we keep the 2024 result in the disputed column. We present the US indictment's allegations strictly as charges. Where sources disagree on hard numbers, we show both and attribute them: the oil deal's 25-year term (per Rodríguez) versus 100-year rights (reported by AP), and political-prisoner counts that change week to week. Migration figures are rounded estimates from different reference dates.
Country lens
One country, three ways to read it.
Rozana's reporting stays the same. These tabs show how outside voices frame this country's own story, in their own words.
Markets
Crypto and major currency pairs below pull from live public feeds and refresh every 15 seconds. Equity indices and commodities now attempt a live pull too, refreshing roughly every 45 seconds - when a market's live feed can't be reached from your browser, that one tile falls back to the most recent verified level instead of guessing, and is labeled accordingly rather than averaged into a fake "now."
How the week's news reads for the companies that matter
News coverage of 15 companies tied to Rozana's stories and the wider market, split into what's likely to help each one and what's likely to hurt it.
Rozana Tracker · now live
Every market, every conflict, every headline.One live screen.
A command center from Rozana, with markets, breaking news, a world monitor and one-click country briefs side by side. No account, no key: just open it and watch the world move.
Markets that move with the news
Crypto, forex and major indices on one board, with a live wire of headlines running underneath. Switch between Beginner, Trader and Professional views.
See what's spiking before it trends
World headlines from public feeds, plus keyword spikes that flag terms surging well above their own recent average.
A control-room map of the planet
Conflicts and emergencies, earthquakes and disasters, sanctions regimes, nuclear-armed states and shipping chokepoints, all layered on one map.
One country, one brief
Pick any country to see its conflict status, sanctions picture and latest headlines side by side. Press ⌘K to search everything at once.
Live now
Rozana Tracker is live.
Markets, conflicts, headlines and one-click country briefs on one live screen. Free, no account needed.
Open Rozana Tracker
A wider perspective on the news.
Rozana follows the world's biggest stories and lays them out so you can see what is known, what is still disputed, and how every side is telling it.
Most news asks you to trust one voice. Rozana does it differently: verified facts are kept apart from disputed claims, each side's argument appears in its own words, and every story shows where its information comes from.
The aim is simple. Give readers the full picture, make the uncertainty visible, and leave the conclusions to them.
How Rozana works
Verified and disputed, kept apart
A claim is marked verified only when two or more independent sources or official data back it up. Everything else stays in the disputed column, clearly labelled.
Every side of the spectrum
Each story shows how outlets across the political spectrum cover it. Political lean and funding are rated separately, because a source can be state-funded and accurate, or independent and unreliable.
Each side in its own words
Governments, parties and groups get their framing presented as they put it, not as a paraphrase of what they "really" mean.
We show our work
Every Story Room links its sources and ends with a methodology note explaining the hardest judgment call behind it.
What we make
How to read the labels
Backed by two or more independent sources or official data.
Contested, unconfirmed, or the sources disagree. Shown so you know it's out there, not as fact.
A government's or party's own position, reported as their claim rather than as settled fact.
Contact us
Spotted a mistake, have a tip, or want to work together? Send a message and we'll get back to you.
- Corrections: tell us what's wrong and where
- News tips and sources
- Partnerships and press
- Feedback and ideas
Support Rozana
Rozana is free to read, with no account needed. Following along and chipping in helps keep it independent.
Privacy Policy
- You can read Rozana without an account, and we don't ask for your name or email to do so.
- We don't use advertising trackers, sell your information or build profiles about you.
- If you contact us, we use what you send only to reply and keep it no longer than we need.
- Some services we rely on (hosting, fonts, market data, images from news outlets) see basic technical data such as your IP address when your browser loads them.
01Who we are
Rozana ("Rozana", "we", "us") publishes the Rozana news website, including its Story Rooms, Markets, Sentiment and About pages, and the Rozana Tracker at rozanai.ca (together, the "Services"). Rozana is based in Ontario, Canada. This policy explains what personal information we handle when you use the Services and how we protect it, in line with Canada's Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).
Questions about privacy can be sent to our privacy contact at support@rozanai.ca.
02What we collect
Information you give us
- Messages you send us. If you use the contact form or email us, we receive your name, your email address, the topic you choose and anything you write.
- Donations. If you donate, the payment is handled by a third-party payment provider. We may receive your name, email address, the amount and the date, but we never receive your full card or bank details.
Information collected automatically
- Technical data. Like any website, the servers that deliver Rozana receive standard technical data such as your IP address, browser type, device type, the pages requested and the time of the request. Our hosting provider keeps these logs for security and to keep the site running.
- A saved preference on your device. The Sentiment page remembers which company you last viewed using your browser's local storage. This stays on your device and is never sent to us.
We do not use analytics tools, advertising networks, social media tracking pixels or fingerprinting, and we don't collect sensitive information such as health, financial or biometric data.
03How we use information
- To reply to your messages, review corrections and follow up on news tips or partnership requests.
- To process and acknowledge donations and to keep records we are legally required to keep.
- To run, secure and improve the Services, including preventing spam, abuse and attacks.
- To comply with the law and respond to lawful requests from authorities.
We rely on your consent for these purposes, which you give by contacting us, donating or using the Services. You can withdraw your consent at any time, subject to legal or contractual limits, by contacting us. We do not sell, rent or trade personal information, and we do not use it for advertising.
04Third parties
To deliver the Services, your browser connects directly to some third parties. Each receives basic technical data (such as your IP address) and handles it under its own privacy policy.
| Service | Why |
|---|---|
| Website hosting (Cloudflare; preview copies hosted on Claude by Anthropic) | Delivers and protects the website and keeps security logs. |
| Google Fonts | Loads the typefaces the site uses. |
| Market data providers (such as CoinGecko, Frankfurter and Yahoo Finance) | Your browser may request live prices for the Markets page. |
| News outlets and image hosts | Some headlines show thumbnail images loaded from the original publisher. |
| Rozana Tracker (rozanai.ca) | Shown on or linked from the Tracker page; it has its own data sources. |
| Your email provider; Web3Forms, if enabled | Delivers messages you send through the contact form. |
| Payment provider | Processes donations. |
| LinkedIn and X | Only if you click our links to follow Rozana there. |
We may also disclose information if required by law, to protect the rights, safety or property of Rozana or others, or as part of a merger, sale or reorganization of Rozana, in which case this policy will continue to apply.
05Cookies and local storage
Rozana itself does not set cookies. The only thing the site stores on your device is your last-viewed company on the Sentiment page, kept in your browser's local storage. You can clear it at any time through your browser settings. Our hosting provider may set strictly necessary security cookies (for example, to block malicious traffic).
06How long we keep information
We keep messages for as long as needed to respond and follow up, and generally no longer than 24 months, unless a longer period is needed for a correction record, a legal claim or a legal obligation. Donation records are kept as long as required by Canadian tax and accounting rules. Server logs are kept by our hosting provider for a limited period under its own policies.
07Your rights
Under PIPEDA you can ask to access the personal information we hold about you, ask us to correct it if it's inaccurate, and withdraw your consent to our use of it. You can also ask us to delete it where we are not required to keep it. Email support@rozanai.ca and we will respond within 30 days. We may need to confirm your identity first.
If you are not satisfied with our response, you can complain to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. If you live outside Canada, you may also have rights under your local law, and we will honour reasonable requests.
08Security
We protect information with safeguards suited to its sensitivity, including encrypted (HTTPS) connections, security headers, limited access to messages and no storage of passwords or payment details. No method of transmission or storage is completely secure, so we cannot guarantee absolute security. If a breach creates a real risk of significant harm, we will notify affected people and the Privacy Commissioner as the law requires.
09Children
The Services are intended for a general adult audience and cover war and conflict. They are not directed to children under 13, and we do not knowingly collect personal information from them. If you believe a child has sent us information, contact us and we will delete it.
10International transfers
Some of the providers listed above may process information outside Canada, including in the United States. Information processed elsewhere is subject to the laws of that country and may be accessible to its authorities. We choose reputable providers that protect information in line with this policy.
11Changes to this policy
We may update this policy from time to time. We'll change the "Last updated" date above and, for significant changes, post a notice on the site. Using the Services after an update means you accept the revised policy.
12Contact
Rozana, Ontario, Canada · support@rozanai.ca · or use the contact form.
Terms & Conditions
- Rozana is free to read. Use it for personal, non-commercial purposes.
- Everything here is general information, not financial, investment, legal or safety advice.
- We work hard to be accurate and label what's disputed, but news changes and mistakes happen. Tell us and we'll correct them.
- Links and data from other websites belong to those sites, and we aren't responsible for them.
01Agreement
These Terms & Conditions ("Terms") govern your use of the Rozana website and the Rozana Tracker at rozanai.ca (the "Services"), operated by Rozana ("we", "us"). By using the Services you agree to these Terms and to our Privacy Policy. If you don't agree, please don't use the Services.
02Using Rozana
The Services are free and need no account. You may read, share links to and quote short extracts from Rozana for personal, educational or journalistic purposes, with credit to "Rozana" and a link back. You may not copy whole Story Rooms or republish our content for commercial purposes without our written permission. We may change, suspend or discontinue any part of the Services at any time without notice.
03Not financial, legal or safety advice
Everything on the Services, including Story Rooms, the Markets page, market tickers, the Sentiment page and the Rozana Tracker, is general information only. It is not financial, investment, trading, tax, legal, medical or travel-safety advice, and it is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security, currency, commodity or crypto-asset. Market figures may be delayed, approximate or out of date, are dated on each tile, and may fall back to an earlier verified snapshot when live feeds are unavailable. Sentiment labels are automated and can be wrong. Always check primary sources and consult a qualified professional before making decisions.
04Accuracy and corrections
Rozana labels claims as Verified, Disputed or Official claim according to the standards described on our About page. These labels reflect our editorial judgment at the time of writing, based on the sources available then. News, especially about war and crisis, changes quickly, and information may become outdated or turn out to be wrong. Political-lean and funding ratings of outlets come from independent trackers or our own assessment and are opinions, not statements of fact about any outlet. If you spot an error, contact us. We review all correction requests and fix confirmed errors.
05Content and intellectual property
The Rozana name, logo, site design, original text, summaries, analyses and compilations are owned by Rozana and protected by copyright and trademark law. Headlines, quotes and images from other publishers remain the property of their owners. They are shown in short form with attribution and links to the original for news reporting, commentary and review. Satellite and Earth imagery is from NASA and is in the public domain. Open-source software used on the site remains under its own licences. If you believe content on Rozana infringes your rights, contact us with details and we will review it promptly.
06Third-party links and services
The Services link to and display content from news outlets, data providers, social networks, payment providers and other websites that we don't control. We are not responsible for their content, accuracy, availability or privacy practices, and a link is not an endorsement. Your use of those sites is governed by their own terms.
07Acceptable use
You agree not to:
- break any law, or use the Services to harass, threaten, defame or harm anyone;
- try to gain unauthorized access to, disrupt, overload or attack the Services, our hosting or any connected system, or bypass security measures;
- scrape, crawl or bulk-download the Services by automated means beyond ordinary search-engine indexing, or use our content to train machine-learning models, without our written permission;
- introduce malware, spam or misleading content, or impersonate Rozana or anyone else;
- misrepresent our content, or remove its labels or attribution in a way that changes its meaning.
08Messages, tips and submissions
If you send us a correction, tip, idea or other submission, you confirm that you have the right to share it. You also give Rozana a non-exclusive, royalty-free, worldwide licence to use it for reporting, corrections and improving the Services, without any obligation to you. We will not publish your name or contact details without your permission. Do not send us confidential information you are not entitled to share.
09Donations
Donations are voluntary gifts to support Rozana's work. They do not buy any goods, services, access or editorial influence, and they are non-refundable except where the law requires otherwise or in the case of a clear payment error reported within 14 days. Rozana is not a registered charity, so donations are not tax-deductible unless we state otherwise. Payments are processed by a third-party provider under its own terms.
10Disclaimers
The Services are provided "as is" and "as available", without warranties of any kind, express or implied, including warranties of accuracy, completeness, timeliness, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose and non-infringement, to the fullest extent permitted by law. We do not guarantee that the Services will be uninterrupted, error-free or free of harmful components.
11Limitation of liability
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Rozana and the people who run it will not be liable for any indirect, incidental, special, consequential or punitive damages, or for any loss of profits, revenue, data or investment value, arising from your use of, or inability to use, the Services or any content on them, including decisions you make based on that content. Our total liability for any claim relating to the Services is limited to the greater of the amount you donated to Rozana in the 12 months before the claim or CAD $100.
Some jurisdictions do not allow certain exclusions or limits, so some of the above may not apply to you. Nothing in these Terms limits rights you have that cannot be waived by law.
12Indemnity
You agree to indemnify and hold Rozana harmless from claims, losses and costs (including reasonable legal fees) arising from your breach of these Terms or your misuse of the Services.
13Changes to these Terms
We may update these Terms from time to time. We'll change the "Last updated" date above and, for significant changes, post a notice on the site. Continuing to use the Services after an update means you accept the revised Terms.
14Governing law
These Terms are governed by the laws of the Province of Ontario and the federal laws of Canada that apply there. Any dispute will be resolved in the courts of Ontario, and you agree to their jurisdiction. If any part of these Terms is found unenforceable, the rest remains in effect. Our failure to enforce a provision is not a waiver. These Terms and our Privacy Policy are the entire agreement between you and Rozana about the Services.
15Contact
Rozana, Ontario, Canada · support@rozanai.ca · or use the contact form.
Built for people, free for everyone.
Rozana has no paywall, no ads and no sign-up. If it helps you understand the world a little better, you're welcome to chip in. Every donation, big or small, keeps it going.
Why we do this
We started Rozana because following the news shouldn't mean picking a side before you know the facts. Too often, coverage of wars and crises is loud, one-sided or locked behind a paywall. People deserve better: the full picture, clearly labelled, free to read.
So that's what we do. We separate what's verified from what's disputed, show how every side tells the story, and link every source so you can check it yourself. We do it for the people reading, not for advertisers or anyone with an agenda.
Rozana will stay free to read. If you'd like to help keep it that way, feel free to donate. And if you can't, that's completely okay. Reading, sharing and telling us when we get something wrong helps just as much.
Where your donation goes
Research time
Checking sources, separating fact from claim and writing each Story Room takes hours of careful work.
New Story Rooms
Covering more of the world's crises, and keeping the existing rooms up to date as stories change.
Data and hosting
Keeping the site fast, secure and online, and paying for the news and market data behind it.
Rozana Tracker
Building the live tracker of markets, conflicts and headlines, free for everyone to use.
Other ways to help
Thank you for reading Rozana.
Whether you donate, share or just read, you're part of why this exists.