Elbahrain.net The operation marked the first time foreign troops entered Russian territory since World War II – embarrassing the Kremlin and proving to Kyiv’s backers and the rest of the world that Ukraine’s military was not perpetually on the back foot.

Some nine weeks later, Ukraine’s advance has stalled, and neither side has made major gains or counterattacks in recent days.

The endgame is unclear. Analysts believe Kyiv is trying to use its initial momentum for a morale boost and a potential bargaining chip, while Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to downplay the entire incursion and limit the resources Russia’s war machine devotes to countering it.

What’s the latest on the ground?
Ukraine has maintained a foothold in Kursk of about 786 square kilometers (300 square miles), according to the latest assessment by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a think tank in Washington, DC.

“Russian advances are mostly happening on the flanks of our foothold,” a commander of a Ukrainian battalion inside Kursk, Dmytro – who uses the call sign “Kholod,” meaning cold – told CNN on Wednesday. “They keep trying to advance but the gains are incremental, somewhere they manage to take a street in the village. But it goes both ways – we also counterattack and push them back.”

Ukraine’s main foothold is around the Russian town of Sudzha and its military is trying to establish a second foothold around Veseloe village. Ukraine has not disclosed how many troops it has sent to the region.

Russia has deployed a reasonably large number of troops – estimated at 40,000 – to defend and counterattack in Kursk, but analyst Mark Galeotti described the initial force as “built from wherever they can find,” with Russia using conscripts and reservists at the outset of the incursion.

“This is equivalent to sort of scramping around your sofa cushions to find some small change,” Galeotti, a senior associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), a British think tank, told CNN.

Moscow has since deployed more experienced forces, but not as many resources as Russian civilians in Kursk would perhaps want.

“Over time, there is a degree to which the Kursk operation has become normalized,” Galeotti said. “We shouldn’t assume that Russians have just come to accept it… I think Putin has managed to postpone judgment, but I don’t think it’s been completely waived.”

Why hasn’t Russia’s response been stronger?

Although the incursion was initially a shock to both the government and ordinary Russians, “the Kremlin has played this down,” according to John Lough, an associate fellow at Chatham House’s Russia and Eurasia Program.

Putin’s government has characterized it as a “raid” and even downplayed their counterattack as a “counterterrorism mission.”

One Russian military blogger put the normalization into stark words, saying: “Most of Russia has already got used to the fighting near Kursk… Those who have nothing to do with the Kursk region are rather sluggishly interested in what is happening.”

Frontlines are moving only slightly, but the fighting is reportedly fierce, with Russian forces deploying numerous drones, barrel artillery and aerial bombers, according to the Ukrainian commander.

“They don’t hesitate to drop a bomb on a tree line if they assume we have troops there,” Ukrainian battalion commander “Kholod” said. He claims Russia has now sent a powerful group of troops and combat brigades to where his unit is fighting in Kursk, and argued the Russian counterattack was staved off by Ukraine’s drone and mine attacks.

What has Ukraine achieved?
The incursion into Kursk likely had multiple goals, analysts say, including giving Ukraine a narrative win.

“Their goal was to demonstrate to Ukraine’s Western allies that the Russians are vulnerable and that there are limits to their ability to deploy combat power,” said Lough, adding that the incursion also highlighted how “Russia’s red lines are rhetorical.”

It also provided a morale boost for Ukrainians. Several soldiers who spoke to CNN in September said that despite casualties and difficult operations, giving Russia a taste of its own medicine was worth the fight.

Yet Ukraine’s goal of diverting troops from the eastern frontline to Kursk has so far failed.

Kursk could still be a bargaining chip for negotiations in the future, though, experts said.

“By taking this territory, they immediately ruled out the possibility of both the Russians and the Western allies saying, ‘Now it’s time to stop. Let’s have a ceasefire,’” Lough said.

Focus still on eastern Ukraine
Meanwhile, the primary focus of the war remains on the frontlines in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region, where its troops are fighting to retain control of the strategic city of Pokrovsk.

Rather than focus resources on liberating their own territory, the Russian military has expanded its assaults on multiple fronts in Ukraine, including in key areas of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia.

“It seems to be a very high priority for the Kremlin to advance as far as possible in Donbas, regardless of the losses,” Lough added. “There is a sort of window that is about to close, because you get to this time of year when the roads turn to mud.”

Russia’s daily attacks on Ukraine continued Thursday, with several people killed in the regions of Odesa, Kherson and Donetsk.

Elbahrain.net Iran’s government is extremely nervous and has been engaging in urgent diplomatic efforts with countries in the Middle East to gauge whether they can reduce the scale of Israel’s response to its missile attack earlier this month and – if that fails – help protect Tehran, sources familiar with the matter told CNN.

Iran’s anxiety stems from uncertainty about whether the US can convince Israel not to strike Iranian nuclear sites and oil facilities, and the fact that its most important proxy militia in the region, Hezbollah, has been significantly weakened by Israeli military operations in recent weeks, the sources said.

The US has been consulting with Israel on how it plans to respond to Iran’s October 1 attack, and US officials have made clear they do not want Israel to target Iranian nuclear sites or oil fields. US President Joe Biden spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday, their first conversation in almost two months, telling him Israel’s retaliation should be “proportional.”

The US’ Gulf allies, including the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Qatar, have also expressed concern to the US about a potential attack on Iranian oil facilities, which could create negative economic and environmental impacts for the entire region, an Arab diplomat told CNN.

The Biden administration is deeply worried that the ongoing tit-for-tat attacks between Iran and Israel, which began earlier this year after Israel struck what Iran said was its consulate building in Damascus, could spiral into a major regional war that pulls the US in, too.

A major part of the fears is that the US’ influence with Israel has appeared to be steadily waning over the last year. Similarly to its operations in Gaza, Israel has increasingly disregarded the US’ calls for more restraint in Lebanon, where Israel’s intense bombing campaign and ground offensive has killed over 1,400 people since late last month.

Israel also did not consult with the US before conducting a massive attack that exploded thousands of pagers and walkie-talkies used by Hezbollah operatives last month, or before assassinating Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut and upending a delicate ceasefire proposal that had been put forward by the US and France less than 48 hours earlier.

Israel’s security cabinet has not yet reached a decision on how to proceed, an Israeli official told CNN on Friday. And while the gap between the US and Israeli positions is narrowing, it may not remain that way, a US official said.

“We can’t actually know whether they voted or not,” a senior administration official said of the Israeli cabinet’s discussions, expressing skepticism over the level of transparency about what Israel is sharing with the US. The official suggested they can’t “put too much stock in the machinations” of the Israeli government.

As of last week, Israel had not given any assurances that it would not target Iran’s nuclear facilities, CNN reported.

Israel has for decades been planning attacks on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, and just two years ago simulated striking them in a military exercise. Israel is also suspected of carrying out assassinations against Iranian nuclear scientists in recent years, and Iran’s nuclear facilities have come under siege from cyberattacks, likely from Israel—the most famous being the Stuxnet virus, which was able to penetrate Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility.

‘Our strike will be powerful’
Israel’s Defense Minister Yoav Gallant issued a strong warning to Iran about his country’s response on Wednesday.

“Our strike will be powerful, precise, and above all – surprising. They will not understand what happened and how it happened,” Gallant said.

The Gulf states, broadly, are eager to stay on the sidelines of the conflict, the Arab diplomat said. While Iran has publicly warned that any parties seen as aiding Israel will be treated as aggressors, it is also unlikely that Iran’s neighbors would explicitly come to Tehran’s defense in the event of an Israeli attack.

But Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar have told both the US and Iran that they will not allow Israel to use their airspace to strike Iran, the Arab diplomat and another source familiar with the matter told CNN. Jordan also will protect its airspace from any unauthorized intrusion, regardless of the origin, a Jordanian official said.

The US does not believe that Iran wants to become entangled in a full-scale war with Israel, and Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told Al Jazeera this week that Netanyahu “is the only one who wants a war and to set the region on fire to stay in power.”

But the US has still urged Tehran, through backchannels, to calibrate its response if Israel attacks, an official said.

While Qatar regularly speaks to the Iranians and relays back to the US what they say, the US official said that ultimately “we just do not know what [Iran] will do.” Key voices within Iran will have different ideas about if and how to respond to Israel, but that will depend on the scale and scope of the highly anticipated Israeli move, another US official said.

This official said that messaging from Iran has been consistent both publicly and privately since Tehran launched its barrage of missiles at Israel earlier this month and there has not been a significant change in messaging.

Iran has been particularly interested in getting help from Saudi Arabia in preventing an Israeli attack and using their influence with Washington to help find a solution to the crisis, the Arab diplomat told CNN.

Officials from each country have met three times in less than a month, and Araghchi traveled to Saudi Arabia on Wednesday to “consult on regional developments” and to “try to stop the crimes of the Zionist regime in Lebanon and Gaza,” he told local media.

The world is watching Israel’s every move as it contemplates how to respond. But at least until Saturday at sundown, Israel will be at a standstill to mark Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement and the holiest day of the year in Judaism. And though it’s not impossible Israel might launch action, shops, restaurants and other services will be closed, public transport will not be operating and even the country’s main airport — the Ben Gurion in Tel Aviv — will be shut down.

Elbahrain.net During his journey to the United States more than a century ago, British theatrical impresario Richard D’Oyly Carte was so impressed by the new American hotels he stayed in that he decided to return home and open Britain’s first purpose-built luxury hotel in 1889 – the Savoy.

Like every high-end hotel, it needed to have a solid food and beverage offering. Enter, the American Bar. Deliberately designed for US visitors, over the decades it attracted such luminaries as Ernest Hemingway and Marilyn Monroe.

Nowadays, thanks to the many culinary awards, guidebooks and TV shows out there, experiencing local cuisine is an essential part if not the entire focus of any travel experience. But, like the patrons of the American Bar before us, seeking out home comforts when abroad is still something we all do. And there’s a good reason.

“The Savoy itself was the first luxury hotel to open in London, designed to appeal to discerning American travelers,” says Andrea Di Chiara, bar manager of the now-famous venue, which remains London’s longest-surviving cocktail bar and was named the world’s best bar in 2017.

“The American Bar opened as an extension of that ideology, and continues to draw an international crowd.”

It shouldn’t be a surprise that venues both at the high and low ends of the travel scene are cashing in on the homesick or those seeking familiar flavors.

The rise of culinary travel
In a culinary tourism market projected to be worth over $1.1 trillion in 2024, more than 34% of tourists surveyed in 2022 said they chose destinations inspired by the cuisine they liked, according to a recent report by Future Market Insights.

Those numbers are expected to keep climbing, predicted to reach $5.6 trillion in 2034, a whopping 17.1% compound growth rate per year.

This phenomenal growth might be positive news for those in the dining industry, but it also means that a person is more likely to be judged for food neophobia – the fear of trying new foods – or side-eyed for opting for something they could find back home.

At a recent dinner in Hong Kong, one of my companions admitted that all he wanted on his first day in Paris was a steaming bowl of noodle soup to soothe his “Asian stomach.”

“Why would you even…?”

The idea was so unfathomable that another fellow diner couldn’t even finish his question. A few moments later, even he admitted, “Maybe I’d have an occasional craving for McDonald’s.”

Stories like this are far from rare, though many of us hate to admit it.

Most of us have a friend who gets teased for packing Diet Coke in their suitcase or admits to preferring Starbucks to a local coffee shop when traveling. My British colleague brings Yorkshire teabags with him when he heads abroad. My own mother, who lives in Hong Kong, travels with a mini rice cooker and a bag of rice “for emergencies.” When I lived in London, I missed the taste of Hong Kong bubble waffles so much I opened up a market stall.

We are all essentially seeking the same thing – a taste of familiarity in a foreign land – and none of us should be mocked, according to industry experts and scientists who say the decision to try or not try unfamiliar local dishes is intrinsically programmed within us.

The science behind not trying new foods
A 2019 joint study carried out by professors in the US found that cultural familiarity, motivational factors and personality traits influence tourists’ food decisions more than cost and convenience.

“Travelers seemed more driven by comfort and safety,” says Angel Gonzalez, an associate professor at California State University, Monterey Bay who co-authored the study.

“Those who are more cautious or unfamiliar with local cuisine tend to lean towards familiar food.”

Interestingly, Americans of Hispanic ethnicity are more inclined to try local foods, he says.

“This may relate to broader familiarity with diverse food experiences,” Gonzalez speculates, while reminding us that the research only offers a limited snapshot of food behaviors. The study was based on interviews with 330 people in the US, all questioned on how likely they’d be to try local foods when traveling.

“While the findings are interesting, we’d need a more extensive study to offer a deeper and more nuanced understanding of why travelers make certain food choices abroad,” he notes.

In the absence of a more definitive explanation, Judson Brewer, a neuroscientist and behavioral professor at Brown University, invites us to look inward.

He tells CNN there are two key processes our brains go through when it comes to food choices.

“Travel is, or can be, a trade-off between the excitement of discovering new things and going to what we know,” says Brewer, who wrote a book on eating behaviors called “Hunger Habit.”

“Do we try a new food or eat at the familiar fast food franchise that happens to be on the corner?”

In these situations, he says our orbitofrontal cortex, which is in charge of our decision-making processes, tries to assess which option is more rewarding for survival.

Dubbed the explore vs exploit dilemma, this instinct is rooted in our hunting and gathering ancestry – when humans had to decide whether to find a new food source or forage what was in front of them before resources ran out.

In the case of traveling, he says our planning brain might decide that it’s safer to stick with food we know to avoid potential physical discomfort.

“Our brains don’t like uncertainty, and travel (especially to new places) can be scary,” says Brewer.

These uncertainties can trigger anxiety, leading to another process in our brains.

“As kids, we learn to connect food with mood and emotion. We learn to associate food with comfort – hence the term ‘comfort food,’” Brewer says.

“The psychological comfort provided by familiar foods is akin to a sense of ‘home.’”

Food has increasingly become a way to cope with our feelings, thanks to modern marketing campaigns and pop culture. Remember when a broken-hearted Bridget Jones dug into a tub of ice cream in the movie?

When emotions arise, the planning part of our brain goes offline and the survival part takes the wheel.

To numb the pain, it encourages us to find consolation in food – even when we aren’t hungry – releasing dopamine (a feel-good hormone) as a reward and reinforcing the habit of choosing familiarity.

“Familiar tastes can serve as an anchor that provides psychological comfort and security, making us feel less adrift in a new environment,” says Brewer.

Elbahrain.net Exactly 16 years ago, an impossibly young-looking Barack Obama was barnstorming through Ohio on a bus tour, electrifying huge crowds and emphatically closing the deal on his thumping 2008 election victory.

On another October night on Thursday, the 63-year-old ex-president was back on stage, with a vast American flag for a backdrop, trying to do for Kamala Harris what she’s so far struggled to do herself — put away the 2024 election.

The snowy haired Obama had swapped Ohio, which ceased to be a closely contested presidential state as soon as he left the White House, for this year’s potentially decisive state, Pennsylvania. That the hope and change prophet of 2008 is still his party’s most effective political orator four presidential elections later is an indictment of Democrats. But the urgency of his message in Pittsburgh told a more immediate story — his nemesis Donald Trump may be poised for an Oval Office return.

when Bill Clinton took Obama’s woolly reelection pitch and created a rationale for voters weary of economic pain to send him back to the White House.

Obama on Thursday painted a searing picture of Trump as a malicious, ridiculous and incompetent menace, while trying to weave a rhetorical case for voters who are feeling economically insecure to vote for Harris, who is part of an incumbent administration, nonetheless.

“I am the hopey changey guy so I understand people feeling frustrated, feeling we can do better,” Obama said. “What I cannot understand is why anybody would think that Donald Trump will shake things up in a way that is good for you, Pennsylvania. I don’t understand that.”

Democrats are beginning to worry about Harris’ prospects
Obama’s impassioned appeal for Harris in a state that could doom her presidential hopes comes at a moment when Democrats are fretting that her early momentum after taking over the campaign from President Joe Biden has ebbed, leaving potentially the most critical general election in decades at best a toss-up with less than a month to go.

“He’s clear-eyed about how close this race is,” a source familiar with Obama’s remarks told CNN’s Kayla Tausche. The ex-president savagely mocked Trump, asking whether his successor had ever changed a tire or a diaper and condemning his single term and “mean and ugly” border policies.

Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris walks to board Air Force Two as she departs for New York, at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, on October 7, 2024.

Obama slams Trump over false hurricane conspiracy theories
The former president on Thursday accused Trump of violating basic American values. “Those didn’t used to be Republican and Democratic values. It used to be we’d have arguments about tax policy and foreign policy, but we didn’t have arguments about whether you should tell the truth or not,” he said.

He slammed Trump over his false claims that the Biden administration denied hurricane aid to Republicans. “You are going to have leaders who try to help and then you have a guy who will just lie about it to score political points and this has consequences,” Obama said. “When did that become OK?”

But the Trump campaign is not letting go of claims that were debunked even by many Republican state and local officials. “You’ve got a lot of people who could have been helped, a lot of lives that could have been saved, that weren’t, and there’s a lot of details to figure out,” Sen. JD Vance, the GOP vice presidential nominee, said Thursday.

An emerging strategy for Harris in the election endgame
Obama’s remarks were directed especially at traditional Republicans who may abhor Trump’s conduct and the male voters who form his power base.

Earlier, Obama had sought to shore up another traditionally Democratic constituency — Black men, CNN’s Edward-Isaac Dovere reported. At a Harris campaign office, Obama wondered whether the reticence of some “brothers” to support the Democratic nominee came down to sexism. “You’re thinking about sitting out or supporting somebody who has a history of denigrating you, because you think that’s a sign of strength, because that’s what being a man is? Putting women down?” Obama said. “That’s not acceptable.”

Yet the former president can only do so much. He’s not on the ballot and for all his undimmed appeal to Democrats, he’s yesterday’s man. And in the past, his quintessential appeal has not always been transferable to other Democrats. He worked hard to elect Hillary Clinton, who was defeated in 2016. One big question now is whether Harris, who has been basing her campaign on generational change and her biography, can build on Obama’s critiques of Trump to make her own sharpened closing argument.