Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published. Become a member and support our work here.

In September, CBS News obtained new images of the aftermath of attacks on US bases in the Middle East from active service members. One told the news channel: “This is major damage to our bases that hasn’t been communicated to the American public. “We’re standing there with our eyes closed getting punched in the face,” they added.

While reports have detailed how Iran used Russian intelligence, including satellite imagery, to identify US troops, ships and aircraft, Bellingcat found that publicly available mapping platforms also reveal detailed and potentially sensitive information about US military bases in the Middle East. 

Google Maps and other online mapping services contain dozens of labels identifying facilities including headquarters, accommodation, gyms and fuel points. Publicly available photographs and videos, including material published by the US military, provide further details about how these facilities are used.

Experts told Bellingcat that such information could have helped inform Iranian targeting decisions by revealing where personnel gather and how bases operate. However, they cautioned that Iran would also have had access to other sources of intelligence. Reporting from Reuters earlier this year also highlighted how US officials believed commercially available location data was being used to target US troops in war zones.

The bases examined by Bellingcat are not secret and have operated for years in a region where US forces maintained a strong sense of security. Joseph Jarnecki, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, said the US had been able to maintain aerial superiority and was understood to have significant air defence capabilities, but that Iran’s missile and drone campaign has undermined both assumptions. 

Iranian strikes have damaged at least 20 US military sites across Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Jordan, Kuwait, Iraq and Saudi Arabia since the conflict began in February this year.

Governments can request that Google blur or remove sensitive information from its services and Google publishes data on government requests for content removal.

Bellingcat contacted the US Department of Defense who asked us to reach out to CENTCOM about the details in this story. We also contacted Google. However, we did not receive responses to questions from these respondents before publication.

We examined four of the largest and most heavily affected US military installations by Iran’s missile and drone campaign: Camp Buehring and Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan and Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. At each one, we found publicly available Google Maps information providing details about facilities inside the bases and how they are used.

Camp Buehring

At Camp Buehring in Kuwait, Google Maps identifies what is labelled as the main headquarters building, as well as a gym and a self-help facility, all of which were among locations destroyed by recent Iranian strikes. In addition to Google Maps place markers there are dozens of reviews and user-uploaded photographs.

Bellingcat verified that this was a headquarters building by matching the flagpoles and layout in a photo published by the US military’s Defense Visual Information Distribution Service (DVIDS) showing soldiers posing in front of the  building to the Google Maps satellite image.

We also identified details about one of the camp’s gyms, including the building’s layout and roof structure, as well as Google reviews that indicate when it is busiest.

Among the images published by CBS News in September was that of a heavily damaged tent-like structure with smoke rising from it. Bellingcat matched the location of this image to the above satellite imagery, verifying that it shows the gym building pinned on Google Maps.

Exclusive images released showing damage to E-3 Sentry AWACS aircraft at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, plus damage to US military camps Arifjan and Buehring in Kuwait from Iranian strikes. Images sent to CBS by active US military personnel. (IRIB News) https://t.co/1urA44f4xz

— Middle East Observer (@ME_Observer_) September 15, 2026

A building labeled on Google as “DPW Self-Help Center” was also destroyed at Camp Buehring. Its Google Maps listing includes opening hours, and a photo posted by a Master Sergeant in 2017 labeled “My office in Kuwait” shows the interior of an office. Some of the notices on the walls inside the office are legible, including what appears to be a floor plan.

A Google Maps placemark labelled “Transient Tent” identifies a large accommodation area, while another review includes a ground-level photograph of one of the tents. The dining facility can also be seen from the inside, including information regarding meal times.

William Goodhind of Contested Ground, a visual forensics consultancy that uses OSINT and satellite imagery to analyse military sites, said the information available on Google Maps could reveal “the camp’s layout, the division between secure and non-secure areas, confirms likely accommodation areas, and shows day/time periods of low and high activity.”

Camp Arifjan

A satellite image of Kuwait’s Camp Arifjan, captured by Planet on March 4, 2026 and published by the The Washington Post, shows damage to numerous structures at the base. Bellingcat compared the image with publicly available mapping data to identify two damaged facilities.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Media Trending (@tmctrending)

A Google Maps listing for a lodging facility labelled “TPE FOR ARIFJAN” includes a soldier’s review discussing room reservations, accommodation shortages and cleaning schedules, indicating that the building was used for military housing. Although Google’s satellite imagery of the base is blurred, the facility is visible in unblurred Bing Maps imagery using coordinates obtained from its Google Maps listing. The satellite image published by The Washington Post shows heavy damage to the facility.

A “24hr Fuel Point” tagged on Google Maps is also blurred, but when the coordinates are copied and pasted into Bing Maps a clear satellite image of the fuel station appears. This facility is also seen destroyed on the satellite imagery published by The Washington Post.

Bellingcat contacted Microsoft to ask why the facility was not blurred out in the Bing Maps service. A spokesperson said: “When an entity requests removal from visibility on Bing Maps, we work through our process and act accordingly.”

Muwaffaq Salti Air Base

Three US service members were killed in Iranian ballistic missile strikes on Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan on July 17, 2026. The strikes appear to have caused extensive damage to a barracks in the north of the base, with satellite imagery released by Iran showing at least 20 structures destroyed.

Less than 40 metres from the nearest destroyed structure, and within the same living quarters area, Google Maps reveals the location of an “Airman’s Attic”. These are volunteer-run thrift shops for US Air Force personnel. 

A five-star review posted last year by a soldier includes a ground-level image of the facility, showing uniform drop-off points and fortifications along the perimeter. The listing provides information about the area’s use, while photographs of the shop’s exterior make it possible to match the satellite imagery to the location on the ground.

A Sky News investigation also found that 80 percent of the runs shared publicly on the sporting app Strava at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base during the April ceasefire started or finished in this northern barracks.

Less than 100 meters from the destroyed area, “LSA DFAC” is pinned on Google maps. “DFAC” is the standard US military acronym for “dining facility”, according to Stars and Stripes. Several Google reviews also discuss the steak being served in this location.

Al Udeid Air Base

Similar mapping information is available for Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the largest US military installation in the Middle East. 

The base appears unblurred on Google Maps and entries on the platform identify the functions of numerous buildings. These include lodging facilities, which videos and reviews indicate are used by US Air Force crews and show the interior layout of the facility.

Meanwhile, Russia’s Yandex Maps details the site of two cinemas, a bar and a school on the base. This appears to match information provided on Google Maps.

While Al Udeid Air Base was damaged during Iranian attacks earlier this year, the areas that were struck do not appear to be among those listed on Google. 

Business Insider reported that a geodesic dome that housed secure communications equipment was hit in the strikes. ABC News detailed how another building had been damaged near the centre of the base. Google Maps shows a large warehouse-like structure at the location where ABC News reported this strike.

A New Reality in the Middle East

Former US Air Force targeting specialist Wes J. Bryant said the problem facing US bases in the Middle East reflected a broader assumption within the military that bases in allied countries were safe from serious attack. He said the belief that these were rear-area bases where “nothing’s going to happen out here” was a fundamental miscalculation, and that the Google Maps issue was an example of the military failing to account for that vulnerability.

Matthew Savill, Director of Military Sciences at the Royal United Services Institute, said Western militaries do not have consistent policies governing what information can be publicly posted about sensitive sites. He said the issue needs to be considered before a conflict begins, rather than when attacks are already underway. “The start point should be, can we enforce operational security discipline?” Savill pointed to restrictions already in place at some UK military facilities, including Faslane, a naval base that houses the UK’s nuclear submarines, where he said personnel are not permitted to use mobile phones on site.

Savill told Bellingcat that the different pieces of data available on Google Maps, even if outdated, provided a “pattern of life” about US bases in the Middle East. But he added that the use of Google to help with the military targeting of Western bases is not new, saying he encountered the issue while deployed to Iraq more than 20 years ago.

“When I was in Iraq, we knew for a fact that insurgents and militants had been using commercial imagery, including Google Earth, to try and map our bases,” he said. “We have known for more than 20 years that there is a vulnerability that if you don’t stop the collection and layering of data early on, that your bases can be heavily mapped.” 

The use of open-source information to support military targeting has been documented in Ukraine. In 2022, Foreign Policy detailed how Ukrainian private intelligence company Molfar used photographs of Russian soldiers published by Russian media alongside Google Earth satellite imagery to identify their location. Molfar passed its findings to Ukrainian intelligence, and the site was subsequently struck by the Ukrainian military.

The security risks of publicly mapping military installations were recognised by the US military in 2008, when the Pentagon banned Google’s Street View from documenting the interiors of its bases. Since the Iran war started, US military commanders have also warned service members about posting photographs and videos from bases after Iranian attacks, cautioning that such footage could help Iran assess the effects of its strikes.

Iranian attacks have forced US personnel to evacuate many additional locations that were deemed too vulnerable to further strikes. 

In total, 23 US service members have been killed and 865 wounded in the US-Iran war, according to the Pentagon.

---

Bellingcat’s Jake Godin, Charlotte Maher and Merel Zoet contributed to this report.

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post How Online Maps Lay Bare the US Military Bases Targeted by Iran appeared first on bellingcat.

Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published. Become a member and support our work here.

An online ad for Ben McAdams, the Democratic candidate for Congress in Utah, emphasised that he could be trusted because he “fought back against MAGA”.

In Texas, another ad promoted Republican candidate Chris Gober, calling him a “MAGA warrior”.

What’s interesting is that both ads were ultimately paid for with money from the same organisation – Leading the Future (LTF), a Super PAC which opposes regulations that “constrain” innovation in AI. The network has received US$125 million in funding in total from OpenAI president Greg Brockman, his wife Anna Brockman, tech-focused venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) and a16z’s founders, Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings show. 

Directly opposing LTF is Public First Action (PFA), which calls for AI safety regulations and guardrails. PFA has received $40 million in funding from AI company Anthropic. 

Like the ads run by organisations funded by LTF, the Super PACs funded by PFA also ran ads that appeared supportive or critical of Trump depending on the voters they were targeting. 

None of these ads mentions AI.

As the US 2026 midterm elections approach on Nov. 3, Super PAC spending on political advertising has reportedly soared to record highs, surpassing US$11 billion last week and exceeding the amount spent on any other election cycle to date. 

Super PACs are a particular type of political action committee (PAC) that may receive unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, labour unions and other PACs for the purpose of financing independent expenditures and other independent political activity.

In this year’s elections, LTF’s and PFA’s Super PACs, funded by the AI industry heavyweights, have played an outsized role in supporting or opposing candidates through advertising. But as polls show distrust of AI crosses party lines, the advertisements that Silicon Valley’s leaders are paying millions of dollars to try to sway the results in their chosen candidates’ favour often do not mention AI at all. 

While LTF is a registered Super PAC itself, FEC filings show it mainly disburses money to other Super PACs in its network which run political ads. 

Of about $52 million that LTF has disbursed to date, $20 million went to Think Big, which targets the Democratic voter base, and another $20 million went to American Mission, which focuses on Republicans. 

PFA, meanwhile, is registered as a “social welfare”, or 501(c)(4), organisation. This type of non-profit is not required to disclose its donors or disbursements. However, PFA contributes funds to three Super PACs: the bipartisan Public First PAC, Jobs and Democracy for Democratic candidates and Defending Our Values for Republicans. FEC filings for these Super PACs show Public First PAC received $1 million, Jobs and Democracy received $15.4 million and Defending Our Values received $7.9 million from PFA. Public First PAC’s FEC filings also show that $4 million of its $4.4 million in disbursements disclosed so far went to Jobs and Democracy, while another $300,000 went to Defending Our Values. 

Super PACs are allowed to accept unlimited contributions from other political committees, and other similar networks of Super PACs have been observed in the current election cycle, such as cryptocurrency-linked Fairshake and its affiliated Super PACs.

Bellingcat analysed data on more than 300 online video ad campaigns paid for by Think Big, American Mission, Jobs and Democracy and Defending Our Values from Google’s Ad Transparency Center. These ad campaigns, many of which used the same videos in slightly different formats or across different platforms, supported or opposed 40 candidates. 

Only ads supporting or opposing two candidates mentioned AI, and none mentioned data centres, a top issue this election cycle. A New York Times analysis of 95 video ads paid for by the same four Super PACs, using data gathered by media tracking firm AdImpact, had similar findings. FEC rules state that Super PACs can spend money to support or oppose a candidate, but cannot coordinate with the candidate or their campaign on this. There is no evidence that any of the candidates or campaigns for which the Super PACs ran ads have coordinated with them.

Michael Beckel, Director of Money in Politics Reform at cross-partisan political reform group Issue One, told Bellingcat that voters are at a disadvantage when special interests fund Super PACs running ads that don’t mention the priority issues of those underwriting them. 

“Special interests seem keen on moving voters with messaging around hot-button issues, all while advancing a specific policy agenda that viewers of ads are kept in the dark about,” he said. The result of this, Beckel added, was that “the industry gains a stronger hand in Washington, while voters get little chance to judge the agenda their votes could help advance”. 

A representative for PFA stated: “We endorse officials who support regulating AI. The aligned PACs run ads on the issues that matter most immediately to voters in each race, and for most electorates right now that means the economy, affordability, public safety, and other issues that they are facing on a daily basis.” 

Jobs and Democracy, Defending Our Values, LTF, Think Big and American Mission did not respond to questions about their political advertising as of publication. 

A recent survey by think tank Data for Action and non-profit Guardrails Action found that about three-quarters of likely voters would be less inclined to vote for a candidate if they found out they had accepted a donation from an AI Super PAC. 

The ads distributed by the AI-backed Super PACs supporting or opposing 29 candidates mentioned economic issues such as taxes, the cost of living, consumer rights and local jobs or small businesses. Another 16 mentioned immigration or law enforcement and 17 mentioned US President Donald Trump or his “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) movement. 

Like the ads mentioning Trump, those on immigration were sharply divided in messaging depending on whether they were targeting Democratic or Republican voters, even when they were paid for by the AI Super PACs in the same network. 

LTF’s Think Big sponsored an ad for Democratic candidate Jeremy Moss in Michigan that talks about how he stood up to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), while American Mission’s ad for Republican Clay Fuller in Georgia mentions how he is focused on securing the southern border. 

We found similar messaging in ads mentioning immigration that were paid for by Super PACs in PFA’s network. Defending Our Values ran an ad in support of Republican John Cowan in Georgia emphasising that he will combat illegal immigration, whereas Jobs and Democracy’s ad for Democrat Valerie Foushee in North Carolina said she was “leading the fight to hold ICE accountable”.

For the ads that did mention AI, almost all were in support of Alex Bores’ primary in New York. PFA’s Jobs and Democracy PAC ran 152 ads supporting Bores’ candidacy, at least some of which mentioned that he was in favour of safeguards on AI and holding Big Tech accountable. 

LTF’s Think Big, on the other hand, ran 22 ads opposing Bores’ candidacy. While they did not mention his stance on AI, many of Think Big’s ads focused on him receiving funding from Anthropic, “dark money Super PACs” and his former employer Palantir, the software giant whose technology, including a new AI system, is used in ICE’s immigration enforcement operations. 

Jobs and Democracy’s advertiser page also showed two ads for Josh Gottheimer in New Jersey that focused on the threats of AI scams and AI-generated media, urging voters to call Gottheimer to tell him to “stand strong for AI safeguards”. 

Major donors to LTF that Bellingcat reached out to – Greg Brockman, a16z, and a16z founders Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz – did not respond to requests for comment on their funding to the Super PACs as of publication. We could not find any publicly available contact information for Anna Brockman, but we also asked about her contributions to LTF in questions to her husband.

OpenAI did not respond to questions about the Brockmans’ contributions to LTF as of publication. However, the company published a statement on the topic in June, which said “OpenAI does not direct the activities of LTF, or have visibility into their operations” and that “any engagement with that organisation has been in a personal capacity, not on behalf of the company”. 

PFA’s main public donor, Anthropic, did not respond to Bellingcat’s queries about its funding for PFA and PFA’s political advertising as of publication. It said in a statement on its website in July that its donations to PFA were “to help promote policies that will maintain meaningful safeguards, sustain America’s AI leadership, and demand transparency from the companies building the most powerful AI models”.

Unknown Vendors

Federal campaign finance laws require federal political committees to file periodic campaign finance reports disclosing their receipts and disbursements. 

Our analysis of FEC filings for LTF and the Super PACs in its network revealed that they were channelling more than $36.4 million in total towards four companies that were newly set up, with no apparent online presence outside of these filings. 

A complaint to the FEC by the non-profit Campaign Legal Center (CLC) in May cited American Mission and Think Big’s payments to Summit Ridge and Lantern Productions, alleging that the Super PACs had “unlawfully evaded federal reporting requirements by funnelling their payments for goods and services through shell companies set up to conceal how the super PACs are actually spending their money”. The FEC has not yet ruled on the complaint. LTF, American and Think Big did not respond to Bellingcat’s queries about the complaint as of publication.

FEC filings show that LTF paid a company called Prusik Partners LLC more than $966,000 for operational expenditures for a range of services including communications and strategy consulting, as well as legal fees. 

The network’s Democrat-focused Super PAC, Think Big, paid a company called Lantern Production Consultants LLC more than $20 million, based on filings for disbursements from Aug. 20, 2025 to Oct. 14, 2026. 

The payments included $3.17 million for operational expenditures for a range of services such as media consulting and research, and another $17 million for independent expenditures. The FEC defines an independent expenditure as one that pays for “a communication that expressly advocates for the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate”. The highest independent expenditures paid to Lantern ($8 million) were to oppose Bores’ candidacy, the filings show.

Think Big also declared in its filings that it had paid a company called Blue Horizon Compliance Consultants LLC almost $55,700 for “compliance consulting”. 

Republican-focused American Mission, on the other hand, paid a company called Summit Ridge Media LLC more than $13 million, based on filings for disbursements from Aug. 20, 2025 to Oct. 14, 2026. 

This included $2.2 million for operating expenditures such as polling and website services, and $10.9 million in independent expenditures, with the highest amount (about $960,400) going towards communications in support of James Morris Kingston, the Republican candidate for the House of Representatives in Georgia.

Bellingcat found that all four of these LLCs listed mailing offices and office supply goods stores in Nevada as their mailing addresses. We could not find records of them doing business with any entity outside of the LTF network – in fact, they appeared to have no online presence aside from their names appearing in the filings and business registrations. 

Despite their addresses being listed in Nevada, none of the companies could be found in the state’s public business registry. Instead, Bellingcat found registrations for Prusik, Lantern Production and Summit Ridge across the country – in Delaware. 

While Delaware is the second-smallest state in the US, more than half of all Fortune 500 companies are incorporated there according to the Delaware Secretary of State. The state’s business-friendly laws mean companies can reportedly incorporate in minutes and are only required to name a representative – who can be a paid agent unrelated to the business – in public registration documents, not the beneficial owners.

Articles of incorporation from the Delaware Secretary of State showed that Prusik was registered on July 22, 2025, while Lantern Production and Summit Ridge were both registered on Oct. 30, 2025. We also found a Delaware registration for a company called “Blue Horizon Compliance Group LLC”, registered on Oct. 30, 2025. While the name differs slightly from the Blue Horizon Compliance Consultants LLC that Think Big declared payments for, the registration was signed by the same agent listed in the documents for Lantern Production and Summit Ridge. 

The filings show that all of these companies – including Blue Horizon Compliance Group, if this was indeed the same entity referred to in Think Big’s filings – began receiving payments from the Super PACs within two to three months of their business registrations.

Saurav Ghosh, CLC’s Director of Federal Campaign Finance Reform, told Bellingcat that the group filed the complaint because “when groups funded by big corporate special interests evade transparency laws, voters lose”. 

“Federal reporting requirements help ensure transparency in our elections and protect voters’ legal right to know where the money is going,” Ghosh said. “Secret spending schemes like this make it virtually impossible to ensure that our elected officials are staying accountable to voters instead of wealthy special interests.”

We were unable to reach out to the LLCs as none of them had phone numbers or email addresses listed online. LTF, Think Big, and American Mission did not respond to questions about the LLCs, including whether “Blue Horizon Compliance Consultants LLC” listed in Think Big’s filings was the same company as Delaware-registered “Blue Horizon Compliance Group LLC”. However, a WIRED story on these same LLCs quoted a spokesperson from LTF as saying that the complaint was “a desperate ploy for attention from Public First, Anthropic, and the groups aligned with their outside organisations”. WIRED also quoted a Public First spokesperson denying that the group had anything to do with the complaint.  

Beckel suggested that stricter transparency measures relating to Super PAC spending would help inform and empower voters. For instance, Congress could pass legislation to require ads to include the names of the top donors, he said, adding that similar rules had been passed with cross-partisan support in places like Alaska and Arizona. 

“Congress would be doing voters a huge service by passing more robust transparency requirements for political ads. Voters deserve to know who is behind the ads they’re seeing,” Beckel said. 

About the Data

Google Ads Analysis

We reviewed ads available through Google’s Ads Transparency Center. These are ads served on Google platforms like Search, Display, Gmail and YouTube. We filtered specifically for ads shown between Jan. 1 and Oct. 23, 2026 in the US. 

We focused only on video ads classified as political advertisements, not text- or image-based ads. We looked at ads purchased by the following advertisers: Think Big, THINK BIG, American Mission, Jobs and Democracy PAC, JOBS AND DEMOCRACY PAC, Defending Our Values PAC and DEFENDING OUR VALUES PAC. 

In total, there were 336 advertisements in the dataset: 86 from Think Big, 57 from American Mission, 22 from Defending Our Values and 171 from Jobs and Democracy. Each ad listed on the platform was counted individually, although many of these were duplicates of the same ad that was run over a different period or platform. Some of the ads have also been removed for ad policy violations, but we were able to see which candidates they were for because they appeared when searching for ads specific to those candidates within the advertiser’s page. 

For the coding of themes, we looked at whether each of the themes mentioned (AI, data centres, economy, Trump, and immigration or law enforcement) appeared in any of the ads for each candidate. This does not account for how many times each theme may have appeared in ads for a candidate.

Our notes on the Google ad data and count of themes for each candidate can be found here. 

For the accompanying map showing spending by each Super PAC by state, we used data from the Google Ad Transparency Center showing the total spend per advertiser and the spending range per ad to estimate the spend per ad (as the data does not show the exact spend per ad). For each advertiser, we separately added up the minimum and maximum spend amounts for all ads. We then calculated where in that range the total spend fell (e.g. 45 percent between the minimum and maximum spend). The per ad spend was estimated by applying this same proportion to the range of each ad and rounding down to the nearest dollar.

FEC Campaign Finance Data

Data from FEC filings for LTF, Think Big and American Mission are based on disclosures from Aug. 20, 2025 to Oct. 14, 2026. Data from FEC filings for Public First, Defending Our Values and Jobs and Democracy are based on disclosures for Jan. 1, 2026 to Sept. 30, 2026, which were the latest available as of publication.

The amounts LTF and PFA contributed to their associated Super PACs are based on the recipient Super PACs’ receipts for contributions from “Leading the Future”, “Public First”, “Public First Action” and “Public First Action, Inc”. 

Links to the source pages for these filings, as well as the data we exported for our analysis, are available here.

---

This investigation was supported by a grant from the Tarbell Center for AI Journalism. 

Data visualisations by Galen Reich. Melissa Zhu contributed research to this piece.

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post Inside the Secretive, Contradictory World of Campaign Ads Funded by AI Super PACs appeared first on bellingcat.

Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published. Become a member and support our work here.

Imagery captured by the European Space Agency’s freely available Sentinel-2 and Sentinel-1 satellites appears to be delayed over Gaza and parts of the West Bank, a Bellingcat analysis has found.

While the delay remains relatively short at just 24 hours, this can still impact the speed at which analysts and researchers can observe what is happening in the region.

For example, the Israeli Defence Forces demolished homes in the West Bank Palestinian city of Hebron in recent days. New imagery captured on October 26, which included Hebron, would allow open source researchers to quickly confirm the demolitions, assess the impacted area and observe any unreported IDF activity. But imagery for the western half of Hebron was not available until October 27 due to the Sentinel-2 delay, inhibiting real-time fact-checking and reporting on this evolving situation.

A spokesperson for the European Union told Bellingcat that the delay was not related to events in Gaza but to “mitigate possible threats” due to the war in the Middle East “including Iran’s attacks on its neighbours and possible threats to European interests”. The delayed region of Sentinel tiles that cover Gaza as well as parts of Israel and the West Bank also extends over the Eastern Mediterranean Sea.

The European Union ordered a 24-hour delay on Sentinel satellite imagery over the Gulf of Oman earlier this year during US and Israeli strikes on Iran. However the delay impacting Gaza and parts of the West Bank has not been announced or previously reported.

“Such decisions are taken unanimously by all EU Member states and will stay in place as long as necessary,” the spokesperson said. They also said that while the Copernicus program, which includes the Sentinel satellites, operated a free and open data policy there were limitations to this for security. 

When asked if the delay, which began in late March, was related to the presence of US vessels in the Eastern Mediterranean or if there were other areas of delay, the spokesperson said they had no further comment.

Sentinel Delays

The Sentinel-2 and Sentinel-1 satellites provide an invaluable source of imagery for open source researchers. This has been especially true this year, as commercial satellite imagery providers restricted access to imagery in the Middle East, including areas of active human rights concern, such as Gaza. 

However, in July, the European Union published Council Decision 2026/1716, which ordered a 24-hour delay on Sentinel imagery over the Gulf of Oman, after a request from the US government which was involved in strikes on Iran at that time.

Just two weeks later, the European Union issued a corrigendum that unpublished decision 2026/1716 and removed it from the Council of the European Union record, although satellite data shows the delay has remained. 

This decision, while it was available, was reportedly the first public notification of delayed Sentinel imagery. Yet it was not the first time that Sentinel imagery has been restricted, analysis shows. Bellingcat found four distinct regions of delayed satellite imagery during 2025 and 2026: the Gulf of Oman, the Gulf of Aden/western Arabian Sea, the Red Sea as well as the previously unreported delay in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea and parts of Israel, the West Bank and the entirety of Gaza.

Bellingcat’s analysis shows that these delays have been implemented in stages. Twenty-four hour delays of Sentinel-2 imagery were first observed by open source researchers in March and April 2025 after the US launched a naval and air strike campaign against Houthi targets in Yemen. 

The previously unreported imagery delay in the Eastern Mediterranean began on March 28, 2026, the same month that commercial American space imaging company Planet Labs also restricted imagery across the Middle East. The Gulf of Oman delay began on July 15, 2026, two days after the publication of Council Decision 2026/1716.

Decision 2026/1716 also specified that the delay be implemented for both Sentinel-2 and Sentinel-1 radar imagery. Bellingcat’s analysis of Sentinel-1 image availability shows that this is the case for both the Gulf of Oman region and the unreported region over the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. However, the 2025 restrictions on Sentinel-2 imagery in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden are not implemented in Sentinel-1. 

Sentinel-1 imagery uses “synthetic aperture radar” to capture lower resolution radar images that can collect data at night and on cloudy days. This differs from Sentinel-2, which captures optical satellite imagery at higher resolution.

A Tale of Two Tiles

Sentinel satellite imagery is most commonly accessed by open source researchers through Copernicus Browser, a free online platform, but it is also distributed as large tiled files in the Copernicus Data Space Ecosystem. These tiles are numbered using the Military Grid Reference System, and can be listed using APIs that provide information on each tile, including the capture and publication time. By comparing the capture and publication time, the publication delay can be computed.

For example, the catalog information for the tile T36RXV, which includes Gaza and portions of the West Bank, Negev and Egypt, provides the following metadata for the October 21, 2026 capture.

This shows that while the image was captured at 08:20 UTC on October 21, it was not published until 10:09 UTC on October 22 — almost 26 hours later. This is in contrast to the neighboring tile T36RYV, which includes parts of the West Bank, Israel, and Jordan. API data for this tile shows that the image was published at 12:10 UTC on October 21, just under four hours after the capture time.

This difference is not unique to this date either. Bellingcat’s analysis shows that this tile has been consistently delayed by one day since March 28, 2026.

This method can be extended further, and by analysing every tile with valid publication date timestamps, Bellingcat identified all global Sentinel-2 and Sentinel-1 delays since 2023. The only consistent delays visible were those identified in the Gulf of Oman, the Gulf of Aden/western Arabian Sea, the Red Sea and Eastern Mediterranean in 2025 and 2026.

Impact on open source investigations

While the 24-hour delay on certain Sentinel imagery is a less severe restriction than other satellite providers have imposed, it can still impact the open source research process in fast moving situations. This is especially so in recent months as the European Space Agency’s Sentinel satellite data has emerged as a refuge as other satellite data is censored.

The image below shows how imagery for the eastern half of Hebron was visible on October 26, but not the western half where demolitions took place earlier this week.

The shape of the missing tiles can be seen by zooming out within the Copernicus browser, demonstrating how imagery of Gaza and other parts of Israel and the West Bank are also delayed.

Sentinel imagery covering western Hebron after the demolitions took place was published on October 27. However, the delay prevented local reports from being verified with satellite imagery while the situation was still ongoing.

Some Sentinel-2 users have previously described the challenges of covering fast-moving issues in the Gulf of Oman when the Sentinel delay was announced in March.

---

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post EU Satellite Imagery Delayed Over Gaza and Parts of West Bank by 24-hours appeared first on bellingcat.

Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published.

In September, the AI company Anthropic published a blog post that claimed its models were approaching “superhuman capabilities for geolocating outdoor photos”. Anthropic made this claim by comparing its models’ performance to that of players of the popular online game GeoGuessr, which challenges users to geolocate Google Street View images. 

Bellingcat has been running its own benchmark tests on AI models since June 2025, right around the time when Large Language Models (LLMs) began to challenge reverse image searches for assisting with geolocation tasks. In our first round, GPT 4o-mini from OpenAI appeared to be the best tool for geolocating, a title which was taken by Google AI mode when we performed our second round of tests a few months later in August 2025. 

This time, we significantly upped the ante for the models, providing increasingly challenging photos and asking for only one set of coordinates. We tasked not only closed-weight models from Claude, Grok, Gemini, ChatGPT, and Mistral, but also open-weight models from Moonshot AI’s Kimi, commercial provider GeoSeer and the non-generative geolocation model GeoClip. In total, we fed each model 52 photos that had not been published anywhere on the internet before.

The results showed that the current generation of models have markedly improved geolocation capabilities. Anthropic’s Opus and Fable, as well as Google’s recent Gemini 4 Argon model, performed the best on geolocation tasks, narrowing down locations from images faster than a human could under specific conditions. Preliminary tests of a set of agentic skills and tools being developed internally by Bellingcat also showed promising results in further improving the geolocation performance of generic-use AI agents.

But crucially, the tests also showed why humans remain necessary for accurate and trustworthy geolocation work, as no models were foolproof. This is particularly important given the increased use of AI in military contexts. The Anthropic blog post focused specifically on geolocating photos for military and intelligence purposes such as targeting, a historically labour-intensive process requiring significant human expertise. 

While our tests showed some models performed extremely well at narrowing down results to the correct general area, none were close to being perfect at finding the exact spot a picture was taken. That accuracy is extremely important in geolocation, especially in military contexts where the cost of incorrect information can be life or death. It is also important for organisations like Bellingcat whose reputation relies on pinpoint factual accuracy.

Our Methods

To compare model results, we used two metrics built on the distance in kilometres between a prediction and the real location. GeoGuessr Score was used to assess whether models could systematically identify the general area, while the Mean Log Score (explained below) measured which models most accurately pinpointed the correct location in the final few kilometres. 

The GeoGuessr Score metric is based on the online game of the same name, whose scoring system Stanford University academics reverse-engineered in a 2024 study. This system rewards answers close to the general area an image was taken, but does not strongly distinguish between guesses close to the precise location. For example, an answer 200km from the correct location with more points than one 2,000km away. However, an answer 500m from where a picture was taken and another 5km away achieve a similar score. For real-world geolocations, that distance matters a great deal.

For more precision, we introduced a custom metric that grades models higher if they narrow down the search in the last few kilometres. This metric, the Mean Log Score, assigns a value from 0 (completely inaccurate) to 100 (perfect model) and works on a logarithmic scale instead of a linear one like GeoGuessr score.

Therefore, a 10-fold improvement in distance means the same whether it is from 5km to 500m or from 500km to 50km. You can compare both metrics here.

Below are the model results sorted by either metric, showing how many photos each model geolocated within distance bands from the true location.

Several models placed at least 10 out of the 52 photos correctly within one kilometre, and the top-performing models placed over 50 percent of the photos within 25 kilometres.

NOTE: Geoseer-fast refused to answer on four of the 52 photos, claiming “This image is not suitable for geolocation”, while Mistral-large-4 refused once with “insufficient information in image to identify location”. Kimi-k2.6 also failed to provide a set of coordinates on one photo, and Gemini 4 Argon timed out repeatedly on one photo.

Our Test

To independently assess the models, we sought to give them very specific instructions and some images that were harder to geolocate than those provided in our past tests. The prompt asked for a single set of coordinates reflecting the photographer’s location. The purpose of restricting the response in this way was to prevent hedging, such as multiple guesses or confidence scores, and make the grading more uniform across different models. Models were allowed to use their providers’ built-in tools: search, code execution and page fetch. We capped their token output at 64,000 and ran each model under its default effort setting with a maximum time of 15 minutes per photo. If a model did not return coordinates on the first prompt, we also allowed a single rescue prompt asking it to do so using its previous reasoning and without using any tools.

The images provided were unique, from around the world, not published on the internet before, scrubbed of metadata and provided without any context. They did not contain significant landmarks. We also included images in snowy, foggy and nighttime conditions.

The results show that the LLMs tested could, in many circumstances, successfully narrow down a location much faster than a human can geolocate even without any context. This is not limited to Google Street View-style images. Take, for example, this image of vegetation and a very small part of a rooftop.

For an average person, identifying the country this photo was taken in without any context could take a significant amount of time. However, multiple models quickly narrowed it down to Kenya. You can navigate their answers in the map below. Notice how several correctly inferred enough vegetation details to narrow down the exact part of the world and the park itself, but also that for many, the final response was a best guess only. It is important to note that even though some models were correct, others were significantly off.

The full model results for all 52 photos can be seen in the table below.

Of the models tested, Gemini 4 Argon scored highest on the Mean Log Score, and Claude’s models (Opus and Fable) were at the top of the table regardless of the score metric. Even Claude Sonnet, the weakest of its lineup, consistently came close to the real location while being the fastest to answer across all models.

This was followed by GPT-6 Astra and GPT-6.1 Sol, as well as other Claude and Gemini models, and then the geolocation-specific model, GeoSeer Fast, which provided good results but also timed out frequently. We tested GeoSeer’s more competent Agent model, but it refused to answer on eight photos and regularly timed out.

For secondary factors like time and cost, Claude also performed well on both metrics, and Gemini Argon, while much slower, came at a similar cost to Opus. Based on API rates, Argon and Opus models offered the best balance of accuracy and cost, especially compared to Fable and Grok. Grok was the most expensive option and had an underwhelming bottom-half performance. Meanwhile, GeoClip was freely available but only outperformed Claude Haiku.

Model Limitations

While we sought to analyse the most prominent models, there was one that we could not include as it has yet to be fully released.

In its blog post, Anthropic claimed its Mythos model beats “even the strongest human baseline on median distance error, scoring 37.0km and 47.2km across 6,000 photos (placing 23.7 percent and 23.1 percent within 1km).“ But Nuno Moniz, Associate Research Professor at the Lucy Family Institute for Data & Society at the University of Notre Dame, told Bellingcat that “the median represents a strong simplification of what would be acceptable to compare AI-based system performance with regards to humans”. 

Anthropic compared its models to competitive GeoGuessr players and their success in identifying the location of Google Street View images. The entire set of test images was online and there was no guarantee the models were processing the imagery for the first time. 

While Anthropic has been relatively open about these methods, not all developers have been as forthcoming. It is therefore difficult to assess whether the same limitations will impact all other models, or whether there will be further caveats that we are simply not aware of. 

Moniz said that “the increasing availability of benchmarking tools and datasets has made it somewhat difficult to measure reliability in test results such as these”. Specifically, due to the ”uncertainty as to whether that data was included in its training”. This is why we ran our Bellingcat tests with non-published photos sourced from Bellingcat staff and the Bellingcat Volunteer Community.

A further limitation of any models comparing performance to GeoGuessr scores is that the game uses images from Google Street View, which is limited to a select number of countries, and within these, a limited number of roads. Street View is also intentionally skewed to feature clear, high-quality photos taken during daytime that are useful for navigation, and users can pan around their view. There are also some well-known tricks that allow GeoGuessr players to bypass actual geolocation to correctly guess the location of photos: for example, Google is known to use a black car in Jordan and a white car in the UAE to capture imagery. While this wouldn’t necessarily impact model performance, it is a drawback of measuring against GeoGuessr score as the game has a set of workarounds that can bypass geolocation skill.

Anthropic’s data consisted of thousands of social media photos of various scenes. Once again, though, these photos were online and may have featured in the model’s training data. Anthropic’s blog post contained four images as an example of this dataset.

The examples Anthropic shared are relatively easy to geolocate as they feature recognisable buildings and signs. But footage that requires geolocation often comes from regions where access is limited and which do not feature on social media or Street View.

Specifically, in a military and intelligence context, footage often involves low-resolution material and intentionally obscured details recorded in remote or inaccessible areas. Context that could be found online can be uncertain or plain wrong, especially during a developing situation, such as the image below that Bellingcat investigators geolocated when verifying a US strike on a school in the city of Minab in Iran that killed at least 120 children earlier this year.

Anthropic researchers acknowledge this caveat, writing that it “does not as clearly emulate the task of precisely pinning down a location in near-real-time in a less populated battlefield setting; that is a task for future research.”

As noted, it is also possible that similar caveats need to be applied to other models when seeking to understand and interpret any geolocation-related benchmarking.

Supercharged Models

In parallel to the above models, we also tested a set of agentic skills and tools being developed internally by Bellingcat. These are researcher-informed instructions and code that can equip generic-use AI agents to augment their geolocation ability. For instance, we designed skills such as allowing it to download Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) satellite imagery tiles. We also designed another skill that enabled direct access to data from Bellingcat’s OpenStreetMaps search tool, which aims to assist geolocation efforts by comparing items identified in imagery (like the position of a pylon compared to a nearby railway line) to OpenStreetMaps data. GeoSleuth is a similar project that has already been published, which we used for comparison. We picked Claude’s Opus 5.5 model to run both skills customisations because of its strong performance and reasonable pricing, and ran all the photos through the supercharged models under the same conditions – except that they had no timeout enforced as the supercharged models required more time to utilise their extra skills. 

The different timeout conditions and expanded toolset do not allow for a direct comparison of the customised models to the previous off-the-shelf models’ results, even if they both outperformed the barebones Opus model they were based on, and all other models on GeoGuessr Score, with only Argon ranking above Bellingcat’s agent in Mean Log Score.

Still, this test allows us to showcase why skill customisations can bring value. Take the following photo.

This is not an exceptionally hard geolocation, and 11 of 17 models answered within 5km of the actual capture location in Venice, Italy. GPT-Sol answered with the correct monastery, but only Bellingcat’s agent and GeoSleuth answered with the exact camera position coordinates. This was possible because both model customisations can download and compare satellite imagery tiles, which allows them to validate not just which monastery the photo was taken at but also the correct courtyard position and orientation from visual cues. You can click the buttons in the list below to audit each model’s final answer.

While in this instance the supercharged models got the exact spot, there were other instances where they did not, as the scores in the results table above show. This again emphasises that even with extra skill sets added, these models were still far from infallible.

Tests Conclusions

Despite increased model improvement, our analysis shows that important caveats remain and it is important to keep a human in the loop when seeking to guarantee a geolocation is precise and correct.

Our tests show that the coordinates models provide as answers are rarely an exact match, even with supercharged models. Invariably, even the best models, with the best tools, can confidently claim a wrong position. Anthropic says its Mythos model was able to pinpoint less than a quarter of its social media photos dataset within a 1km radius. But narrowing down a location is rarely the trickiest part of geolocation work. A large part of important geolocation work is in the final stretch: finding specific coordinates from a general area. This level of specificity is needed because a general area is not a match. Matching features and perspective are necessary for an accurate geolocation, and in many cases that is done on very low-quality images or even by cross-referencing multiple sources. 

This level of precision is essential for investigations where it matters what building a person could be found at, what lines of sight individuals might have had, or what impact an air strike might have led to. 

Since LLMs can still confidently get things wrong, as our analysis shows, all results still have to be verified independently. Strong human geolocation skills therefore remain crucial, as the more one understands about geolocations, the better one can verify or take to completion an automated result. 

Though it can speed up geolocation work significantly, especially in narrowing down an area of interest, AI models remain a useful assistant rather than a tool we can blindly delegate geolocations to.

---

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post Can LLMs Supercharge Geolocations? Our Tests Show Big Improvements But Humans Remain Key appeared first on bellingcat.

Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published.

Satellite imagery obtained by Bellingcat lays bare the extent of tree-felling at a Washington DC golf course that President Trump is reportedly seeking to transform into a championship-level course, despite moves to protect the site by conservationists. 

The extent and circumstances surrounding the rapid changes prompted a judge to call an emergency hearing earlier this week, banning any further changes until later this month.

Reports on Wednesday detailed that 430 trees were cut down at the East Potomac Golf Links  which is owned by the Federal government and managed by the National Park Service (NPS). This is despite a judge reportedly stating earlier this year that no more than 10 trees at the course could be cut down without first notifying the court. 

NPR reported that officials notified the court just before 5pm on Friday Oct. 9 of plans to remove up to 529 trees in phases starting  the next day on Saturday Oct. 10. That prompted US District Court Judge Ana Reyes to call an emergency hearing on Oct. 12. By that time, 430 trees had reportedly been cut down.

Reyes is reported to have said she was “furious” with the Justice Department for the lack of time afforded the court and plaintiffs before the tree removal was carried out.

She was also reported to have said that the government’s actions had cost it “all of its credibility with me in this case.”

Images taken at the course earlier this week show trunks and branches strewn out across fairways.

Just total devastation wrought on East Potomac Park this past weekend. 450+ trees. For an admin that professes to support “beautification” of DC, that’s sure not what we or anybody else who has seen what they did on Saturday would describe it as. East Potomac is (was?) a thriving, beautiful gem in the heart of Washington DC. A beautiful, public, accessible place that hundreds of thousands use annually. The assault on this place should infuriate every American. The impacts of what took place Saturday will take years to fix. We cannot sit idly by while this admin treats our public lands like they are for the taking.

— Save East Po (@SaveEastPo) October 13, 2026

But satellite imagery affords a broader look at exactly what sections of the course have been impacted.

The Image below from Planet Labs taken on October 8 shows the golf course before the tree-felling was carried out.

Planet Labs imagery captured on Oct. 13 shows large barren sections towards the south and west of the course, where trees were removed.

A before and after slider allows for easy comparison of the Oct. 8 and Oct.13 images.

Reuters reported that an organisation called The ​DC Preservation League said in a February ​2026 lawsuit that President Donald Trump was flouting ⁠environmental laws to “irreparably destroy a priceless piece of American history” so he could “convert a public recreation space into an exclusive, high-end golf course.”

Kevin Griess, an NPS official, reportedly stated at Monday’s hearing that tree removal was part of a 2019 plan that predates Trump’s aims for the course and sought to restore links-style vegetation.

Bellingcat contacted NPS as well as the Department of Justice but did not receive a response before publication.

The changes to the golf course are not the only ones President Trump has sought in Washington DC and the surrounding area since the beginning of his second term. In October last year  demolition began on the East Wing of the White House with the aim of building a new ballroom claiming it was “the safest building ever built.”  

Trump has also proposed a 250-foot-tall “Triumphal Arch” to be built just outside the Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia.

---

Correction: This article was updated on October 15 to reflect that a judge told the US government not to cut down more than 10 trees before providing notice. The article previously said that no more than 10 trees could be felled without the court’s approval. The headline has also been changed to reflect this.

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post Satellite Images Show Extent of Trump Admin’s Tree-Felling at DC Golf Course appeared first on bellingcat.

Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published.

US non-profits whose founding leaders or organisations have been associated with India’s controversial Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) – or initiatives the Hindu nationalist group has endorsed – received millions of dollars over recent years through grants that allow donors to remain anonymous, a Bellingcat analysis has found. 

The right-wing and Hindu nationalist volunteer organisation is widely considered the ideological parent of India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a former RSS worker, is one of its most famous supporters. 

But the RSS’ vision of India as a Hindu nation is controversial both at home and abroad: it was previously banned in India three times, and a bipartisan US commission on religious freedom recently called for the US government to sanction the group “for their responsibility and tolerance of severe violations of religious freedom”. Almost a hundred US politicians, both Democratic and Republican, recently pledged not to take funding from RSS-linked entities. 

While there have been efforts to map out RSS-related entities, it can be challenging to establish concrete links between the organisations because the RSS remains an unregistered entity in India and has no formal membership, maintaining that it is a “body of individuals” with shared ideological views.

“The RSS functions without independent oversight of its resources, finances, influence, and activities,” said Dr Angana P Chatterji, an anthropologist and scholar of South Asia studies at the University of California, Berkeley. “This is not proportional to the vast power, reach, and influence it possesses. Its leadership and cadre are protected from accountability and scrutiny,” she added.

The RSS had not responded to multiple requests for comment, as of publication.

Bellingcat identified two US-registered non-profits that appeared to have past and present ties to the RSS, or organisations associated with them, based on the non-profits’ or RSS websites and publications, as well as statements by the non-profits’ founders and spokespeople. The non-profits were the Ekal Vidyalaya Foundation of USA Inc (Ekal USA) and Sewa International Inc (referred to as Sewa USA). 

We looked at all Form 990s – tax returns that US non-profit organisations are required to file annually – listing Ekal USA and Sewa USA as grant recipients, as well as the Form 990s of the charities themselves, from 2020 to 2024. As of September, the latest available Form 990s for Sewa USA were for the fiscal year ending December 2024, while Ekal USA also filed a form for the fiscal year ending December 2025, which was excluded for consistency, although the same pattern was observed during this period.

This analysis showed that the charities received at least US$24.4 million from 34 organisations that manage donor-advised funds (DAFs), or 20.7 percent of the total $117.8 million they reported receiving in contributions and grants during this period. 

The actual amount from DAFs may be higher, as we excluded filings that covered partial years outside of this period – for example, June 2019 to June 2020. The filings from the two charities we identified were based on the calendar year.

The Form 990s also revealed that the vast majority of the money spent by these two charities on grants to other organisations or individuals was in India or the South Asia region rather than in the US: Ekal USA donated $33.7 million in foreign grants – all of which went towards the Ekal Vidyalaya project in India according to its filings –  and none in domestic grants in the five years from 2020 to 2024, while Sewa USA reported $29.7 million in foreign grants and $622,613 in domestic grants during the same period. 

DAFs are common vehicles for people in the US who want to make donations to charitable causes while receiving tax relief or benefits. Donors do not control the money once they donate it but can advise on which charities the money eventually ends up at.

These funds are legally maintained and operated by non-profit sponsoring organisations. As public charities, DAF sponsor organisations detail the amounts and recipients of grants that they make on behalf of their donors in their Form 990s. However, they do not disclose who their donors are, and donors can choose to remain anonymous. (Note: Bellingcat US receives grants from donor-advised funds, and some grants do not disclose the name of the grant recommender. However, many of our donors are listed on our funding page.)

There are many more organisations reportedly linked to the RSS that are not included in this analysis, but we focused on these two because of the large amounts of grants they received through DAFs, with the original sources of the funds untraceable from public information, as well as evidence pointing to both historical and current connections between them and the RSS or organisations associated with the RSS. 

It is worth noting that some of the evidence we found pointing towards a connection between the two charities and the RSS or organisations associated with the RSS was from before or after the period we analysed (2020 to 2024). There is no evidence that DAF grants funded the RSS, only that they went to organisations that appear to have connections with the RSS. Experts told us that DAF grants undergo less regulatory scrutiny than other charitable donations and that DAF sponsor organisations have discretion over whether to restrict or permit donations to certain recipients.

Ekal USA

Houston, Texas-based Ekal USA is a non-profit that describes its mission in its Form 990s as “to provide free elementary education and free primary healthcare to children in remote and rural India”. The USA branch of Ekal Vidyalaya, according to its website, was founded in 2001 as part of efforts to “reach out to the global diaspora” in order to achieve a goal to “expand the reach of Ekal to 100,000 villages”. 

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has appeared at multiple Ekal Vidyalaya events in India promoting the initiative over the years, as far back as 2014 and most recently in May.

Ekal USA was started in the late 1990s as a programme of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad of America (VHPA), or World Hindu Council of America, VHPA spokesperson Shyam Tiwari told Bellingcat in an email response. He added that it was set up as an independent organisation in early 2000. According to VHPA’s website, Ekal USA was established in 2002.

VHPA is based in the US, while the similarly named Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) is in India. VHP lists VHPA in the “Hindus Abroad” section of its website. A 2017 article from VHPA’s magazine states that late founder Mahesh Mehta was trained by the RSS since he was 10 years old, and that the VHPA was born after Mehta was advised by the former supreme leader of the RSS to “build VHP in USA”. The national spokesperson of VHP in India, Vinod Bansal, said that it is an independent organisation that “sometimes shares ideology” with VHPA.

RSS’ website states that VHP was launched to organise Hindus and “reconvert all those who had been knowingly or unknowingly proselytised to alien faiths and are now desirous of coming back to the Hindu fold”. Bansal referred to VHP as an “independent part of the RSS” and an “ideological brother”. 

Ekal USA Chairman-Advisor Subhash Gupta wrote in an Ekal USA publication this year that in the ‘80s and ‘90s, he was “president of the VHP’s Houston chapter” and “often received many high-profile guests from RSS and VHP”.

Gupta did not respond to requests for comment as of publication.

From 2020 to 2024, Ekal USA reported receiving more than $48.4 million in contributions and grants. Of this amount, at least $8.3 million was from DAF grants, based on Form 990s that listed Ekal USA as a grantee. 

According to Ekal USA’s Form 990s, it transferred $33.7 million in foreign grants during this period and none in domestic grants for organisations or individuals. The forms also show that all the foreign grant money went towards building Ekal Vidyalaya schools in India. The rest of its expenses involved operational costs such as staff salaries.

The Ekal Vidyalaya movement has been criticised over reports that allege the schools are used to indoctrinate millions of India’s poorest and most vulnerable children and women with Hindu nationalist ideology, including that Muslims and Christians are “enemies of Hinduism”. Ekal Vidyalaya in India did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Ekal USA did not respond to Bellingcat’s questions about these reports or any relationship it may have with the RSS. However, on its FAQ page, the group states that it does not teach religion in its schools and “does not discriminate based on caste, religious affiliation or linguistic affiliations”.

Sewa USA

Sewa USA, also based in Houston, describes itself as a “Hindu faith-based, humanitarian, nonprofit service organisation” and is listed under the heading of “Sewa Movement” on the website of India-based charity group Sewa International. 

Sewa USA Vice President of Public Affairs Rakhi Israni told Bellingcat over email that the organisation “does not operate as a branch or affiliate of the RSS” or participate in political activity. 

But multiple pages on the organisation’s website appear to indicate a connection between the non-profit and the RSS. In 2022, Sewa USA reposted an article on its website referring to Sewa International as “the US-based charitable non-profit organisation with links to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)”. In a press release about the death of its founding member Ved Prakash Nanda in 2023, it noted that Nanda was “immersed in the ideals of the [RSS]”. And two different blog posts from 2021 and 2024 on Sewa USA’s website had volunteers citing RSS-led activities as the starting point for their involvement.

In addition, Sewa USA has also posted multiple times on social media and its website about an India-based organisation – Sewa Bharati – that appears to have the support of the RSS. 

Sewa USA referred to Sewa Bharati as a “sister organisation” in an X post in 2014, and its regional chapter in Purvanchal as a “partner organisation” in a Facebook post in 2022.

On its website, Sewa USA said in a post that volunteers from its “partner organisations in India” had participated in rescue operations related to the 2023 train accident in Odisha, and listed several initiatives by Sewa Bharati in India. It also launched a fundraiser for families affected by floods in Maharashtra in September 2025, which mentioned that over 100 Sewa Bharati volunteers were already on the ground clearing debris and assisting communities. 

“Foreign grants awarded to partner agencies in India, including service-oriented NGOs like Sewa Bharati, are strictly project-based, fully audited, and evaluated based on measurable humanitarian impact in education, health, and disaster relief,” Israni told Bellingcat.

RSS’ website links directly to the main website of Sewa Bharati through a tab on its main navigation bar labelled “Sewa”, and Sewa Bharati is mentioned in RSS’ 2016 annual report under the heading “Seva Vibhag”, a Sanskrit term for “service department”. 

A blog post on Sewa Bharati’s website from December 2024 about an event the group organised described Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh as highlighting the role of RSS leaders in establishing Sewa Bharati in his address and noting that “RSS not only builds the nation but also the individual”. RSS Joint General Secretary Alok Kumar also spoke at the Sewa Bharati event, according to the blog post. 

In response to Bellingcat’s queries, Israni said that Sewa USA had “no role in Sewa Bharati’s governance or operations”. Sewa Bharati did not respond to multiple requests for comment as of publication.

Sewa USA received almost $69.4 million in contributions and grants from 2020 to 2024, according to its Form 990s. Filings listing Sewa USA as a grantee show that at least $16 million was from DAFs. In its expenditure statements, Sewa USA reported giving $29.7 million in foreign grants to groups in South Asia during this period and about $622,613 in grants domestically in the US, while the rest of its expenditures included operational costs such as salaries and travel. It is not specified in the forms how much funding, if any, Sewa USA transferred to Sewa Bharati during this period, and Sewa USA did not respond to questions about any amounts transferred as of publication. 

‘Cause-Neutral’ Funding

Experts told Bellingcat that there was less regulatory scrutiny of grants distributed through DAFs than some other types of charitable donations.

“For donor-advised funds, there’s actually less oversight by the IRS because donor-advised funds are considered public charities rather than private foundations,” said Samuel Brunson, a law professor at Loyola University Chicago.

“If a private foundation were giving money to organisations in India, that would be a little bit trickier. But if it’s a public charity … there’s not really a ton of oversight on that as long as the money that the US tax-exempt organisation is giving meets its charitable purpose.”

Lloyd Hitoshi Mayer, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame who specialises in non-profits, said that it was “irrebuttably presumed” that funds granted to US organisations with the non-profit 501(c)(3) tax status were being used for good charitable purposes.

“The existing federal tax laws related to donor-advised funds put some restrictions on what grants donor-advised fund sponsor organisations, which actually control the funds, can make. But the big exception is that Congress said, ‘If you make a grant to a Section 501(c)(3) charity, you’re good.’ You don’t have to do any additional oversight.”

Some DAF sponsor organisations have previously faced criticism for granting money to charities that have promoted homophobic, anti-immigrant or anti-Muslim views. Several were also criticised for pausing funding to the Southern Poverty Law Centre earlier this year, although this case demonstrated how DAFs can prevent funds from going to some groups recommended by donors, if the DAFs deem them unsuitable. 

Brunson told Bellingcat that DAF sponsor organisations “absolutely have the right and ability” to halt processing donations to certain organisations. “Whether we want them to do that or not is a separate question,” he said. 

Bellingcat reached out to the top three DAF sponsor organisations that donated to the two non-profits we identified – Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund (Fidelity Charitable), American Online Giving Foundation (AOGF) and Charles Schwab-affiliated Donor Advised Charitable Giving (DAFgiving360; known before 2024 as Schwab Charitable) – to ask about their internal policies on assessing charities receiving donations through their funds. In total, the three DAFs accounted for almost $20 million, or 81.7 percent, of the DAF grants to Ekal USA and Sewa International for full reporting years between 2020 and 2024. 

Fidelity Charitable, AOGF and DAFgiving360 all told Bellingcat that they had due diligence processes in place when evaluating non-profits. 

Fidelity Charitable’s website states that it is a “cause-neutral” charity, but it ensures grants are used solely for charitable purposes. AOGF said non-profits must comply with eligibility requirements regarding hate speech, discrimination and the use of funds. 

Meanwhile, DAFgiving360 said that a grant recipient may be subject to monitoring or placed under temporary suspension “due to circumstances that DAFgiving360 deems appropriate”, such as if there is a public interest consideration or if the recipient does not further DAFgiving360’s mission.

---

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post Groups Associated With India’s Far-Right Receive Millions Through US Donor-Advised Funds appeared first on bellingcat.

Earlier this week, several viral social media posts and news articles stated that Google had updated satellite imagery over Gaza.

The imagery shared in these posts and articles shows several areas, including the southern city of Rafah. Huge destruction is detailed in the images, including what appears to be entire neighbourhoods flattened

But the imagery wasn’t entirely new. 

A Google spokesperson told Bellingcat that they regularly updated third-party satellite images and that the latest Gaza imagery had actually been available since June 2026. 

Tomorrow's front page

New satellite pictures lay bare Israel's destruction of Gaza pic.twitter.com/E65GXUHwrG

— The National (@ScotNational) September 28, 2026

Social media posts from earlier this year also detailed how Google Earth Pro users (a program that needs to be downloaded) had been analysing what appears to be the same imagery that was showcased this week by media outlets as early as May.

Google Earth has updated its satellite imagery to 2026 for the central and south Gaza strip.

In this thread, we will be going over some areas that I found interesting while I explored the update.

If you want a screenshot of a site, reply with the coordinates, and ill send. https://t.co/rPYzpKNRmW pic.twitter.com/iZpncz6bVH

— Stinky (@Stinky915846091) May 22, 2026

Bellingcat has access to satellite imagery from commercial space company Planet Labs, which shows further destruction in Rafah after the June Google update.

The Planet Labs imagery also gives insight into destruction further north in Gaza as recently as September.

Demolitions and Destruction Continue

The Google imagery updated in June showed a satellite image captured by the Airbus satellite imagery provider several months prior, in February 2026. 

When compared to a previous image of the same area that was published and visible on Google in June 2024, the difference is stark. Entire neighbourhoods have been razed while several school facilities near the Tal as Sultan area appear to be among the most prominent buildings still standing.

Satellite imagery shows visible changes across Rafah between June 2024 (left) and February 2026 (right). Image credit: Airbus via Google Earth.

Bellingcat previously reported on this destruction when it first started taking place in 2024. And the demolitions have continued since Google published its latest Airbus images in June.

The most recent high resolution imagery from Planet Labs, which uses its own constellation of satellites called SkySat, was taken in September. This was seven months after those now displayed on Google, and shows buildings near Rafah’s municipal stadium have now been demolished. 

A number of schools and other buildings near the Tal as Sultan area previously still standing to the northwest of the stadium are also now shown to have been demolished in the September imagery.

Satellite imagery shows visible changes across Rafah between February 2026 (left) and September 2026 (right). Image credit: Planet Labs PBC.

The centre of Bani Suheila, a town just to the east of Khan Yunis in southern Gaza, also looks drastically different from how it appears in the Google imagery. 

While most of the buildings surrounding the centre of the town are visibly damaged or destroyed in the Airbus imagery, updated imagery from Planet shows that even more of the buildings have been reduced to rubble, with an IDF outpost now visible on top. A large earthen barrier is also visible, cutting through the town from north to south.

Satellite imagery shows visible changes in town of Bani Suheila between February 2026 (left) and September 2026 (right). Image credit: Planet Labs PBC.

Recent Planet Labs imagery also shows the level of destruction in northern Gaza, primarily in the eastern areas of the towns of Shujaiya and Jabaliya.

Satellite imagery shows visible changes in town of Jabaliya between December 2024 (left) and September 2026 (right). Image credit: Planet Labs PBC.

Both Shujaiya and Jabaliya were already heavily damaged before the most recent ceasefire. Satellite imagery shows that the IDF has continued razing large parts of both neighbourhoods while building outposts.

Satellite imagery shows visible changes in town of Shejiya between December 2024 (left) and September 2026 (right). Image credit: Planet Labs PBC.

Earlier this week, reports also surfaced that an Israeli satellite imagery provider had released images over northern Gaza before they were taken down.

Satellite images such as these appear to show that Israel has not stopped reducing buildings in Gaza to rubble despite the continuation of an official ceasefire.

Israel previously told media that the mass demolitions were part of an effort to “demilitarise” Gaza. 

According to United Nations data, about 82 percent of the structures in Gaza are damaged, with two -thirds of them destroyed. 

With international journalists still widely unable to enter Gaza freely, satellite imagery remains one of the only ways to assess the true scale of destruction and to understand what is happening on the ground.

---

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post Viral Google Maps Images Shared Widely This Week Show Gaza Ruins. We Obtained More Recent Satellite Imagery appeared first on bellingcat.

This article is the result of a collaboration with The Sunday Times. You can find their corresponding piece here. 

Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published.

Christy Kinahan, the Irish founder of the Kinahan Organised Crime Group who is being pursued by authorities around the world from his bolthole in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), has had his residence permit cancelled.

The visa was cancelled at the end of last month, just weeks after the extradition of his eldest son Daniel Kinahan from Dubai to Ireland, where he is charged with directing the activities of a criminal organisation.

It follows a review of public immigration records by Bellingcat and The Sunday Times, published in August, which revealed that Christopher Kinahan Jr, another of Christy Kinahan’s sons, was recently issued with a new two-year visa in the UAE. 

This is despite his status as a sanctioned individual who, like his father and older brother, is the subject of a $5 million reward from the US government for information leading to his arrest or conviction.

Last month, we also exposed the residence statuses of the crime gang’s other sanctioned leaders who remain at large in Dubai. These include cartel lieutenant Bernard Clancy, whose residence permit was renewed in January, as well as padel poster boy Ian Dixon and Christy Kinahan, who have been living in Dubai on expired permits.

The cartel members had all obtained employment-based residence visas sponsored by Dubai companies, which are required to apply for employee work permits through the UAE’s Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratization.  

Christy Kinahan’s most recent visa listed his employer as OSA Management Consultancies DWC LLC, which is based at the same Dubai address as cartel-linked firm CV Aviation Consulting Services DWC LLC. The visa expired on April 1.

A new search of Emirate government portals shows the visa was subsequently cancelled on August 31. 

According to information published by a UAE government-authorized service provider, visa cancellation applies to people who leave the country permanently, alter their visa category or change employer. For employment-based residence visas, the cancellation process must be initiated by the employer or an authorised representative. 

In the case of Kinahan’s visa, the specific reason for the cancellation is unknown. However, his last date for leaving the country is listed as September 29 in the government immigration file. This is in line with the 30-day grace period granted to holders of standard employment visas after cancellation.

The Sunday Times reports today that Europe’s intelligence services believe Kinahan is still in Dubai, though rumours that he has moved to Africa have sparked speculation he has already fled the Gulf. It also reports that the cartel leader has moved assets out of the Emirates as the crime group breaks into rival factions.  

The Kinahan Organised Crime Group is a $1.5 billion transnational network involved in drug trafficking, money laundering and arms smuggling. Investigators have connected it to Iran’s intelligence services and the Lebanon-based militant group Hezbollah.

The UAE foreign ministry has been contacted for comment.

---

Connor Plunkett, Peter Barth, Beau Donelly and John Mooney contributed to this article.  

Bellingcat is a non-profit and the ability to carry out our work is dependent on the kind support of individual donors. If you would like to support our work, you can do so here. You can also subscribe to our Patreon channel here. Subscribe to our Newsletter and follow us on Bluesky here, Instagram here, Reddit here and YouTube here.

The post Christy Kinahan’s UAE Residence Visa Cancelled appeared first on bellingcat.

Sign up here to receive Bellingcat’s biggest investigations by email as soon as they are published.

WARNING: This report contains links to graphic images and footage.

A joint Bellingcat and Jeune Afrique investigation into drone strikes carried out by the Malian military adds new details about the attacks which frequently are carried out in civilian areas and have reportedly resulted in the deaths of civilians.

The incidents, concentrated in northern Mali, often involved strikes on vehicles or commercial activity. Video footage of the strikes is often broadcast on national television, portrayed as precise attacks against terrorists and their logistics. 

Mali’s military government acquired its first Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 drones in late 2022, and regularly releases footage of drone strikes to be broadcast on national television, describing them as “precise” and describing the targets as “terrorists and their logistics”. This month marks three years since Mali joined with Burkina Faso and Niger to form the Alliance of Sahel States (AES). Its military government has made restoring national sovereignty a central part of its political message. 

Bellingcat geolocated more than a dozen drone strikes including instances in which civilian deaths and injuries were reported. However, this represents just a fraction of the strikes that have taken place in northern Mali, with many more conducted for which footage was not available or further details were harder to verify as the locations are so remote.  

Yvan Guichaoua Senior Researcher at the Bonn International Centre for Conflict Studies told us the Malian military’s drone strikes appeared to fit a pattern of “guilt by location” in which people may be treated as targets based on where they are rather than who they are. 

He added that the broadcast of drone strikes on national television, often accompanied by dramatic commentary created a familiar narrative for veiwers that was akin to daily episodes “of a national saga”. Yet the impact of the drone war on civilians and non-combatants is seldom covered in such reports. 

Mali’s civil war involves separatist and Islamist groups and has been ongoing since 2012, predating the formation of the AES. But the conflict has spiked in 2026 as Tuareg separatists from the Azawad Liberation Front (FLA) and militants from the al-Qaeda affiliated Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM) seized control of parts of the country’s north in coordinated attacks against the Malian military and Russia’s Africa Corps forces. The Malian military (known hereafter by their official name Forces Armées Maliennes or FAMa) has relied heavily upon drone strikes in response. 

We contacted FAMa and put our findings to them but did not received a substantive response at time of publication.

Destruction in Zouera

In one notable case – on July 8, 2025 FAMa presented a drone strike in the town of Zouera, in the Timbuktu region, as a successful operation against a supply vehicle for terrorists in footage broadcast on ORTM1 [4:50-5:31]. Drone footage shows a person walking near the vehicle before it is struck. The explosion immediately ignites a nearby structure, while several people can be seen running away.

One video of this incident, apparently showing the aftermath of the attack, shows the remains of a person inside the burnt-down structure, which was located directly beside the vehicle that was hit in the strike. We also checked satellite imagery and found a noticeable burn scar at the location in imagery taken on Jul 9, 2025, that wasn’t visible the previous day.

Bellingcat geolocated the strike site to the coordinates 16.84589, -3.85213, inside Zouera. Several videos filmed in the immediate aftermath show the destroyed vehicle, a large plume of black smoke, and the nearby structure engulfed in flames.

Information gathered by Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and posted on X on July 11, 2025, stated four people were killed in the strike, including three young girls. MSF added that five others were treated for injuries at a local health centre, one of whom was in a serious condition. 

#Mali : Après une frappe aérienne ayant touchée le marché de #Zouéra, cercle de Goundam, région de #Tombouctou, les équipes MSF ont pris en charge ce mardi 8 juillet 5 blessés, dont un cas grave, au centre de santé local. 4 personnes ont perdu la vie, dont 3 jeunes filles. pic.twitter.com/cTdLiY9bG8

— MSF Western & Central Africa (@MSF_WestAfrica) July 11, 2025

Amasrakad Strike

Zouera was not an isolated incident. Footage from March 2024 that was released by the Malian military and again aired on ORTM1 showed two drone strikes in the town of Amasrakad that resulted in the deaths of civilians, according to witness testimony and previous reporting by Amnesty International.

The footage shows an initial strike hitting a parked pick-up truck before cutting to a second strike on a nearby compound, where several people can be seen running moments before impact. The first strike was geolocated to the coordinates 17.08402, 0.76204, by France 24.

Bellingcat geolocated the second strike to a structure within a nearby compound at coordinates 17.081613, 0.768012, where the drone footage shows several people scrambling before impact. Separate graphic footage published by the Spokesperson for the Awazad Liberation Front on X the following day shows several dead people including what appeared to be women lying in and around the compound. France 24’s previous reporting on the strike included images of covered bodies inside a destroyed tent, as well as an image of a child that was reportedly injured during the strike. 

Our partner Jeune Afrique obtained testimony from the man who filmed the footage. He said the second strike killed 13 members of two families, including several children, who had gathered in a tent for shelter after the first strike. He added that he helped take eight injured people to health centres. The man told Jeune Afrique he has now joined the separatist FLA group following the attacks.  

This testimony would appear to support a 2024 Amnesty International report that stated at least 13 civilians, including seven children, were killed and more than a dozen people injured. Amnesty reported speaking to seven survivors and eyewitnesses who said the first strike hit a Toyota Hilux used by the local health centre. Believing the vehicle had been the target, residents fled to a nearby compound to seek shelter. The second strike then hit the compound directly, the Amnesty report stated.

The FAMa claimed in an official statement just after that attack that: “These operations neutralised several terrorists and destroyed a significant quantity of military equipment and vehicles.” While the pro-Azawad separatist group, the CSP gave a different account, condemning the strikes and claiming that they had killed 13 of which a majority were women and children. 

We contacted FAMa to ask whether it maintains that those killed were members of an armed group, whether steps were taken to establish if civilians were present before the strike was carried out and whether an investigation was done into the reports of civilian deaths. We did not receive a reply at time of publication.

Two Strikes in Tinzaouaten

Some of the cases we geolocated had been documented previously. However, we were able to add new details about several strikes. The town of Tinzaouaten near Mali’s northeastern border with Algeria endured two major drone strikes in 2024, reportedly in retaliation for a major assault carried out by separatist and Islamist forces against Malian troops and Russian mercenaries. On July 30, 2024, the Malian military stated it had launched an air campaign around Tinzaouaten in coordination with the military government of Burkina Faso and had targeted “high-value targets”, including caches, logistics hubs and vehicles.

Bellingcat geolocated this footage posted on the day of the strike to 19.92476, 2.98003. The footage shows several damaged structures and what appears to be one casualty.

Pits and infrastructure which appear to be consistent with a mine are visible in satellite imagery of the area.

Bellingcat geolocated an additional video posted by a pro-Azawad media outlet showing destruction posted on X to the coordinates 19.92502, 2.98013. In another video geolocated to this site, a man claims he is at the “Inkharaban mine, near the Azawad-Algeria border.”

The Second Strike

A month later, on August 25, 2024, FAMa stated it had identified pickup trucks carrying military equipment in Tinzaouaten. It said that, “After careful surveillance, a series of strikes destroyed these terrorist targets and neutralized around twenty armed individuals.” On news channel ORTM1 the newsreader described the operation as “precision strikes targeting terrorist objectives”. 

Bellingcat geolocated footage shared online by the pro-separatist Press and Media Agency of Azawad showing the destruction at the coordinates 19.95107, 2.97284, in Tinzaouaten.

Bellingcat also geolocated two images showing casualties at this location. One image shows a group of around eight bodies, while another graphic image shows the bodies of two young boys around 20-meters away (19.9512, 2.97307). We could not confirm whether or not those pictured were civilians though a resident told Reuters that civilians were killed in drone strikes on the town.

Bellingcat contacted FAMa to ask about the two strikes in Tinzaouten in the summer of 2024. We asked the military what steps were taken to establish whether civilians were present when the strikes were carried out and whether any investigation has been carried out into the two strikes, but we had not received a response at time of publication.

In addition to the above incidents Bellingcat geolocated additional drone strikes based on footage broadcast on ORTM and added them to the below map. We were not able to confirm who was killed in the additional strikes but evidence we analysed show strikes often taking place within populated villages or against vehicles and fuel supplies.

Guess what?

Bellingcat is finally launching an official merch line! That’s right: after years of fantasizing and wishing, we’re finally ready to get our name and logo on cool merch that you’ll be able to show off. We’re working with a high quality, sustainable merchandising company to make all kinds of cool swag: coffee cups, caps, t-shirts, hoodies, and more!

We want your help designing the merch!

It’s not a Bellingcat project if it doesn’t involve you, our community, and our official merch launch is no different. As part of this exciting launch, we’re asking you to submit design ideas for the merch.

Close your eyes and think “Bellingcat”. What do you see? Draw it, write it, paint it—get original and creative, and send it to us! We’re only interested in what you can come up with, so leave the AI at home.

Our staff will review your submissions and pick the ones that we like the most. We’ll score them on originality, creativity, and how well they reflect the Bellingcat essence. If we pick yours, we’ll let you know and give you free merch with your design on it! 

How to submit your design ideas

To submit your design idea, simply upload an image via this Google Form. Once our staff reviews your submissions, we’ll conduct public voting to select the winning submissions. Our staff will let you know by November 6, 2026 if yours was one of the winning designs. We’ll then work with you to put the merch with your amazing design on it in your hands! 

For more information on the terms and conditions of the contest, make sure to read this page. Please keep all submissions appropriate for a general audience. Content containing profane, lewd, explicit, discriminatory, or harassing material will be rejected immediately without review.

The last day to make your submission is October 2, 2026.

Please see our FAQ below:

Will Bellingcat make money on my design?

Any profit from merchandise sales will go towards the Bellingcat Stichting Foundation, which will help us run our operations and keep our investigations independent.

How long will winning designs be in circulation?

This design submission is for a limited time capsule event. The designs chosen will only be available until the limited stock lasts.

What do you mean by a sustainable print on demand company?

The platform we’re using to create the merchandise is Fourthwall, which offers many sustainable print on demand providers.

Who will select the winning designs?

Bellingcat staff members will shortlist the initial submissions and then the public will be given the opportunity to vote on the final selection of designs and products which will be anonymised. The ones that receive the most votes will be selected for production.

What level of effort do I need to put in here? I’m not a professional artist!

Don’t doubt yourself! We want to see where your creativity takes you. Submissions are evaluated as creative concepts; final execution, text layout, and color formatting will be finalized by our production team. Bellingcat Stichting and its printing partners reserve the right to modify or adjust the design strictly to ensure compatibility with apparel printing processes, manufacturing standards, and brand guidelines. However, we will respect your moral rights as the author and will not make substantial alterations that harm the integrity of the original work without your prior consultation and consent.

What makes a winning design?

We will use three categories to score designs out of five. The three categories designs will be marked on are: originality, creativity, and speaks to our collective mission.

Can I submit more than one entry?

Brimming with ideas? You can submit more than one design to the contest. To do so, either combine multiple designs into one file, clearly labelling them as separate concepts, or fill out the form separately for each design.

The post Bellingcat Official Merch Design Contest appeared first on bellingcat.