Abdul El-Sayed Makes History, Defeats Republican Rival To Become First Muslim US Senator

Democrat Abdul El-Sayed has won Michigan’s closely watched United States Senate election, making history as the first Muslim to be elected to the US Senate.

El-Sayed defeated Republican candidate Mike Rogers in the November 3, 2026, midterm elections, according to projections by the Associated Press.

His victory marks a historic milestone for Muslim representation in American politics and brings an end to more than two centuries without a Muslim serving in the US Senate.

The election was one of the most closely watched contests in the country, as Democrats and Republicans battled for control of the Senate.

According to Michigan Advance, the Associated Press called the race for El-Sayed with approximately 85 per cent of the votes counted. He was leading Rogers with 51.9 per cent against 46.1 per cent.

The victory means El-Sayed will succeed retiring Democratic Senator Gary Peters, who did not seek re-election.

Born on October 31, 1984, in Rochester Hills, Michigan, El-Sayed is the son of Egyptian immigrants.

The 42-year-old politician built his career around public health before venturing into electoral politics.

He graduated from the University of Michigan in 2007, earning degrees in biology and political science. He subsequently obtained a doctorate in public health from the University of Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar and later earned a medical degree from Columbia University in 2014.

In 2015, at the age of 30, he was appointed Detroit’s health director, making him one of the youngest officials to occupy the position.

He later served as head of Wayne County’s health department from 2023 to 2025.

Although he previously contested the Michigan governorship in 2018, he lost the Democratic primary to Gretchen Whitmer.

His election to the Senate therefore represents a significant turning point in his political career.

During the campaign, El-Sayed promoted an ambitious progressive agenda, including universal healthcare, popularly known as Medicare for All.

He also advocated measures to address medical debt, increase taxes on billionaires, reduce corporate influence in politics and limit the role of wealthy interest groups in election financing.

On foreign policy, he called for an end to the war involving Iran and a reassessment of America’s relationship with Israel, particularly over the conflict in Gaza.

His positions attracted support from prominent progressive politicians, including Senator Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Kamala Harris also campaigned in Michigan in support of his candidacy.

El-Sayed’s campaign was marked by controversies surrounding his Muslim faith, Egyptian heritage and criticism of Israel.

President Donald Trump and other Republican figures questioned his loyalty to the United States and made allegations linking him to extremist organisations.

El-Sayed rejected the allegations, while the Associated Press reported that there was no evidence supporting claims of terrorist links.

His Democratic primary opponent, Congresswoman Haley Stevens, also endorsed Republican candidate Mike Rogers shortly before election day, following disagreements over El-Sayed’s positions.

Despite the divisions, El-Sayed secured the Democratic Party’s support and went on to defeat Rogers in the general election.

El-Sayed’s election is particularly significant for Muslim representation in the United States Congress.

Although Muslims have previously served in the House of Representatives, including Keith Ellison, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, no Muslim has ever served in the US Senate.

His victory will therefore open a new chapter in the representation of Muslims in America’s highest legislative chamber.

He is expected to assume office in January 2027, succeeding retiring Senator Gary Peters.

His victory also gives progressive Democrats a prominent new figure in Washington as the party prepares for future political contests.

For El-Sayed, the historic achievement marks the culmination of a political journey that began with public health advocacy and has now taken him to the United States Senate.

Abdul El-Sayed Makes History, Defeats Republican Rival To Become First Muslim US Senator (more…)

US Midterm Elections: ‘Americans Said No To War,’ Iran Speaker Declares As Democrats Take Control Of Congress

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has described the Democratic Party’s victories in the United States midterm elections as a rejection of war, warning the Trump administration against ignoring the wishes of American voters.

Ghalibaf made the declaration on Wednesday, November 4, in a statement posted on his official X account, shortly after Democrats secured control of both chambers of the US Congress in Tuesday’s elections.

The results represent a major setback for President Donald Trump and the Republican Party, with Democrats gaining several previously Republican-held seats in the Senate and House of Representatives.

Reacting to the development, the Iranian parliament speaker linked the Democrats’ electoral success to public dissatisfaction with the ongoing US-Israeli war against Iran and the rising cost of living in America.

In his statement, Ghalibaf wrote:

“Conscience or the cost of living, Americans said NO TO WAR, and we endorse this message.

“If the US govt betrays their public will to serve international paymasters and blackmailers, it will learn our NO comes with a Nightmare.”

His remarks appeared to suggest that the American electorate had used the midterm elections to express opposition to Washington’s mil2itary involvement in the Middle East.

The Iranian leader’s comments also came amid continuing tensions between Washington and Tehran, with diplomatic efforts ongoing to prevent a further escalation of the conflict.

The conflict between the United States, Israel and Iran, which began following joint US-Israeli military action in February 2026, featured prominently in the political debate ahead of the midterm elections.

The war has contributed to rising energy prices and economic uncertainty, adding to concerns about inflation and the cost of living among American households.

Other issues, including President Trump’s tariff policies, domestic political divisions and concerns about the economy, also featured prominently in the election campaign.

According to reports, Democrats made significant gains across several states, winning congressional seats previously held by Republicans and securing control of both chambers of Congress.

The outcome is expected to complicate Trump’s legislative agenda during the remaining two years of his presidency.

President Trump has also acknowledged that the conflict with Iran contributed to the Republican Party’s poor performance in the elections.

Speaking during an interview with Fox News following the results, Trump admitted that the war was one of the factors behind the party’s losses.

“I think a part of it was Iran, but at the same time, people understood the importance of what I’ve done with Iran,” he said.

However, the president rejected suggestions that the election results amounted to a personal repudiation of his leadership, maintaining that voters understood his administration’s position on the conflict.

Trump also indicated that he would resist some legislative proposals from the incoming Democratic-controlled Congress, saying he would veto bills he considered unacceptable.

With Democrats taking control of both the Senate and House of Representatives, the administration is expected to face increased congressional scrutiny over its foreign policy decisions, military spending and handling of the Iranian conflict.

The new congressional majority will have greater powers to conduct investigations, organise oversight hearings and challenge aspects of the president’s legislative programme.

The election outcome also places additional pressure on the Trump administration to address domestic economic concerns while managing its foreign policy challenges.

For Tehran, the Democratic victories present an opportunity to amplify its argument that continued military confrontation carries significant political and economic consequences for Washington.

However, Ghalibaf’s interpretation of the election results remains Iran’s political position, as American voters also considered several domestic issues when casting their ballots.

The developments come as diplomatic efforts continue amid uncertainty over the future of US-Iran relations and the wider security situation in the Middle East.

US Midterm Elections: ‘Americans Said No To War,’ Iran Speaker Declares As Democrats Take Control Of Congress

Australia Under Pressure To Scrap $368bn US-UK Nuclear Submarine Deal As Inquiry Warns Of China War

A public inquiry in Australia has called for the immediate cancellation of the country’s controversial $368 billion nuclear submarine agreement with the United States and the United Kingdom, describing it as potentially the worst, riskiest and most expensive defence decision ever taken by an Australian government.

The inquiry, led by former Australian Labor Party lawmaker and Midnight Oil frontman, Peter Garrett, alongside former Chief of Defence Admiral Chris Barrie, warned that the agreement could undermine Australia’s national sovereignty, expose the country to a possible military confrontation with China and create serious long-term nuclear waste challenges.

The findings were contained in a report titled Surrendering Australia: The AUKUS Deception, which called on the government to terminate the submarine programme and undertake a comprehensive reassessment of the country’s defence and foreign policy priorities.

The report also recommended suspending plans for new military bases linked to the agreement and establishing a royal commission to investigate the circumstances surrounding the deal.

AUKUS is a trilateral security partnership involving Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, established to strengthen defence cooperation, including Australia’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines.

The agreement was originally negotiated under the administration of former Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison, with then United States President Joe Biden and former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

However, the inquiry argued that the agreement was reached without adequate public consultation or parliamentary scrutiny, raising questions about its financial implications and long-term consequences for Australia’s independence.

Speaking at the National Press Club in Canberra, Garrett criticised the current government for failing to conduct a comprehensive review of the agreement since assuming office.

He argued that the deal was conceived in secrecy and had bypassed established defence and parliamentary oversight procedures.

According to the inquiry, Australia’s involvement in the programme could make the country increasingly dependent on Washington’s military and strategic decisions, potentially drawing it into conflicts that might not directly serve its national interests.

Barrie, who served as Australia’s Chief of Defence between 1998 and 2002, also questioned the viability of the submarine programme.

He urged the government to abandon the project and rebuild the country’s national security decision-making processes.

The inquiry further raised concerns about the proposed expansion of the Stirling defence precinct in Perth, warning that it could effectively become a United States military base hosting as many as 2,000 American military personnel.

It warned that the development could expose nearby communities, including Rockingham and Fremantle, to increased security risks in the event of a major international conflict.

Another major concern highlighted in the report was whether Australia would actually receive the nuclear-powered submarines it had committed enormous resources to acquiring.

Under the arrangement, Australia is expected to begin receiving second-hand United States Virginia-class submarines around 2032, before the country eventually develops its own AUKUS-class submarines, expected to become operational around 2042.

However, delays and rising production costs affecting the United States submarine industry have raised doubts about whether Washington can meet the delivery commitments.

The inquiry also questioned the absence of enforceable guarantees protecting Australia’s investment should the United States or the United Kingdom fail to fulfil their obligations.

It warned that Australia could spend hundreds of billions of dollars without receiving the promised military capabilities.

The financial implications extend beyond the acquisition and construction of submarines.

The report estimated that managing nuclear waste generated by the submarine programme could require an additional $180 billion.

It noted that Australia had yet to identify a permanent storage facility for the radioactive waste, including highly toxic materials from submarine reactor cores and spent nuclear fuel.

The inquiry also called for a fundamental review of the second pillar of the AUKUS agreement, which covers cooperation in advanced military technologies and defence capabilities.

It urged the Australian government to reconsider its relationship with Beijing, warning that the submarine programme could further heighten tensions with China.

The findings followed public hearings held across Australia and the receipt of more than 1,000 submissions from citizens, former government officials, military experts, academics and advocacy groups.

The controversy has also attracted criticism from several former Australian leaders, including former Prime Ministers Paul Keating and Malcolm Turnbull, as well as former foreign affairs ministers Gareth Evans and Bob Carr.

They are among prominent figures who have questioned whether the agreement represents the best option for Australia’s national security.

Despite the criticism, the AUKUS partnership remains a major component of Australia’s defence strategy, with successive governments maintaining that nuclear-powered submarines will strengthen the country’s military capabilities and strategic position in the Indo-Pacific region.

The inquiry’s recommendations have now intensified pressure on the government to explain the enormous financial commitment, the risks associated with the agreement and whether Australia can secure its national interests without becoming excessively dependent on its Western allies.

Australia Under Pressure To Scrap $368bn US-UK Nuclear Submarine Deal As Inquiry Warns Of China War