分类: politics

  • Zelensky in Dublin as Ireland begins EU presidency term

    Zelensky in Dublin as Ireland begins EU presidency term

    DUBLIN — A landmark ceremonial event kicking off Ireland’s six-month term holding the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union launched in the Irish capital on July 1, 2026, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky gracing the guest list alongside top EU and Irish leaders. The gathering, which opened with a formal flag-raising ceremony featuring performances of both the Irish national anthem and the European Union’s official anthem, marks the eighth time Ireland has held the rotating presidential role since it joined the European Economic Community, the EU’s precursor, in 1973. The last time Dublin assumed the responsibility was 2013, and this current term will run through the end of December 2026. As the presiding country, Ireland will be tasked with steering legislative negotiations across EU policy areas and mediating consensus between the bloc’s 27 member states.

    Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin opened the ceremony by extending official welcomes to European Council President António Costa and visiting Ukrainian President Zelensky. In his opening address, Martin emphasized that Ireland’s decades-long evolution into a modern, outward-facing economy and inclusive society cannot be separated from its decades of European Union membership. “Ireland has always been a deeply European country,” Martin told attendees, framing the nation as “a beacon of hope for the transformative potential of the European appeal.” He went on to reaffirm Ireland’s longstanding commitment to Ukraine amid Russia’s ongoing full-scale invasion, stating: “We will stand unswervingly by the people of Ukraine. We are determined to ensure Ukraine get the peace and justice they deserve.” The presidency role passed to Ireland from Cyprus, which completed its own six-month term in June 2026.

    In his address at the ceremony, Zelensky offered his warm congratulations to Ireland on assuming the presidency, noting that the role carries an outsized “great responsibility” for the bloc. He thanked Ireland for its consistent “attention to Ukraine” and recalled that the country has stood with Kyiv from the “very beginning” of Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. “We must protect lives and our values from Russia’s anti-European aggression, and when we face many other challenges, both in international affairs and at the national level,” Zelensky said. He added that the European Union currently holds a unique “opportunity and responsibility to be a force that brings more stability” to the European continent and the broader global order.

    Costa echoed this sentiment in his own remarks, praising Ireland for its consistent leadership in upholding the core tenets of the international rules-based system. “Ireland has consistently been at the forefront” of efforts to defend these foundational principles, Costa noted, highlighting the country’s longstanding commitment to multilateral cooperation and European integration.

  • Trump’s $1.4bn crypto earnings revealed

    Trump’s $1.4bn crypto earnings revealed

    A bombshell new disclosure from U.S. President Donald Trump’s mandatory 2025 financial filing has uncovered that the sitting president pulled in over $1.4 billion in earnings last year from cryptocurrency-related business activities. The figure, which translates to roughly £750 million, marks one of the most unusual and high-profile personal financial windfalls for a sitting U.S. president in modern history, reigniting debates over conflict of interest and transparency in executive branch financial holdings.

    Mandatory financial disclosures are a core legal requirement for senior U.S. government officials, including the president, designed to give the public visibility into potential conflicts between personal business interests and official policymaking. Prior to this filing, Trump had already drawn widespread attention for his unusual engagement with the volatile crypto sector, breaking with longstanding norms around sitting presidents maintaining distance from speculative private assets during their time in office.

    The size of the disclosed earnings has already prompted questions from government ethics watchdogs, who argue that the massive crypto profit creates an obvious conflict of interest as the president oversees federal policy related to digital asset regulation, taxation, and market oversight. As details of the filing continue to circulate, public and congressional scrutiny of the transaction origins and regulatory compliance of Trump’s crypto dealings is expected to intensify in the coming weeks.

  • Belarus’ authoritarian leader pardons 28 political prisoners to ease ties with the West

    Belarus’ authoritarian leader pardons 28 political prisoners to ease ties with the West

    TALLINN, Estonia – In a move framed as a step toward mending strained ties with Western governments, Belarusian authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko has issued a pardon to 28 people imprisoned on what the regime labels “extremism” charges – offenses widely recognized as politically motivated convictions targeting dissent.

    The pardon, announced Wednesday via presidential decree, was timed to coincide with Belarus’ upcoming Independence Day celebration on Friday, with the administration justifying the action on “humanitarian grounds.” The announcement marks the latest in a series of prisoner releases that have gained momentum since the return of U.S. President Donald Trump to the White House, which have been facilitated by Washington-mediated diplomatic negotiations.

    Lukashenko has held unbroken power over the 9.5 million-person nation for more than 30 years, ruling with a harsh, repressive grip that has drawn repeated waves of economic and political sanctions from Western capitals. Sanctions have been imposed both for the regime’s systematic crackdown on fundamental human rights and for its decision to allow Russia to use Belarusian territory as a staging ground for Moscow’s full-scale 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

    The most serious challenge to Lukashenko’s rule emerged after the disputed 2020 presidential election, when hundreds of thousands of Belarusians took to city streets across the country to protest what they widely viewed as a rigged vote outcome. The regime responded with a brutal, sweeping crackdown: tens of thousands of demonstrators were detained, many were beaten by security forces, leading opposition figures were either imprisoned or forced into exile.

    Five years after those mass 2020 protests, Lukashenko secured a seventh consecutive term in office in an election last year that opposition groups dismissed as a completely undemocratic farce.

    Under the series of U.S.-brokered agreements struck in recent months, Lukashenko has overseen the release of hundreds of political prisoners, in exchange for the lifting of a subset of U.S. sanctions. A March deal brokered by Washington saw the release of 250 detained opposition figures and activists, while the U.S. agreed to lift sanctions on two major Belarusian state-owned banks, the national Finance Ministry, and the country’s top potash producer – a key export industry for Belarus. A second deal in April facilitated a prisoner swap between Belarus and Poland that freed prominent independent journalist Andrzej Poczobut as part of a 10-person release.

    Despite these incremental releases, leading Belarusian human rights organization Viasna reports that 864 political prisoners remain behind bars in the country, including 21 journalists working for independent media outlets.

    Earlier this week, Nils Muižnieks, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on human rights in Belarus, issued a stark warning that even with the release of hundreds of detainees over the past year, the broader human rights situation in Belarus has not seen meaningful improvement. “Sustainable progress requires an end to politically motivated repression and accountability for past violations,” Muižnieks stated in his report.

    Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the exiled leader of Belarus’ opposition, told the Associated Press that while the latest pardon will bring momentary relief to the families of the 28 released prisoners, the international community cannot lose sight of the hundreds still detained. “We mustn’t forget that hundreds of political prisoners remain in Belarusian jails, and all of them must be released,” Tsikhanouskaya emphasized.

  • Australian communist: CPC’s 105-year journey proves determination and action achieve greatness

    Australian communist: CPC’s 105-year journey proves determination and action achieve greatness

    On the 105th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China (CPC), a senior leader of the Communist Party of Australia has shared his reflections on the CPC’s historic journey, crediting the organization’s decades of transformative progress to unwavering determination, grounded theoretical guidance and consistent collective action.

    Christian Goopy, member of the Communist Party of Australia Central Committee, opened up about his own ideological journey in a recent commentary, noting that his decision to join the Australian communist movement has been a defining personal choice. For Goopy, party membership has provided a clear ideological framework that has helped him remain aligned with his core values and expand his capacity to contribute meaningfully to collective progress as a communist activist.

    First established on July 1, 1921, the CPC has grown from a small revolutionary organization into the governing party of the world’s most populous nation, guiding China through a century of unprecedented social, economic and political transformation. Goopy emphasized that the 105-year trajectory of the CPC offers a powerful case study in how aligned ideological commitment, theoretical clarity and deliberate, people-centered action can combine to deliver outcomes that reshape the lives of hundreds of millions and alter the course of global history.

    The commentary comes as global political observers and left-wing movements mark the CPC’s anniversary, with many leaders across the world sharing perspectives on the party’s legacy and its impact on global development over the past century. Goopy’s remarks join a growing chorus of international communist and progressive leaders recognizing the CPC’s century-long track record of delivering equitable development and advancing working-class interests.

  • Turkey tightens security and showcases strength and commitment ahead of NATO summit

    Turkey tightens security and showcases strength and commitment ahead of NATO summit

    As the July 7-8 NATO summit approaches, the Turkish capital of Ankara is bracing for the arrival of leaders from all 32 alliance member states, with host nation Turkey rolling out unprecedented strict security measures and preparing to showcase its dual role as both an independent and core member of the transatlantic bloc. The summit, which will gather global defense leaders including U.S. President Donald Trump at a time of growing rifts within the alliance, comes as Turkey has signaled a deliberate shift back toward closer alignment with its NATO partners after years of unorthodox independent foreign policy.

    To guarantee the safety of summit attendees and delegations, Turkish authorities have deployed tens of thousands of police officers, placed national air defense systems on high alert, and imposed sweeping restrictions on public activity. All public gatherings, demonstrations, concerts and even graduation ceremonies within the capital have been banned for the duration of the summit, while non-essential public sector workers have been granted administrative leave to reduce traffic and crowd congestion. Major access controls are in place across key city arteries, the presidential complex (where summit meetings will be held), delegation hotels, and both existing and new aviation facilities.

    In a pre-summit security sweep, law enforcement officials have detained more than 200 individuals alleged to have ties to extremist organizations including the Islamic State, according to official statements. However, the operation has also drawn criticism after independent reports confirmed that several political activists, lawyers and a local academic were swept up in the detentions. Additional controversy has emerged over restrictions on press and expression: a Turkish court has ordered internet service providers to block access to websites critical of the NATO summit and alliance policy on public order and security grounds, and multiple journalists aligned with Turkish opposition media outlets have been denied official press accreditation to cover the event. Media rights organizations and opposition political figures have decried these measures as excessively restrictive, with former Turkish ambassador and main opposition lawmaker Namik Tan noting that “in the history of the organization, we have never witnessed security measures as stringent and suffocating in a host city for a summit as we are seeing this time in Ankara.”

    As part of pre-summit infrastructure upgrades, Turkey has completed conversion of a former military airfield into a purpose-built VIP airport exclusively designed to accommodate arriving heads of state and senior delegation members. Officials confirmed the facility will remain a dedicated VIP airport after the summit concludes and will not open to commercial civilian traffic. Local media has also reported city-wide beautification efforts, including repainting building facades along the motorcade route from the new airport to central Ankara.

    For Ankara, a city of nearly 6 million residents with long experience of tight security in response to persistent terrorist threats, the current measures represent an extraordinary expansion of security controls that have significantly disrupted daily life. While some residents have adjusted to the new rules – like personal trainer Selin Karakoc, who expressed relief that her July 5 wedding falls just before restrictions take effect – the sweeping limits on public assembly and expression have sparked debate over the balance between security and civil liberties.

    Beyond the immediate security preparations, the summit holds major strategic significance for both NATO and host Turkey. The core agenda for the two-day meeting centers on shoring up alliance unity amid growing tensions between the United States and European NATO members, stoked by Trump’s repeated threats to withdraw from the alliance, cut U.S. troop levels in Europe, and criticism of European allies for failing to back U.S. policy toward Iran and efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Defense spending commitments and the long-term future of the alliance’s transatlantic bond are also expected to feature prominently in discussions.

    Fatih Ceylan, a former Turkish ambassador to NATO and current security analyst at the Ankara Policy Center, noted that the key metric for the summit’s success will be progress in reducing transatlantic rifts. “The important aspect of the meeting is to what extent the rift between the United States and Europe can be healed or narrowed during the summit,” he said. “We should not expect miracles, but nonetheless if there is a convergence of ideas emphasizing the importance of NATO, that should be seen as a success.”

    Turkey’s role as summit host is widely credited with securing Trump’s attendance, a point the U.S. president himself acknowledged after a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte at the White House, saying “Well, except for the fact that it was being held in Turkey by President Erdogan, I don’t think I would have gone to it.” Trump has long maintained a close personal rapport with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has positioned the summit as a landmark moment for Turkey’s standing in the alliance.

    Erdogan has framed Turkey as a reliable, responsible NATO ally that shoulders unique responsibility on the alliance’s strategically critical southeastern flank, saying he is working to ensure the Ankara summit “will stand as a reference point in NATO’s history.” As a NATO member since 1952, Turkey boasts the alliance’s second-largest standing military after the United States, a rapidly expanding domestic defense industry, and a one-of-a-kind strategic location at the intersection of Europe, the Middle East, the Black Sea and the Caucasus.

    Yet Turkey has long walked an independent path within NATO, a track record that has frequently frustrated other alliance members. Ankara has refused to join Western sanctions on Russia, maintains ongoing territorial disputes with fellow NATO member Greece, and purchased a Russian S-400 air defense system that resulted in its expulsion from the U.S.-led F-35 stealth fighter program in 2019. Turkey also delayed the accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO for more than a year, only dropping its opposition after securing major concessions on counter-terrorism cooperation and the lifting of European arms export restrictions. It has also previously blocked senior NATO leadership appointments over unmet policy demands.

    But Turkish analysts point out that this independent streak has also allowed Turkey to play a unique mediating role in regional conflicts, most notably brokering the 2022 Black Sea Grain Initiative that allowed critical grain exports to leave Ukrainian ports amid Russia’s full-scale invasion, and supporting recent diplomatic efforts to de-escalate tensions in the Middle East.

    Ankara has itself long expressed frustration with NATO allies, particularly over what it views as insufficient alliance solidarity during the 2016 failed coup against Erdogan, and over arms export restrictions imposed after Turkey’s military intervention in northern Syria. Murat Aslan, an analyst with Ankara-based think tank SETA, argued that Turkey’s history of tense relations with the U.S. and Europe forced it to develop an independent approach to alliance politics – a model that could now help bridge current transatlantic tensions, as European powers also push for their own strategic autonomy from the U.S. “Turkey can help NATO navigate U.S.–Europe tensions by showing how to ‘balance’ independence with alliance commitments,” Aslan said.

    In recent months, Turkey has signaled a clear shift back toward closer alignment with NATO. The strategic value of the alliance was underscored earlier this year when NATO missile defense systems intercepted four missiles launched from Iran that crossed into Turkish territory during the Iran war. In a sign of alliance solidarity, Italy and Germany deployed additional air defense systems to Turkey in the weeks leading up to the summit to bolster security against potential regional threats.

    Hamish Kinnear, principal Middle East and North Africa analyst at risk intelligence firm Verisk Maplecroft, wrote in a recent research note that “Turkey wishes to distinguish itself as a foreign policy actor that is independent of NATO and the West. While Turkey is not abandoning its balancing approach, it is tilting closer to the West, primarily because of NATO.”

    For the alliance, the Ankara summit will test whether members can put longstanding rifts aside to present a unified front at a time of global uncertainty – while for host Turkey, it is an opportunity to cement its role as a core, indispensable member of the transatlantic alliance even as it retains its independent foreign policy voice.

  • Can China target critics abroad with its new ‘ethnic unity’ law?

    Can China target critics abroad with its new ‘ethnic unity’ law?

    When 23-year-old Chinese student Zhang Yadi, also known by her nickname Tara, flew home for a visit to China last July, few could have predicted her trip would end in detention. A postgraduate student at a top-ranked UK university, Tara had drawn Beijing’s ire months earlier while studying abroad: she shared a public birthday greeting to the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama on the social platform X, and had assisted with editing an independent Chinese-language outlet that advocates for Tibetan human rights.

    Arrested in the popular tourist town of Shangri-La, Yunnan province, she now stands accused of “inciting others to split the country and undermine national unity,” a charge that carries severe penalties under Chinese law. For Beijing, which claims Tibet as an inalienable part of its territory and labels the Dalai Lama a dangerous separatist, Tara’s words spoken from abroad crossed a non-negotiable red line. Her case now stands as a stark warning to critics of Chinese policy overseas as Beijing rolls out a sweeping new law that extends its legal reach beyond national borders.

    On Wednesday, China’s long-debated Ethnic Unity Law formally comes into force. Framed by Beijing as a measure to foster social harmony and a unified national identity across the country’s 56 recognized ethnic groups, the legislation has triggered widespread fear among exiled dissidents, rights activists, and international governments. The most contentious provision, Article 63, grants Chinese law enforcement authorities explicit legal authority to target foreign-based organizations and individuals accused of “undermining ethnic unity” or “fomenting ethnic division.” For the first time, Beijing’s long-standing practice of transnational intimidation of dissidents will have formal domestic legal standing.

    This development comes as China works to burnish its global image amid its rise as a major world power. In recent months, Beijing has loosened visa requirements for travelers from 77 nations, rolled out high-profile tourism campaigns, and rolled out the red carpet for visiting heads of state including U.S. President Donald Trump and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Influencer social media content from trips across China, including to tightly restricted regions like Tibet and Xinjiang, has been amplified to showcase the country’s natural and cultural diversity to a global audience. But the new Ethnic Unity Law threatens to undermine that soft power push, drawing sharp condemnation from European policymakers and human rights groups.

    Officially, Beijing frames the law as a logical extension of its longstanding policy of ethnic integration, which current leader Xi Jinping has framed using the metaphor of ethnic groups “hugging tightly like pomegranate seeds” to build a stronger, more unified nation. The law mandates that Mandarin Chinese, the language of the majority Han ethnic group that makes up more than 90% of China’s 1.4 billion population, be taught to all children from kindergarten through 12th grade, ending previous policies that allowed for most core coursework to be taught in local minority languages including Tibetan, Uyghur, and Mongolian. Beijing argues the mandate improves economic opportunity for minority youth by giving them fluency in the country’s dominant working language. But critics say the policy is a core part of the state-driven campaign of “sinicisation” launched in the late 2000s, which seeks to assimilate minority cultures into the dominant Han identity and erase distinct cultural and linguistic traditions.

    Human rights groups say the law will formalize and expand repressive policies that have already targeted minority communities across China for years. In Tibet, authorities have seized control of monasteries, arrested monks who refuse to renounce their devotion to the Dalai Lama, and created a pervasive culture of surveillance and intimidation. In Xinjiang, the United Nations has documented credible evidence of grave human rights violations against the Uyghur Muslim minority, including the mass detention of more than one million people in what Beijing calls “vocational re-education camps.” In Inner Mongolia, 2020 saw rare mass protests by ethnic Mongolians against plans to curtail Mongolian-medium education, a movement that was quickly and violently crushed by security forces. A 2026 joint report from PEN America and the Southern Mongolian Human Rights Information Center has already documented the systematic erasure of Mongolian-language content from Chinese online platforms, with social media groups shut down, independent accounts deleted, and informal digital community networks dismantled.

    For Chinese dissidents and ethnic minority activists living in exile, the law’s cross-border jurisdiction clause has turned anxiety into immediate fear. Many activists still have close family members residing inside China, and rights groups report that relatives of foreign-based critics have already faced increasing harassment and threats over the past year. Even peaceful advocacy for minority rights from outside China, activists say, can now be labeled a criminal offense under the new law, and retaliation can fall on loved ones back home. For many, this closes off any possibility of a safe return to China in the future.

    “As the Ethnic Unity Law goes into effect, the Chinese government’s fist of repression will continue to squeeze as it unabashedly weaponises cultural institutions, technology, and the media to further dictate a state-controlled version of Mongolian culture,” said Erika Nguyen, senior manager at PEN America’s PEN/Barbey Freedom to Write Center and co-author of the 2026 report on Mongolian cultural erasure. “Article 63 should be seen as a call to action for other countries to shore up their protection and support for the exiled Tibetan, Uyghur, and Mongolian writers, artists, journalists, and activists who continue their work at great personal risk.”

    At a press conference introducing the law last month, Chinese Deputy Justice Minister Hu Weilie rejected international criticism that the law constitutes “long-arm jurisdiction,” calling the provision “legitimate, lawful, necessary and a workable legal provision.” “Safeguarding national unity, territorial integrity, and social stability falls within the sovereign rights of all countries, and is a basic principle established under international law,” Hu added.

    But international policymakers have pushed back hard against the new law. Members of the European Parliament have already drafted a warning to EU member states, urging a review of existing extradition treaties with China and noting that if the law is used to target European citizens, it could lead to “severe consequences for EU-China relations.”

    While legal experts note the law will be difficult to enforce in foreign jurisdictions, they argue its primary purpose is to chill free speech and deter any open criticism of China’s ethnic policies from abroad. For thousands of activists living outside China, the new legal framework represents a dangerous escalation of Beijing’s transnational crackdown on dissent, one that threatens to close off open debate even beyond China’s borders. Rights groups warn that as the law takes effect, minority languages will be further pushed out of public life inside China, and the space for advocacy globally will shrink dramatically.

  • Canada celebrates its birthday as Mark Carney battles to keep it intact

    Canada celebrates its birthday as Mark Carney battles to keep it intact

    As Canadians across the nation gathered this week to mark Canada Day, celebrating 159 years of confederation, the festive atmosphere has masked deep growing strains that are putting the country’s longstanding unity to an unprecedented test. Two separate separatist movements, one in the western energy powerhouse of Alberta and another in the francophone province of Quebec, have gained new momentum in recent months, setting the stage for pivotal votes that could reshape the future of the world’s second-largest country by land mass.

    In Alberta, a years-long grassroots separatist push has built enough support to trigger a non-binding sovereignty referendum on October 19. The vote will ask Albertans whether they support splitting from Canada and moving forward with a legally binding separation vote at a later date. Opinion polling places support for separation between 25% and 30% — a share that has caught political observers off guard, even as long-simmering Western alienation has been part of Canadian politics for generations.

    Many backers of Alberta’s separatist movement argue the resource-rich province has been systematically sidelined by federal policymakers in Ottawa for decades. They point to sweeping federal environmental rules that they say have blocked pipeline construction, stifled development of Alberta’s vast oil and natural gas reserves, and cost the province billions in lost economic opportunity.

    André Lecours, a political science professor at the University of Ottawa, notes that today’s separatist drive in Alberta is far different from the historical regional frustrations that have defined the province’s relationship with Ottawa. He calls the current movement a direct offshoot of modern right-wing populism, pointing out that nearly all the leading separatist groups in the province formed during the COVID-19 pandemic, when federal public health rules stoked deep anger toward Ottawa among many Western Canadians. Notably, no elected provincial representative has yet openly and formally backed full separation, a key distinction from Quebec’s decades-long organized sovereignty campaign.

    Half a country away in Quebec, the situation follows a different but equally fraught trajectory. The province, which is majority French-speaking and has long defined itself as a distinct cultural society within Canada, has already held two independence referenda, in 1980 and 1995, with the “yes” side falling just short of a majority both times. Today, the sovereigntist Parti Québécois holds a lead in polling for the province’s October 5 general election. The party has pledged to organize a third independence referendum by 2030 if it secures a governing majority.

    Public support for Quebec sovereignty has held steady at roughly 30% in recent years, but the Parti Québécois has capitalized on widespread voter frustration with incumbent parties to surge into the lead ahead of the fall vote. Party leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon has already released a 500-plus-page policy blueprint laying out his plan for a fully independent Quebec, cementing the issue as the central theme of the upcoming election.

    Standing at the center of these overlapping tensions is Prime Minister Mark Carney, a former governor of the Bank of Canada and Bank of England who cut his teeth watching the United Kingdom’s chaotic Brexit process unfold. Carney, who was raised in Edmonton, Alberta, has framed national unity as his top priority in the coming months, saying Canada is “worth fighting for” and promising to campaign aggressively to keep the country intact.

    On Canada Day itself, Carney traveled to his hometown of Edmonton for a symbolic visit, where he was set to lay out his case for a unified Canada to a province that has grown deeply disillusioned with federal policy. Drawing on his experience with Brexit, Carney has warned that separatist leaders make unrealistic promises to voters during referendum campaigns, claiming separation will be easy, and that Albertans could retain their Canadian passports and currency even after leaving the country. He argues that these false claims risk undermining Canada’s global reputation as one of the most stable and attractive destinations for international business — a status the country cannot afford to lose.

    Historians and political analysts say the current strains on Canadian unity stem from the country’s unique origins and geography. JDM Stewart, a prominent Canadian historian and author of a book on Canadian prime ministers, notes that Canada’s enormous size and deeply rooted regional identities have created tensions that have persisted since the country’s founding in 1867. “Because it’s so big, and because it is so regional, it does create tensions that have been with us since the beginning, and we still wrestle with them today,” Stewart explained.

    Carney has already taken steps to address regional grievances, hoping to shore up support for national unity ahead of the fall votes. In Alberta, he brokered a landmark deal to approve a long-sought oil pipeline to the Pacific Coast, ending decades of acrimony between Ottawa and the province over energy development. The agreement marked a major reset in relations between the federal government and Alberta, which had been locked in conflict over climate and energy policy for generations. This week, Alberta is set to formally ask the Carney government to fast-track the million-barrel-per-day project, which would unlock billions in new revenue for the province. In Quebec, Carney has offered a C$10 billion infrastructure package to fund new hospitals, affordable housing, and public transit projects, aiming to build goodwill with Quebec voters ahead of the provincial election.

    In a pre-Canada Day video address, Carney acknowledged that past federal energy policies left many Albertans feeling alienated, saying “What should have brought us together began to divide us.” He framed his approach as one focused on shared progress, saying his goal is “focusing on what we can build together.” Stewart notes that this approach follows the playbook of successful past prime ministers, who balanced a strong vision for national unity with a willingness to listen to regional grievances and compromise. “Provinces are sometimes a bit like people, they want to be seen and they want to be heard,” Stewart explained. “In a time like this, you need to be able to sell a vision for Canada.”

    Despite the rising tensions, most Canadians remain optimistic that the country will stay united. A recent poll from the Angus Reid Institute finds that a large majority of Canadians believe neither province will actually leave the federation. Stewart argues that the tradition of compromise and pragmatism that has defined Canadian politics since its founding will hold the country together once again. “Most Canadians really feel happy about the country, and are happy to keep working to make it work, and do the bit of compromise that has really been the secret sauce,” he said. “Compromise and pragmatism has been what has kept this country together.”

  • US Supreme Court rejects Trump’s effort to limit birthright citizenship

    US Supreme Court rejects Trump’s effort to limit birthright citizenship

    On Tuesday, the conservative-leaning U.S. Supreme Court — shaped by three appointments from former President Donald Trump — delivered a long-awaited ruling that preserved birthright citizenship as the nation’s binding law, in a narrow 5-4 decision that split the bench. Even dissenting Justice Brett Kavanaugh acknowledged that longstanding federal statute would have sustained the principle of birthright citizenship regardless of the court’s ruling on the constitutional question.

    Writing for the five-justice majority, Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized the foundational role of citizenship in American democratic life. “Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land’,” Roberts wrote. “We keep that promise today.”

    Rooted in the 1868 post-Civil War ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, birthright citizenship mandates that nearly all children born within U.S. territory automatically gain American citizenship, with only narrow exceptions for children of foreign diplomats on official duty and active-duty foreign military personnel. The principle was adopted to redress the nation’s legacy of chattel slavery, which previously classified enslaved people as just three-fifths of a person for legal and political purposes and denied them full citizenship rights.

    The case reached the Supreme Court after the Trump administration took the unprecedented step last year of moving to eliminate birthright citizenship, targeting children born to undocumented immigrants and people engaging in what the administration calls “birth tourism.”

    Current demographic data puts the estimated undocumented population in the U.S. between 12 and 14 million, according to the Immigration Research Initiative. While no official federal data tracks birth tourism, 2020 estimates from the Center for Immigration Studies put the annual number of children born to birth tourists in the U.S. between 20,000 and 26,000, a small fraction of the 3.6 million annual births in a nation of 349 million people.

    The Trump administration has positioned itself as the most hardline anti-immigrant administration in modern U.S. history. Over its current term, it has revoked more than 100,000 visas, deported roughly half a million immigrants, and detained roughly 70,000 more in overcrowded immigration facilities that have faced widespread condemnation for poor hygiene, insufficient access to food, and unsafe living conditions. It has effectively ended the national asylum program and canceled temporary protected status (TPS) — which allows people from unsafe countries to remain in the U.S. — for Afghans, Syrians, and Haitians.

    Immigrant and human rights advocacy groups celebrated the Supreme Court’s ruling, but warned that the decision does not end the threat to immigrant protections for the remainder of Trump’s three-year term.

    “While we welcome this decision, our work is far from over. We will continue to stand with our communities to ensure that every person’s constitutional rights are respected and that no administration can undermine the protections guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment,” Fernando Garcia, executive director of the Border Network for Human Rights, said in a public statement. “Today’s ruling reminds us that the Constitution belongs to all of us, and it is strongest when it protects everyone equally.”

    Shawn VanDiver, president of #AfghanEvac, an organization supporting Afghan evacuees, noted that the question of whether birthright citizenship should stand should never have been in doubt. “For thousands of Afghan families rebuilding their lives in America, this ruling provides important certainty. Whether their parents are Special Immigrant Visa holders or applicants, refugees, asylees, humanitarian parolees, Temporary Protected Status holders, or navigating other immigration pathways, children born in the United States remain protected by the Constitution,” he said.

    Jenin Younes, president of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, reaffirmed that birthright citizenship is a binding constitutional guarantee, not a discretionary privilege that can be revoked by executive order.

    Shortly after the ruling was announced, with his executive effort to end birthright citizenship blocked, Trump took to his social media platform Truth Social to announce he would now push Congress to pass legislation eliminating birthright citizenship, arguing a full constitutional amendment is unnecessary.

    “No long and unwieldy Constitutional Amendment is necessary! Congress should start TODAY to work on ending expensive and unfair to our Country, Birthright Citizenship. They will have my Complete and Total Support!” Trump wrote on the platform.

    The White House has repeatedly framed birthright citizenship as a rule intended only for the children of enslaved people, not for people it claims are “trying to scam the system and come into the country.”

    Hassan M Ahmed, managing partner of The HMA Law Firm based outside Washington, D.C., called the ruling a clear rebuke of the administration’s position. “The most conservative and, frankly, anti-immigrant Supreme Court just told Trump ‘don’t mess with birthright citizenship’. I think it’s safe for now,” Ahmed told Middle East Eye. He added that he does not expect the push for legislation to gain meaningful support among most members of Congress.

    Unlike most of the world, which grants citizenship primarily by descent rather than birthplace, birthright citizenship remains deeply intertwined with American national identity and historical reckoning with slavery. Across the Americas, the principle of birthright citizenship is a widely established norm, and Ahmed called the U.S. version “sacrosanct” for its role in closing a dark chapter of the nation’s legal history.

  • Trump made more than $1bn from crypto in first year back in office

    Trump made more than $1bn from crypto in first year back in office

    Newly released mandatory financial disclosures for former-turned-incumbent U.S. President Donald Trump have revealed that the commander-in-chief earned more than $1 billion in 2025, with the vast majority of that income stemming from his family’s fast-growing cryptocurrency business dealings, reigniting long-simmering ethical debates over potential conflicts of interest tied to his private ventures while holding public office.

    The 927-page public filing, which is required for all senior federal officials including the U.S. president, breaks down the stunning sum of earnings: $635 million alone came from royalties generated by Trump’s own meme coin, a digital asset that launched just three days before his inauguration and has since plummeted sharply in market value. Beyond the meme coin royalties, Trump reported more than $500 million in additional income from World Liberty Financial, a cryptocurrency investment firm co-founded by his two sons and the children of his special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff.

    The 2025 figures mark a major jump in Trump’s reported annual income compared to his 2024 disclosure, when he recorded just over $600 million in total earnings. Outside of the crypto sector, the president also pulled in millions of dollars in additional revenue from more traditional Trump-branded ventures, including commercial real estate holdings, Trump-themed Bibles, branded luxury watches, and a range of other merchandise bearing his name.

    Critics have raised questions about the arrangement, particularly noting that Trump and his immediate family retain a 75% stake in all proceeds generated by World Liberty Financial, tying the president’s personal wealth directly to policy decisions his administration makes around the cryptocurrency industry. However, the White House has forcefully pushed back against all claims of unethical conduct or conflicts of interest, denying that Trump is leveraging his presidency to boost his private bottom line.

    White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly defended the president’s financial activities in an official statement, arguing that Trump’s pro-crypto policies have positioned the United States as a global leader in digital asset innovation. “Neither the President nor his family has ever engaged – or will ever engage – in conflicts of interest,” Kelly said, adding that all administration actions are rooted in advancing the interests of the American public. She dismissed critical coverage of the disclosure as nothing more than a decades-old false narrative pushed by political opponents and legacy media outlets.

  • Trump sons set to profit from tax-funded Kazakh tungsten mine deal

    Trump sons set to profit from tax-funded Kazakh tungsten mine deal

    A newly published investigative report has ignited fierce demands for government accountability after exposing that former President Donald Trump’s two eldest sons stand to gain significant personal profits from a federal-backed tungsten mining deal brokered by their father during his second term in the White House. Democratic congressional leaders have framed the taxpayer-supported project as the latest example of unprecedented, unregulated corruption spreading through the current administration.

    According to reporting from The New York Times, Donald Trump, alongside members of his inner circle—including billionaire Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick—secured a formal agreement with Kazakhstan’s head of state that granted a little-known U.S. firm exclusive access to one of the planet’s largest untapped deposits of tungsten. This critical rare metal is deemed strategically essential by the U.S. government, as it is a core component in the manufacturing of missile warheads, military fighter aircraft, advanced semiconductors, and a wide range of other defense-critical and industrial products.

    Months before the deal was finalized in September of last year, the Trump administration gave preliminary approval for up to $1.6 billion in federal financing to back the project, which is being developed by the U.S.-registered firm Kaz Resources, with construction planned for a rural mining site in northern Kazakhstan.

    The investigative investigation documents direct financial ties between top Trump and Lutnick family members and the mining venture. Within just weeks of high-level negotiations held at the St. Regis Hotel, the report confirms that investors linked to Dominari Securities—a New York-based firm based out of Trump Tower that is partially owned by the president’s eldest sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump—teamed up with other stakeholders to acquire a 20% ownership stake in a corporate entity connected to the Kazakh project. This stake puts the first family’s eldest children in line for massive windfalls as the project moves toward production.

    For the Lutnick family, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick’s two sons, Brandon and Kyle Lutnick, who lead the major investment firm Cantor Fitzgerald, also stand to profit significantly. The pair assisted one of the lead investors in the Kazakh deal raise $210 million in new capital for a separate linked business entity, a move that is projected to deliver multimillion-dollar gains to Cantor Fitzgerald, according to the report.

    The investigation further uncovered that at least 14 separate companies working on federally backed critical mineral mining projects have confirmed financial ties to either the Trump family or Cantor Fitzgerald—beyond the Kaz Resources deal, these include major mining firms Perpetua Resources and USA Rare Earth.

    This potential mining profit windfall is not an isolated case for the Trump family during their current return to the White House. A public “Trump Family Digital Grift Wealth Tracker” maintained by Democratic members of the House Oversight Committee estimates that cryptocurrency ventures spearheaded by the president’s two eldest sons have already generated more than $2.4 billion in cumulative profits for Trump and his immediate family since he retook office in 2025.