Global Pulse

分类： politics

  • Bulgaria’s government withdraws controversial budget after major protests

    Bulgaria’s government withdraws controversial budget after major protests

    SOFIA, Bulgaria — In a significant reversal, Bulgaria’s government has officially withdrawn its contentious budget proposal following days of widespread demonstrations that culminated in violent clashes between protesters and police forces. The decision comes after tens of thousands of citizens took to the streets across major cities, expressing vehement opposition to fiscal measures they believe would adversely impact economic stability.

    The proposed budget, which included elevated tax rates, increased social security contributions, and substantial spending hikes, faced fierce criticism from both opposition parties and business associations. Critics argued these measures would deter foreign investment, encourage growth of the shadow economy, and potentially trigger inflation without corresponding improvements in public service efficiency. These concerns are particularly acute as Bulgaria prepares for its anticipated entry into the eurozone at the beginning of next year.

    Initially, the administration pledged to retract the draft for comprehensive revision after earlier protests but subsequently reaffirmed its commitment to the proposal, sparking renewed public outrage. Monday night witnessed one of the largest gatherings in the capital, with organizers estimating approximately 50,000 participants in Sofia alone.

    The demonstrations, predominantly led by younger citizens, began peacefully with participants chanting slogans such as ‘We will not allow ourselves to be lied to; we will not allow ourselves to be robbed’ and demanding either substantial revisions or the government’s resignation. Signs reading ‘Generation Z is Coming’ and ‘Young Bulgaria Without the Mafia’ highlighted the intergenerational discontent with current policies.

    However, tensions escalated dramatically when splinter groups of protesters targeted the headquarters of major ruling parties. These individuals, many clad in black hoodies and masks, engaged in violent acts including throwing projectiles, setting fire to garbage containers, and vandalizing police vehicles. Riot police responded with pepper spray and other crowd control measures, resulting in multiple injuries and at least 10 arrests according to official statements.

    The government maintained that its original budget draft was essential for complying with eurozone membership requirements, particularly the mandate to maintain budget deficits below 3% of GDP. Nevertheless, the scale of public opposition has forced a strategic retreat, signaling the growing influence of civic mobilization in shaping national economic policy.

  • Japan’s vague and evasive stance on Taiwan slammed

    Japan’s vague and evasive stance on Taiwan slammed

    China has issued a forceful condemnation of Japan’s deliberately ambiguous diplomatic stance regarding the Taiwan question, characterizing Tokyo’s position as both evasive and historically revisionist. The criticism emerged through statements from Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian, who articulated Beijing’s profound dissatisfaction with Japan’s refusal to acknowledge foundational historical documents that cement China’s sovereignty over Taiwan.

    Lin specifically challenged recent comments by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, who invoked the 1951 Treaty of San Francisco to suggest Japan had renounced all claims to Taiwan without explicitly affirming Chinese sovereignty. This position was subsequently echoed by Japanese Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi, who maintained that Japan’s stance remains precisely as articulated in the 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Statement.

    The Chinese spokesperson highlighted Japan’s conspicuous omission of critical historical records including the Cairo Declaration, Potsdam Proclamation, and Japanese Instrument of Surrender—all documents that explicitly mandated Taiwan’s return to Chinese territory. Lin further noted Japan’s avoidance of referencing the four political documents that underpin Sino-Japanese relations, alongside Tokyo’s political commitment to the One-China principle.

    Lin characterized Japan’s selective historical narrative as particularly offensive given its deliberate exclusion of China—the primary victim of Japanese colonial aggression—from the San Francisco Treaty. This approach, according to Lin, demonstrates disregard for the painful legacy of Japanese militarism while challenging the established historical truth of the global anti-fascist struggle.

    The Foreign Ministry spokesman emphasized that Japan’s attempts to obscure its position constitute a direct challenge to United Nations authority and the postwar international order. Lin warned against historical revisionism, stating that turning back the wheel of history remains unacceptable and that peace must not be compromised.

    In parallel developments, China reaffirmed its sovereignty over the Diaoyu Islands, dismissing Japan’s recent exhibition of so-called historical documents at Tokyo’s National Museum of Territory and Sovereignty as selective and unconvincing attempts to justify illegal territorial claims.

  • Russia and the US threatened to resume nuclear testing after several decades. Here is why it matters

    Russia and the US threatened to resume nuclear testing after several decades. Here is why it matters

    VIENNA — The fragile international consensus against nuclear weapons testing faces unprecedented strain as both the United States and Russia have issued reciprocal threats to resume atomic experiments, triggering widespread alarm among nonproliferation experts and global security analysts.

    In late October, U.S. President Donald Trump declared via his Truth Social platform that he had instructed the Department of War to initiate nuclear weapons testing “on an equal basis” with other nations’ programs, asserting this process would “begin immediately.” This pronouncement prompted a swift response from Moscow, where Russian President Vladimir Putin informed his Security Council that Russia would be “under obligation to take reciprocal measures” should the U.S. or any Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) signatory conduct nuclear tests.

    The current crisis unfolds against the backdrop of the CTBT, adopted by the U.N. General Assembly in 1996 following decades of escalating concerns about atmospheric testing. Although the treaty has achieved near-universal acceptance with 187 signatories and 178 ratifications, it has never formally entered into force due to the requirement that 44 specific nuclear technology-capable states must ratify it. Nine nations remain outside the ratification framework: China, Egypt, Iran, Israel and the U.S. have signed but not ratified; India, North Korea and Pakistan neither signed nor ratified; while Russia recently revoked its ratification in 2023, citing “unacceptable” imbalance with the U.S. position.

    Vienna-based Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) maintains an extensive global monitoring network comprising 307 stations utilizing seismic, hydroacoustic, infrasound and radionuclide technologies to detect nuclear explosions. With a 2025 budget exceeding $139 million, the organization has successfully detected all six North Korean tests between 2006-2017.

    Arms control experts warn that resumed testing would particularly benefit nations with less nuclear testing experience. Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association cautioned that U.S. testing would “open the door for states with less nuclear testing experience to conduct full-scale tests that could help them perfect smaller, lighter warhead designs,” ultimately decreasing both U.S. and international security. Joseph Rodgers of the Center for Strategic and International Studies noted that countries like China and India “stand to profit from a resumption of nuclear tests” more than the U.S. or Russia, who have conducted the vast majority of the approximately 2,000 tests occurring mostly before 1996.

    The nature of potential testing remains unclear. U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright indicated new tests would exclude nuclear explosions, referencing subcritical experiments that produce no self-sustaining chain reaction and thus don’t violate the CTBT. The treaty specifically bans supercritical tests creating nuclear yield—the energy release defining destructive power—under a zero yield standard.

    Detection challenges persist for extremely low-yield hydronuclear tests conducted underground in metal chambers, which Kimball describes as creating a “verification gap.” While the monitoring system was designed to detect 1 kiloton explosions (compared to Hiroshima’s 15 kilotons), CTBTO Executive Secretary Robert Floyd noted it actually performs at approximately 500 tons TNT sensitivity.

    In the current climate of uncertainty, Floyd emphasizes his organization’s role in providing “confidence to states” that they would detect any nuclear explosion “anywhere, anytime,” even as diplomatic tensions escalate between the world’s nuclear superpowers.

  • Chinese and Japanese boats face off near disputed islands as feud worsens

    Chinese and Japanese boats face off near disputed islands as feud worsens

    A maritime confrontation near the disputed Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands has intensified diplomatic friction between China and Japan, with both nations offering conflicting accounts of the incident. The uninhabited islands, administered by Japan but claimed by China under the name Diaoyu Islands, have long represented a geopolitical flashpoint in East Asia.

    According to China’s Coast Guard spokesperson Liu Dejun, Chinese vessels intercepted and issued warnings to a Japanese fishing boat that had ‘illegally entered Chinese territorial waters’ on Tuesday. The CCG stated it implemented ‘necessary law enforcement measures’ to protect what it considers sovereign territory, demanding Japan cease ‘all acts of infringement and provocation.’

    Contradicting this narrative, Japan’s Coast Guard reported that it had actually expelled two Chinese vessels that approached a Japanese fishing boat in the early hours of Tuesday. Japanese authorities stated their patrol ships monitored the situation until the Chinese vessels departed several hours later, ensuring the safety of their fishing vessel.

    This maritime incident occurs against a backdrop of rapidly deteriorating bilateral relations. The diplomatic downturn follows controversial remarks last month by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, a known China critic, who suggested Tokyo might consider military action should China attack Taiwan. Beijing considers Taiwan part of its territory and maintains a policy of potential reunification by force.

    The East China Sea tensions have been escalating for over fifteen years despite a 2008 principle agreement for joint resource exploitation. China has increasingly tested Japanese resolve through frequent coast guard deployments, with last year marking the third consecutive record for Chinese government vessel sightings in the contested waters. The previous patrol occurred on November 16, when Chinese vessels conducted what they described as ‘lawful patrol operations to uphold rights and interests.’

    The growing rift between Asia’s two largest economies has extended beyond diplomatic channels, affecting daily life and economic relations between the two nations while raising concerns about regional stability.

  • China delivers another letter to UN chief over Japan’s remarks on Taiwan

    China delivers another letter to UN chief over Japan’s remarks on Taiwan

    In a significant diplomatic escalation at the United Nations, China’s Permanent Representative Ambassador Fu Cong has delivered a second formal communication to Secretary-General António Guterres, vehemently rejecting Japan’s position regarding Taiwan. This development marks the latest chapter in an ongoing exchange of diplomatic correspondence between the two Asian powers at the international forum.

    The controversy stems from November 7th remarks by Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, who suggested during a Diet session that a potential ‘Taiwan contingency’ could constitute a ‘survival-threatening situation’ for Japan, implying possible military involvement. Ambassador Fu characterized these statements as fundamentally challenging the outcomes of World War II, undermining the post-war international order, and violating core principles of the UN Charter.

    In his meticulously argued communication, the Chinese diplomat challenged Japan’s claim of maintaining a ‘consistent position’ on Taiwan, demanding Tokyo provide the international community with a ‘complete and accurate explanation’ of its stated policy. Fu substantiated China’s sovereignty claims by invoking foundational legal instruments including the Cairo Declaration, Potsdam Proclamation, and the Japanese Instrument of Surrender.

    The ambassador further referenced the landmark 1972 Sino-Japanese Joint Statement, wherein Japan explicitly recognized the People’s Republic of China as the sole legitimate government and acknowledged Taiwan as ‘an inalienable part of China’s territory.’ Fu dismissed Japan’s assertion that Prime Minister Takaichi’s remarks aligned with an ‘exclusively defense-oriented’ strategy, noting that linking Japan’s survival to Taiwan scenarios ‘clearly goes beyond passive defense’ and represents ‘self-contradictory arguments intended to mislead the international community.’

    The communication concluded with a stern warning against Japan’s perceived attempts to ‘expand its military capabilities and revive militarism,’ citing increased defense spending, adjusted arms-export principles, and ongoing nuclear policy debates. Ambassador Fu demanded Japan ‘clearly reaffirm the one-China principle,’ uphold bilateral political documents, immediately retract the controversial remarks, and take concrete steps to honor its commitments.

    Adding international perspective, seasoned Pakistani diplomat Munir Akram characterized Prime Minister Takaichi’s comments as ‘not appropriate,’ noting that Japan particularly should have demonstrated greater sensitivity given the historical context between the nations.

  • Putin and Trump’s envoy set for key Ukraine talks in Moscow

    Putin and Trump’s envoy set for key Ukraine talks in Moscow

    A critical diplomatic engagement is set to unfold in Moscow as Russian President Vladimir Putin prepares to meet US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff on Tuesday. This high-stakes meeting follows the White House’s expression of “very optimistic” sentiments regarding a potential agreement to conclude the Ukraine conflict.

    The anticipated summit gains additional significance with the expected participation of Jared Kushner, former President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, who has maintained an advisory role in these diplomatic exchanges. This development comes after intensive negotiations in Florida between Ukrainian and US officials, including both Witkoff and Kushner, focused on refining a US-supported peace proposal initially perceived as advantageous to Russian interests.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky characterized recent discussions as “constructive” while acknowledging persistent challenges. Following his meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris, Zelensky emphasized Kyiv’s non-negotiable priorities: preserving Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty and obtaining robust security assurances. The territorial question remains particularly contentious, with Moscow continuing to demand concessions in eastern Ukraine—a condition Kyiv has consistently rejected.

    The diplomatic landscape shows increased complexity as Witkoff engaged with multiple European leaders, including UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Ukraine’s newly appointed chief negotiator Rustem Umerov. Several key European figures also participated virtually in the Zelensky-Macron discussions.

    White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt indicated that the peace draft had undergone substantial refinement, stating: “The administration feels very optimistic… We’re hopeful that this war can finally come to an end.” This optimism echoes Putin’s recent acknowledgment that he had reviewed the US proposal and considered it a potential foundation for agreement.

    However, Kremlin officials subsequently expressed reservations about accepting the proposal after Ukraine and European allies secured modifications to the initial terms. The original draft, circulated in November, had caused significant concern across European capitals for its perceived alignment with Moscow’s demands. The document addressed sensitive matters including the investment of frozen Russian assets held in European institutions and conditions for Ukrainian market access in Europe.

    President Macron clarified that no finalized peace plan currently exists, insisting that any legitimate proposal must incorporate input from both Ukraine and European nations. He stressed that territorial concessions could “only be finalized by President Zelensky” and highlighted the necessity of European involvement in decisions regarding frozen assets, security guarantees, and Ukraine’s EU accession prospects.

    The French leader simultaneously commended the Trump administration’s efforts to resolve a conflict that originated with Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and escalated into full-scale invasion in 2022.

    EU Foreign Policy Chief Kaja Kallas characterized this week as potentially “pivotal” while expressing concerns that Moscow might seek additional concessions beyond current gains. She warned against pressuring Ukraine into surrender, noting such an outcome would serve nobody’s interests.

    As diplomatic efforts intensify, Russian officials claim to have captured strategic eastern towns of Pokrovsk (Krasnoarmeysk) and Vovshansk—assertions contradicted by Ukrainian authorities and open-source intelligence monitoring the conflict. These battlefield developments occur alongside persistent disagreements over security guarantees, with Kyiv seeking NATO membership protection against future aggression—a proposition both Russia and Trump explicitly oppose.

  • Trump warns Israel not to prevent Syria’s ‘evolution’

    Trump warns Israel not to prevent Syria’s ‘evolution’

    In a significant diplomatic development, former U.S. President Donald Trump delivered a subtle caution to Israel regarding its military actions in Syria, emphasizing the importance of preserving Syria’s path toward stability. Through a post on his TruthSocial platform, Trump expressed satisfaction with current developments in Syria while urging Israel to maintain constructive dialogue with its neighbor.

    The comments followed a recent Israeli military operation in southern Syria that resulted in substantial casualties. Syrian media reported that Israeli forces conducted a raid on the village of Beit Jinn, located approximately 50 kilometers from Damascus, killing at least 13 people. The operation triggered defensive actions from local villagers and required Israeli air support to extract ground troops, according to reports. The Israeli military confirmed six soldiers were wounded during the engagement.

    This incident interrupted a period of relative calm in Israeli-Syrian relations that had persisted since the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government late last year. Israel has subsequently expanded its military presence, occupying a United Nations buffer zone and establishing positions on strategic high ground including Mount Hermon. Regional experts note Israel has simultaneously attempted to position itself as a protector of Syria’s Druze minority by providing arms to local leaders.

    The geopolitical landscape has grown increasingly complex with the Trump administration hosting Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa at the White House in November—a remarkable diplomatic gesture given Sharaa’s former leadership of a U.S.-designated terrorist organization. Sharaa’s participation in counter-Islamic State coalition talks during his visit potentially strengthens his position against the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which continue to guard IS prisoners with U.S. support.

    Regional dynamics further complicate the situation, with Sharaa enjoying support from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. The Gulf states provide financial assistance to Syria’s government while Turkey engages in military training and contemplates a defense agreement with Damascus. The United States has attempted to mediate between Turkey and Israel to prevent clashes in Syrian territory.

    Despite U.S.-mediated talks between Israel and Syria regarding border security arrangements, former U.S. Ambassador to Syria Robert Ford indicated negotiations have stalled due to Israel’s reluctance to withdraw from occupied territories. The fundamental question remains what incentives Syria would have for agreeing to a security arrangement that doesn’t address Israeli occupation concerns.

  • Australia won’t be intimidated by firms over social media ban, minister tells BBC

    Australia won’t be intimidated by firms over social media ban, minister tells BBC

    In a bold move that has drawn global attention, Australia’s Communications Minister Annika Wells has declared her government will not be intimidated by major technology corporations opposing the nation’s groundbreaking social media ban for users under 16. The policy, set to take effect December 10, requires platforms including Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat to implement “reasonable steps” preventing underage access to accounts.

    Minister Wells articulated the government’s firm stance in an interview with the BBC, emphasizing that Australia stands “on the side of parents, not the platforms.” She dismissed concerns from tech companies that have criticized the ban as an ineffective solution, noting they’ve had “15 to 20 years” to address documented harms caused by their platforms without sufficient action.

    The Australian official revealed that multiple international leaders have contacted her government seeking guidance on implementing similar measures, positioning Australia as a pioneer in digital child protection. “We’re pleased to be the first, we’re proud to be the first,” Wells stated, adding that her administration stands ready to assist other jurisdictions pursuing comparable legislation.

    The policy faces potential international headwinds, particularly from the United States where former President Donald Trump has pledged to defend tech companies against foreign regulations. Australia’s e-Safety Commissioner has already been summoned to testify before US Congress regarding the controversial measures.

    Despite acknowledging potential implementation challenges, Wells characterized the policy as an evolving “treatment plan rather than a cure” that will be reviewed over the next two years. The minister drew parallels to Australia’s alcohol restrictions for minors, noting that while some underage drinking still occurs, the public health justification for protective legislation remains valid.

    The ban has not been without criticism. Some digital safety experts argue alternative measures like enhanced parental controls and improved digital education might prove more effective. Legal challenges have emerged, including a High Court case brought by two teenagers arguing the policy violates children’s rights. Additionally, concerns have been raised about the exclusion of online gaming platforms like Roblox, which Wells acknowledged as an area of ongoing scrutiny.

    Personalizing the policy’s implications, Wells shared that managing screen time presents challenges in her own household with three young children, a responsibility that primarily falls to her husband due to her demanding travel schedule. She framed the legislation as her contribution to supporting parents nationwide in their digital parenting struggles, noting that “you can’t parent an algorithm.”

  • Leaked wedding video reveals hypocrisy in Islamist Iran’s elite

    Leaked wedding video reveals hypocrisy in Islamist Iran’s elite

    A private wedding ceremony for Fatemeh Shamkhani, daughter of influential Iranian leader Ali Shamkhani, has ignited widespread controversy after video footage circulated widely across Iran in mid-2024. The event, held at Tehran’s luxurious Espinas Palace Hotel, showcased attendees wearing modern Western attire with many women conspicuously absent of the mandatory head coverings required by Iranian law.

    The visual documentation revealed stark contradictions within the Islamic Republic’s power structure. Fatemeh Shamkhani herself wore a strapless, low-cut wedding gown with a Western-style veil, directly contravening the conservative dress codes that her father, as a key adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and former Revolutionary Guards commander, has helped enforce through brutal crackdowns on public protests.

    This incident transcends mere scandal, emerging as a potent symbol of systemic crisis within Iran. It highlights three critical ailments: elite privilege, selective morality enforcement, and the rapid erosion of the social contract between rulers and citizens. The Shamkhani family represents a wealthy power circle that maintains prosperity through oil revenues, state contracts, and shadow economic activities that evade international sanctions—contrasting sharply with ordinary Iranians suffering hyperinflation, stagnant wages, and currency devaluation.

    The viral spread of the wedding footage demonstrates the regime’s diminishing control over information in the smartphone era. Public outrage has been particularly acute among the 36% of Iranians living below the poverty line, who perceive the extravagance as offensive disregard for their economic struggles.

    This event gains significance against the backdrop of the ‘Woman, Life, Freedom’ protests sparked by Mahsa Amini’s death in custody. The visible defiance of hijab laws by powerful families undermines the moral authority used to regulate female bodies and enforce religious compliance. Meanwhile, speculation suggests the video’s leakage may reflect internal power struggles, potentially involving former president Hassan Rouhani’s faction targeting Shamkhani amid reported infighting following recent military confrontations with Israel and the United States.

    Ultimately, the wedding scandal exposes fundamental contradictions that threaten the regime’s legitimacy, revealing how elite disregard for officially mandated rules gradually erodes the very foundations of governmental authority.

  • ICC has taken ‘confidential’ measures to protect court from US sanctions, officials say

    ICC has taken ‘confidential’ measures to protect court from US sanctions, officials say

    The International Criminal Court (ICC) is deploying confidential defensive strategies to shield its operations from punitive US sanctions, senior officials revealed during the opening session of the Assembly of States Parties in The Hague. This year’s gathering of representatives from 125 member nations unfolds against a backdrop of severe geopolitical pressure, primarily triggered by the court’s investigation into Israeli officials concerning alleged war crimes in Gaza and Palestinian territories.

    The Trump administration’s sanctions regime, initiated in February against Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan and expanded in August to target two deputy prosecutors and six judges, has created profound operational challenges. These measures have frozen the officials’ international travel capabilities and severed their access to global financial networks, including within European jurisdictions. ICC President Tomoko Akane characterized the situation as unprecedented, noting that elected officials now share designation lists with terrorists and narcotics traffickers.

    President Akane further disclosed that Russian authorities have issued arrest warrants for one-third of the ICC’s judicial bench, including the entire presidency, in retaliation for the court’s probe into alleged Russian war crimes in Ukraine. Despite these coordinated pressures, court leadership maintains that their resolve has strengthened rather than diminished.

    Deputy Prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan confirmed the Office of the Prosecutor continues its work unimpeded, implementing protective measures whose specifics remain classified to preserve effectiveness. Notably, the court is pursuing technological sovereignty initiatives, including migrating from US-based cloud services provider Microsoft to ensure operational independence.

    The absence of European Union intervention through its Blocking Statute mechanism has drawn criticism from human rights organizations. Alexis Deswaef of the International Federation for Human Rights urged EU authorities to activate legal protections and establish financial systems independent of US networks to safeguard international justice mechanisms.