分类： politics

KATHMANDU, Nepal — Nepal’s political establishment witnessed an unprecedented transformation on Thursday as newly elected parliamentarians took their oaths of office, with a remarkable two-thirds majority belonging to a party established less than four years ago. The Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), fronted by former rapper turned political phenomenon Balendra Shah, achieved a landslide victory in the nation’s first electoral contest following last year’s youth-led uprising.

The 275-member House of Representatives, which constitutes the powerful lower chamber of Nepal’s parliament, will see these representatives serve five-year terms. The RSP secured an overwhelming mandate through both direct elections and proportional representation, capturing 125 directly elected seats supplemented by 57 additional seats through the proportional system. This combined total of 182 seats dramatically surpasses the second-place Nepali Congress party, which managed only 38 seats.

Shah, anticipated to be formally nominated as prime minister following a party leadership confirmation, is scheduled to assume office on Friday after presidential appointment. His political ascent began with a surprising victory in the 2022 Kathmandu mayoral race before emerging as a central figure in the 2025 popular revolt that ultimately unseated former Prime Minister Khadga Prasad Oli.

The RSP’s extraordinary electoral performance represents a direct challenge to Nepal’s traditionally dominant political forces, notably the Nepali Congress and the Communist Party of Nepal (Unified Marxist–Leninist). Last year’s widespread demonstrations, initially sparked by government-imposed social media restrictions, rapidly evolved into a full-scale uprising addressing systemic corruption and governance failures. The protests turned deadly when security forces opened fire on demonstrators attacking government installations, resulting in numerous fatalities and hundreds injured.

In a landmark judicial ruling that has sent shockwaves through Taiwan’s political landscape, former Taipei Mayor Ko Wen-je has been sentenced to 17 years imprisonment following his conviction on corruption and campaign finance violations. The Taipei District Court found the 65-year-old political maverick guilty of accepting approximately NT$17.1 million (US$535,000) in bribes connected to a real estate development project during his mayoral tenure, alongside charges of misreporting political donations during his 2024 presidential campaign.

Ko, who founded the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and emerged as a significant third-force in Taiwanese politics, maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings. His legal team had vigorously contested the allegations, characterizing them as politically motivated maneuvers by the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to eliminate opposition voices.

The sentencing fell significantly short of the 28-year term prosecutors had initially sought, though it nonetheless represents one of the most severe penalties ever imposed on a Taiwanese political figure of Ko’s stature. The former mayor, who was arrested in 2024 but released on bail last September, now faces the prospect of extensive incarceration unless his anticipated appeal proves successful.

Ko’s political trajectory had been remarkable: his 2024 presidential bid captured over 25% of the popular vote, finishing a competitive third behind winner Lai Ching-te (40%) and another opponent. This performance demonstrated substantial voter appetite for alternatives to the traditional DPP-Kuomintang (KMT) dichotomy that has long dominated Taiwan’s politics.

Outside the courthouse, tensions flared as supporters gathered to protest what they decried as judicial persecution. Kenny Yang, a 52-year-old supporter, told AFP that regardless of the verdict, Ko’s backers would ‘continue to support him and help him seek justice,’ adding that they ‘cannot allow Taiwan to become a society without a sense of right and wrong.’

The case has ignited intense debate about political justice in Taiwan, with Ko’s TPP allies accusing the ruling administration of weaponizing the judicial system against opponents. Current TPP Chairman Huang Kuo-chang has consistently denounced the charges as baseless and politically driven.

Prior to his legal troubles, Ko had positioned himself as a pragmatic alternative to both the Beijing-skeptic DPP and the China-friendly KMT, criticizing the former for escalating cross-strait tensions while faulting the latter for excessive deference to Beijing. Despite this setback, Ko had previously expressed intentions to pursue the presidency again in 2028, though his political future now appears uncertain.

In a significant geopolitical development, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un convened in Pyongyang on Thursday to formalize a comprehensive friendship and cooperation agreement. The high-level meeting, marking Lukashenko’s two-day official state visit, resulted in what both leaders characterized as a foundational document elevating bilateral relations to unprecedented levels.

President Lukashenko proclaimed the newly signed treaty as ‘fundamental’ to the future trajectory of Belarus-North Korea relations, declaring that the partnership was ‘entering a new stage.’ He acknowledged historical limitations in cooperation while expressing sincere satisfaction with the recent intensification of collaborative efforts between the two nations.

‘In today’s reality of global transformation, when global powers openly ignore and violate international law, independent countries need to cooperate more closely,’ Lukashenko emphasized during the talks. He stressed the necessity for sovereign nations to ‘consolidate efforts aimed at protecting their sovereignty and improving the well-being of our citizens.’

Kim Jong Un reciprocated with strong declarations of solidarity, offering ‘full support’ for Belarus while condemning what he characterized as ‘unlawful pressure on Belarus from the Western powers.’ The North Korean leader’s statements highlighted the converging geopolitical positions of both nations amid increasing international isolation.

The alliance carries substantial strategic implications given both countries’ existing partnerships with Russia. Belarus has functioned as a critical staging area for Moscow’s military operations in Ukraine since February 2022, while recently authorizing the deployment of Russian tactical nuclear weapons on its territory. Simultaneously, North Korea has dramatically shifted its foreign policy toward Moscow, providing substantial military support including troop deployments and weapons transfers to bolster Russia’s campaign in Ukraine.

This meeting represents the second direct engagement between Lukashenko and Kim, following their previous encounter in Beijing during September 2025. The strengthened partnership signals the emergence of a more formalized anti-Western bloc among nations facing extensive international sanctions and diplomatic pressure.

A purported 15-point ceasefire plan delivered by the United States to Iran has been met with vehement denial and sharp criticism from Iranian officials, exposing profound diplomatic fractures and conflicting narratives. Iranian military spokespersons from the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters categorically rejected claims of negotiations, characterizing Washington’s move as an attempt to rebrand military setbacks as diplomatic achievements.

Iran’s official response, conveyed through Tasnim News Agency, dismissed any possibility of agreement with “an aggressor,” asserting that regional stability hinges exclusively on the strength of Iran’s armed forces. The spokesman questioned whether internal US conflicts had escalated to the point where Washington was “negotiating with itself,” and warned that neither new American investments nor a return to previous energy prices would materialize until US leadership acknowledges Iran’s security primacy in the region.

The diplomatic confusion extends beyond bilateral relations, revealing trans-Atlantic divisions as German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier condemned the US-initiated conflict as “a politically disastrous mistake.” According to Abdul Wahed Jalal Nori of Malaysia’s International Islamic University, this criticism reflects growing European concerns that military-first approaches are undermining diplomatic channels while exposing Europe to secondary economic and security repercussions.

Regional stakeholders emphasized their indispensable role in any security framework. Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi noted the “strong shared interest” between the US and Iran in ending hostilities, while Qatar’s former prime minister Hamad bin Jassim bin Jaber Al Thani asserted that Gulf Cooperation Council states cannot be excluded from negotiations determining regional futures. He specifically emphasized that the Strait of Hormuz constitutes an international passageway that must remain unconditionally open, not a “bargaining chip.”

Experts warn that excluding regional powers from negotiations risks undermining long-term enforceability of any agreements. Abdul Wahed noted that any durable arrangement would require a comprehensive regional security architecture rather than limited bilateral understanding, suggesting that initial US assumptions about easily controlling the conflict have given way to unanticipated consequences.

Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi has disclosed that diplomatic communications between Tehran and Washington have occurred through third-party channels in recent days, while firmly maintaining that no direct negotiations have taken place. The minister’s statements, delivered during an interview with state-run IRIB TV on Wednesday, come amid ongoing regional tensions following last month’s joint US-Israeli military operations against Iranian targets.

Araghchi clarified the nature of these communications, stating, ‘The American side has initiated the transmission of various messages through multiple intermediaries. When friendly nations relay these communications to us and we respond by articulating our positions or issuing necessary warnings, this constitutes neither negotiation nor dialogue. It represents merely an exchange of messages through our allies, during which we have consistently reaffirmed our principled stances.’

The Foreign Minister revealed that some messages contained Iranian warnings against potential US attacks on critical infrastructure, which he claims prompted Washington to retract its threat to strike Iranian power facilities within a 48-hour window. Araghchi emphasized Iran’s defensive posture, asserting, ‘We did not initiate this conflict and seek its conclusion, but in a manner that prevents its recurrence.’

Significantly, Araghchi rejected the concept of a ceasefire, describing it as part of a ‘vicious circle’ of negotiation, warfare, and temporary truce. Instead, he stated Iran’s objective is ‘to end this war on our own terms.’ The minister outlined Iran’s current policy as one of continued resistance and national defense, explicitly denying any plans for formal negotiations.

Regarding the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, Araghchi characterized the waterway as part of Iranian and Omani territorial waters and indicated Tehran is evaluating ‘new arrangements for safe passage through the strait.’ These comments follow claims by US President Donald Trump that Tehran is negotiating with Washington and desires a settlement to terminate hostilities.

The backdrop to these diplomatic developments includes the late February joint US-Israeli offensive against Tehran and other Iranian cities, which resulted in the death of then-Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei alongside senior military officials and civilians. Iran responded with missile and drone strikes targeting Israeli and US assets throughout the Middle East, while implementing strict control measures over Strait of Hormuz transit, prohibiting passage to vessels affiliated with Israel or the United States.

The Australian government has enacted a significant immigration policy shift by imposing a six-month ban on tourist visa entries for Iranian nationals. Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke announced the immediate implementation of this measure on Wednesday, citing concerns that Iranian visitors might overstay their visas due to deteriorating conditions in their home country.

The policy will affect approximately 6,800 Iranian visa holders who had previously obtained valid travel documents. Minister Burke emphasized that the decision reflects the government’s intention to maintain control over permanent migration outcomes rather than allowing them to become ‘a random consequence of who had booked a holiday.’

Notably, the ban contains several exemptions, including provisions for partners and children of Australian citizens. Burke also indicated that ‘sympathetic consideration’ might be extended to parents of citizens, suggesting some flexibility within the framework.

The controversial decision was announced concurrently with the government’s granting of humanitarian visas to seven members of an Iranian women’s football delegation, five of whom subsequently returned to Iran. Burke defended the simultaneous actions as demonstrating the government’s capacity to balance humanitarian concerns with national interests amid ‘rapidly changing global conditions.’

However, the policy has drawn sharp criticism from refugee advocates and cross-party politicians. Jana Favero, Deputy CEO of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, condemned the move as ‘a massive betrayal of the Iranian community and a breathtaking moral failure.’ Independent MP Zali Steggall expressed concerns about the ‘sweeping, unchecked powers’ granted to the government through this legislation, warning it undermines confidence in Australia’s migration system.

The Australian Greens party characterized the decision as revealing the government’s true stance toward the Iranian people amid regional conflicts. The policy specifically targets Iranian citizens and does not apply to nationals of any other country.