Global Pulse

分类： politics

  • Liberal MP Julian Leeser lashes ABC, SBS over ‘systematic’ anti-Israel bias

    Liberal MP Julian Leeser lashes ABC, SBS over ‘systematic’ anti-Israel bias

    As Australia’s Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion prepares to hear testimony from Jewish university staff and students, a senior opposition politician has launched a pointed public attack on the country’s two major state-funded broadcasters, demanding they address long-running allegations of systemic bias against Israel in their coverage of the ongoing Israel-Gaza war.

    Julian Leeser, the opposition’s education spokesperson and member of the Berowra electorate who identifies as part of Australia’s Jewish community, made the demand on Monday, tying the call for broadcaster accountability to the federal government’s new anti-racism rules for Australian higher education institutions. Leeser confirmed that the country’s Special Envoy into Antisemitism, Julian Segal, has formally raised repeated complaints about the public broadcasters’ Israel coverage, which has unfolded amid a conflict that has killed more than 73,000 people in Gaza since the October 7, 2023 Hamas terror attack that left more than 1,000 mostly civilian Israelis dead.

    “I think the public broadcasters actually have to be prepared to address systemic bias against Israel in their reporting, and I think they need to subject themselves to greater transparency mechanisms as outlined by the envoy,” Leeser told ABC Radio National in an interview, adding that the exact structure of new transparency rules would be determined by the ongoing Royal Commission.

    Australia’s two public broadcasters, the ABC and SBS, have faced sustained criticism from peak national Jewish groups over their coverage of the 10-month-long Israel-Gaza conflict. Last week, the ABC issued a public correction and acknowledged it made a “bad mistake” when it incorrectly reported that 14,000 babies would die of starvation in Gaza within a 48-hour window.

    Despite that misstep, ABC Editorial Director Gavin Fang defended the public broadcaster’s overall coverage during testimony to the Royal Commission, noting the outlet has made a deliberate effort to center the experiences of Australia’s Jewish community when reporting on rising antisemitism domestically. Fang added that covering the Middle East conflict, which has profound impacts on Australian communities, aligns directly with the ABC’s legislated charter obligation to deliver independent news and current affairs. “We have covered the impact of a variety of domestic attacks, for instance, on Jewish synagogues, on graffiti and other incidents of anti-Semitism,” he said.

    For its part, SBS has faced criticism from Segal over its use of casualty statistics published by the Gaza Health Ministry, which was previously overseen by Hamas’ now-defunct civilian administration. Amanda Wicks, SBS Director of News and Current Affairs, pushed back against that criticism, noting the outlet always contextualizes its use of the data by clearly stating Hamas is recognized as a terrorist organization by Australia and controls the Gaza Strip.

    Both broadcasters have also rejected repeated calls from Segal to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, a policy that critics argue disproportionately and unfairly restricts legitimate criticism of the Israeli government and its military actions in Gaza. Leeser, a staunch supporter of mandating the IHRA definition, pushed back on that critique, noting the definition explicitly states that criticism of Israel comparable to that leveled against any other sovereign nation cannot be classified as antisemitic.

    Leeser’s calls for broadcaster accountability come as the federal government rolling out new mandatory anti-racism standards for Australian universities, which require institutions to establish more transparent public antisemitism complaint handling processes. The opposition has gone further, demanding that universities make combating antisemitism on campus a formal requirement to access federal funding. Pro-Palestinian student encampments have sprung up on multiple Australian university campuses since October 7, mirroring similar protests across the globe.

    Leeser also slammed Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke for failing to mandate the IHRA definition for all universities, arguing that more than a year since the October 7 attacks, there is no more room for delay. “The universities said ‘oh, we don’t like IHRA, we’ll adopt our own definition’, and yet they’d had more than a year and failed to do so,” Leeser said. “The time for mucking around with these issues is long past. 15 people were allegedly murdered in cold blood on our most famous beaches because of their religion. The time to adopt IHRA is now, and I’m calling on the minister to mandate the IHRA definition.”

    Leeser added that while legitimate criticism of Israel is acceptable, the spread of antisemitic rhetoric and imagery on university campuses crosses a clear line. “There are lots of Jewish people in this country who criticise the state of Israel, but the idea that you can walk around your university campus and use Nazi iconography to describe Israel and to describe Jews is just wrong,” he said.

  • Protected but deported anyway, as Trump goes after ‘dreamers’

    Protected but deported anyway, as Trump goes after ‘dreamers’

    Three individual stories of so-called ‘dreamers’—recipients of the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program—have cast a harsh spotlight on the Donald Trump administration’s aggressive crackdown on undocumented immigration, revealing how protected immigrants are being expelled from the only country many have ever called home, despite legal safeguards designed to prevent their deportation.

    DACA was launched in 2012 to grant temporary protection from deportation to people who were brought to the United States as undocumented minors. The program allows recipients to legally live and work in the U.S. while they pursue long-term immigration status adjustments. Currently, an estimated 500,000 active DACA recipients, widely known as dreamers, live across the country, according to federal government data.

    But new reporting from AFP details how the Trump administration, which has long sought to dismantle the program, has targeted hundreds of DACA recipients for deportation. According to advocacy organization Home is Here, which cites a formal Department of Homeland Security letter to Congress, U.S. immigration officials have arrested at least 343 DACA recipients and deported at least 86 of them, even while the program’s protections remained in place after courts blocked Trump’s earlier attempt to end DACA entirely during his first presidential term.

    Jose Contreras, a 30-year-old DACA recipient who grew up in the U.S. after arriving as a child, thought he was safe from deportation when he attended a routine immigration hearing in early January. When he asked for a short stay of removal to wait for the birth of his first child, he told AFP immigration officials laughed at his request, reacting as if his ask was absurd. He was handcuffed, put on a plane, and deported to his native Honduras that same day. His son was born in Texas weeks later, in late February, without Contreras present for the birth.

    “I lost it, you know. I fell to the ground. And then I cried,” Contreras said. “Because I wasn’t planning to not be there for my son.” After 118 days in Honduras, a U.S. court ultimately ruled his deportation was unlawful and ordered his return, allowing him to reunite with his family in Edinburg, Texas, where he now wears an ankle monitor required following his return.

    A similar case unfolded for Maria de Jesus Estrada, 42, who was brought to the U.S. at age 15 and built a life in California. When she attended an immigration hearing accompanied by her 23-year-old daughter, she was immediately confronted by six immigration agents who ordered her arrested. Distraught, she only asked for a moment to say goodbye to her child. “I’m not gonna resist anything. I just need a minute. I need to hold my daughter. I need to hug my daughter,” she recalled telling agents. She was deported to Mexico that same day, before a court later ruled her expulsion illegal and ordered her return.

    Immigration officials have defended the deportations by citing old, outstanding removal orders issued when Contreras and Estrada were minors. But their legal attorney Stacy Tolchin argues the cases prove the Trump administration has deliberately broken existing law to target protected dreamers. “The cases of Jose Contreras and Maria de Jesus Estrada are evidence of this administration’s unlawful and inhumane distortion of the law,” Tolchin said.

    For other DACA recipients, there has been no lucky court-ordered return. Jessica Trevino, who was brought to the U.S. from Mexico at age 7 and has lived in the country almost her entire life, was arrested by immigration agents in Alamo, Texas, in late December as she left church with her family. Cellphone video of the encounter, which showed agents roughing up Trevino’s husband, spread widely on social media. Both Trevino and her husband were deported to Mexico in March, leaving their three U.S.-raised children behind to live with relatives in Texas.

    Now living in Matamoros, Mexico, Trevino waits for U.S. courts to hear her case, and holds out hope she will return in time for her daughter’s 15th birthday in August. “Although I was not born in the United States, I have lived here my whole life,” she said. “Sometimes I go to sleep thinking that I will wake up at home.”

    Advocacy groups say the deportations are part of a deliberate strategy to dismantle DACA through incremental action, after the Supreme Court blocked the administration’s attempt to end the program outright. “We are seeing this administration dismantling DACA through delay, denials, detentions and deportations,” said Todd Schulte, president of pro-immigration advocacy group FWD.us. The Trump administration is currently pressing Congress to pass a permanent resolution to the country’s long-running immigration policy dispute, as the future of DACA remains unresolved.

  • US Senator Mitch McConnell says absence due to fall and pneumonia

    US Senator Mitch McConnell says absence due to fall and pneumonia

    After four weeks of public speculation following his mid-June hospitalization, 82-year-old Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the longest-serving Senate party leader in U.S. history, has released his first detailed public statement addressing his health condition, confirming he will not return to Capitol Hill to resume his voting duties in the near term.

    The Kentucky Republican, who has long dealt with lingering mobility challenges stemming from a childhood case of polio, opened up about the difficulties of aging in the public eye in the written statement released by his office on Sunday. “You all know how folks of my generation often hesitate to share the vulnerability that comes with growing older,” McConnell wrote. “Even in the public eye, I feel that same instinct – I can’t help it.”

    McConnell detailed the sequence of events that led to his hospitalization, which was admitted on June 14. He explained that his long-standing mobility issues have become increasingly difficult to manage with age, and last month he suffered a fall that left him briefly unconscious, prompting an emergency trip to the hospital. In the statement, he addressed widespread rumors about serious underlying health issues, clarifying that medical tests ruled out the most severe outcomes: “My doctors have confirmed that I didn’t break any bones or suffer a concussion. I didn’t have a heart attack or a stroke. I don’t have any tumors or hemorrhages.”

    Despite the reassuring news on major health scares, McConnell confirmed that during his weeks of care, he was diagnosed with and has been treating a mild case of pneumonia. He has since transitioned from acute hospital care to an inpatient rehabilitation facility to continue his recovery.

    Acknowledging the frustration of the delayed recovery process, McConnell said he will follow his medical team’s guidance and delay his return to the Senate floor. “As much as it frustrates me, this process takes time. And on the advice of my doctors, I won’t be able to return to the Senate floor to vote quite yet,” he added.

    Public and congressional pressure for transparency around McConnell’s health grew steadily this week, as his hospitalization approached the one-month mark. Since his admission, McConnell’s team had released only sparse updates: a brief July 2 statement confirming he was “receiving excellent care” and “continues to improve”, with no additional details on his diagnosis or treatment plan. Prior to Sunday’s statement, McConnell had not made any public appearances or released any official images since entering care, with only a small number of unpublicized private phone calls reported.

  • China strongly deplores Japanese FM’s statement on South China Sea: spokesperson

    China strongly deplores Japanese FM’s statement on South China Sea: spokesperson

    BEIJING – On Sunday, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson issued a firm rebuke of recent remarks by Japanese Foreign Minister Toshimitsu Motegi regarding the 2016 so-called South China Sea Arbitral Award, marking the tenth anniversary of that widely disputed ruling. The spokesperson confirmed that China strongly deplores and categorically opposes the Japanese foreign minister’s statement, which openly backs the illegal “award”, misrepresents China’s long-standing legal claims in the region, and frames Japan as a so-called “legitimate stakeholder” with rights to weigh in on South China Sea affairs.

    The spokesperson emphasized that Japan holds no standing to intervene in disputes over the South China Sea, as it is not a coastal or involved party to the region’s territorial and maritime issues. Japan has no legitimate right to pass judgment on China’s inherent territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests in the area.

    Drawing on historical context, the spokesperson recalled that during World War II, Japanese forces occupied numerous islands and reefs in the South China Sea through illegal force, leaving a legacy of profound suffering for China and the Chinese people. Decades later, the spokesperson noted, Japan is once again seeking to insert itself into South China Sea matters under the guise of being a stakeholder – a move that evokes memories of Japan’s history of imperial aggression and expansion, and raises justified global vigilance about the growth of Japanese neo-militarism.

    China’s sovereignty over the Nanhai Zhudai (South China Sea Islands) and its accompanying rights and interests in the region were built over centuries of historical activity, and have a firm, unassailable foundation under international law, the spokesperson confirmed. All of China’s activities in the South China Sea are fully consistent with international law and legitimate sovereignty, and cannot be invalidated by the ad hoc, improperly constituted “arbitral tribunal” that issued the 2016 ruling.

    The spokesperson further explained that the 2016 tribunal overstepped its authorized jurisdiction and abused procedural power in producing the “award”, making the ruling inherently illegal, null and void, and completely without binding legal force. The flawed ruling also severely undermined the integrity and authority of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), delivering a major blow to the foundations of the international rule of law. China has never accepted and will never recognize the “award”, and rejects any claims or actions based on it.

    By openly endorsing the illegal award while ignoring its clear procedural and substantive flaws, Japan has exposed its own hypocrisy and deliberate double standards on South China Sea issues, the spokesperson argued. The ruling infamously classified Taiping Island, the largest island in the Nansha Islands which spans 500,000 square meters, supports permanent human habitation with natural fresh water and local agricultural production, as not a full island, disqualifying it from generating an exclusive economic zone (EEZ) or continental shelf rights. Japan’s own claim to an EEZ and continental shelf surrounding Okinotori, a pair of tiny rocky outcrops totaling less than 10 square meters in the Pacific Ocean, would fail under the same flawed standard applied to Taiping Island. If the 2016 arbitral standard is accepted, Japan has no legitimate basis for its own expansive maritime claims linked to Okinotori, the spokesperson noted. Given Japan’s open endorsement of the award, China is fully justified in concluding that Japan accepts the arbitral standard and has voluntarily surrendered its corresponding maritime claims to Okinotori.

    The spokesperson made clear that Japan’s true goal in the South China Sea is not upholding the international rule of law, but inserting itself into the region to undermine stability and advance its own strategic interests. In recent years, Japan has deepened military collaboration with the Philippines, expanded exports of offensive weapons and military equipment to the country, increased overseas military deployments, and pursued development of long-range offensive strike missiles. These actions far exceed the bounds of legitimate self-defense, break free of constraints imposed by Japan’s post-war constitution and core international law norms, and directly challenge the post-WWII international order that has maintained regional peace for decades. This pattern of activity leaves the international community with a pressing question: what are Japan’s actual strategic intentions in the South China Sea and broader East Asia?

    China has formally called on Japan to immediately end its campaign of false accusations against China, cease spreading disinformation about South China Sea issues, and stop acting to undermine regional peace and stability. The spokesperson reaffirmed that China will continue to take all necessary measures to firmly defend its territorial sovereignty and lawful maritime rights and interests in the South China Sea, and any attempt to challenge China’s legitimate interests or destabilize the region is destined to end in failure.

  • Anthony Zurcher: From Trump critic to ally, Lindsey Graham was a political survivor of the Maga era

    Anthony Zurcher: From Trump critic to ally, Lindsey Graham was a political survivor of the Maga era

    Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican senator whose 23-year congressional career became a defining case study of the seismic political shift that reshaped the U.S. Republican Party during the rise of Donald Trump, has died at the age of 71. Widely remembered as a skilled political survivor, Graham’s ideological and tactical trajectory over decades traced the growing influence of populist conservatism that upended traditional GOP politics. Throughout his tenure, he retained a set of core policy positions: a staunchly hawkish foreign policy centered on containing Russian expansion, unwavering support for Israel, and a longstanding call for regime change in Iran. Yet what marked his career most profoundly was his willingness to adapt to the shifting partisan currents that accompanied Trump’s takeover of the Republican Party.

    Graham launched his Senate career in 2002, quickly emerging as a close ally to legendary Arizona Republican senator John McCain, a staunch conservative who built a national reputation for his willingness to buck party orthodoxy and work across the aisle. When Graham launched his own 2016 presidential bid, bipartisan cooperation and de-escalating partisan tensions sat at the heart of his campaign platform. “If I get to be president, we’re going to open up a bar in the White House,” he once joked. “We’re going to get liquored up and solve problems.”

    His early relationship with Trump was defined by open, ferocious hostility. When Trump infamously mocked McCain’s status as a Vietnam War prisoner of war — declaring at a rally “He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured” — Graham hit back, calling the New York real estate developer a “jackass” unfit for the presidency. Trump retaliated by publicizing Graham’s personal phone number at a rally, flooding the senator’s phone with thousands of angry messages, a confrontation that ended with Graham posting a viral stunt video destroying a stack of his own phones in protest.

    As Graham’s presidential campaign collapsed in 2015, he doubled down on his criticism, labeling Trump a “race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot.” In a viral May 2016 tweet that would later be repeatedly cited by his critics, Graham warned that nominating Trump for president would lead to electoral disaster, writing “if the Republican Party chooses Trump as its nominee it ‘will get destroyed … and we will deserve it.’” Graham remained openly opposed to Trump through the 2016 general election against Hillary Clinton, refusing to back either major party nominee and instead supporting independent conservative candidate Evan McMullin.

    But once Trump secured an upset victory in 2016, Graham dramatically shifted his stance. As Trump consolidated total control over the Republican Party during his first term, Graham evolved from a fierce critic into one of Trump’s most vocal congressional allies and close personal friends. The pair regularly golfed together, and Graham, a staple of cable news political programming, used his platform to repeatedly defend Trump and his policy agenda. His most high-profile intervention on Trump’s behalf came during the 2018 Supreme Court confirmation battle for Brett Kavanaugh, when Graham aggressively pushed back against sexual assault allegations against the nominee (who denied all wrongdoing), helping to push through confirmation by the narrowest possible margin.

    Graham’s only major break from Trump came after the 2020 presidential election, when Trump lost to Joe Biden — a former Senate colleague of Graham’s, whom Graham once described as “the nicest person I’ve ever met in politics.” When a mob of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, disrupting the certification of Biden’s victory and forcing Graham and other lawmakers to evacuate for safety, Graham announced he was cutting all political ties with the outgoing president. “Trump and I had a hell of a journey,” he said at the time. “I hate it to end this way… All I can say is count me out. Enough is enough.”

    Yet the break proved temporary. Just weeks later, Graham voted to acquit Trump in his second Senate impeachment trial over the Capitol attack. As Trump began building his 2024 comeback campaign for the Republican nomination, Graham once again lined up behind his former rival, framing his earlier break as a reaction to a singular moment rather than a long-term rejection. “He was a very good president from my point of view,” Graham explained in a 2023 interview with the BBC. “I am judging him by what he did as president.” After Trump won re-election in 2024, Graham returned to his role as a reliable ally, consistently backing Trump’s cabinet and judicial nominees, supporting his legislative agenda, and praising Trump’s military actions in the Middle East, even as he encouraged Trump to continue U.S. strikes until the Iranian regime collapsed. Though he publicly pushed for greater U.S. military support for Ukraine amid its war against Russia, he softened his criticism of Trump’s friendly overtures to Russian President Vladimir Putin and refused to back new Russian sanctions without Trump’s explicit approval.

    Despite his deep alignment with Trump, Graham retained longstanding personal friendships with Democratic lawmakers across the aisle, a fact reflected in the widespread cross-partisan condolences that poured out after his death, even from outspoken Trump critics including California’s Adam Schiff and Massachusetts’ Elizabeth Warren. Trump himself acknowledged Graham’s unique cross-party ability during a Sunday morning television interview: “He was able to deal with Democrats. If I had a problem with a Democrat, he could work it out.”

    Graham’s relationship with anti-Trump Republicans was far more complicated, however. “Before Trump, we were friends,” former Congressman Adam Kinzinger, who served on the bipartisan committee investigating the January 6 attack, posted on X. “I choose to remember the man I knew before our paths diverged — the one who cared deeply about America’s role in the world and wasn’t afraid to see suffering up close.”

    Graham’s sudden death has created immediate upheaval for congressional Republicans and South Carolina’s GOP establishment. Graham, who had already secured the Republican nomination unopposed for a new six-year Senate term in the upcoming 2026 general election, was seeking re-election, leaving the party scrambling to fill the vacant spot. South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster, a Republican, will appoint an interim replacement to serve the remainder of 2026, and the state party will hold a new primary to select a general election candidate for November. While South Carolina is a deeply reliable red state, political analysts note that if Trump’s approval ratings remain stagnant and Republicans face strong national headwinds this cycle, the party will be forced to divert extra resources to defend the now-open seat, a race that was previously considered safe. Whoever wins the nomination will enter Congress as a junior senator, lacking the decades of seniority, institutional influence, and access to power that Graham built over his tenure through one of the most tumultuous eras in modern American political history.

  • Lindsey Graham, staunch backer of Israel and US wars, dies aged 71

    Lindsey Graham, staunch backer of Israel and US wars, dies aged 71

    Veteran South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, one of the most consequential figures shaping modern U.S. foreign policy and a polarizing long-time political associate of former President Donald Trump, has passed away at 71 after a short illness. His Senate office confirmed the news in an official statement released Sunday, noting that Graham died Saturday evening and that his family has asked for privacy during this period.

    First elected to the U.S. Senate in 2002, Graham built a decades-long career defined by unapologetically interventionist foreign policy stances that drew both fierce support and widespread international condemnation. He chaired the Senate Budget Committee and emerged as a leading voice on nearly every major global conflict of the 21st century, from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to ongoing tensions in Ukraine and Iran, and most notably, Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.

    Just days before his death, Graham returned from a high-profile visit to Kyiv, where he met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss new legislation to ramp up pressure on Russia. A leading congressional backer of continued U.S. military aid to Ukraine, Graham warned in a 2023 interview with the BBC that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s territorial ambitions extended far beyond Ukraine, arguing that “To be weak in Ukraine means that you lose in Taiwan.”

    Graham’s political relationship with Donald Trump was marked by notable public tension before an eventual reconciliation that solidified his status as one of Trump’s most prominent allies. Though he publicly broke with Trump in the immediate aftermath of the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, telling a Senate session “All I can say is count me out. Enough is enough,” he reversed course within years. In a 2023 BBC interview, Graham acknowledged “there is a dark side to Donald Trump” but confirmed he would back Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign, arguing “he was a very good president. But I am sticking with him because I saw what he did.” Trump paid tribute to Graham in a social media post following his death, calling the senator a “true American patriot.”

    Across more than two decades in Congress, Graham was one of the most unwavering pro-Israel voices in U.S. politics, consistently pushing for expanded military aid to Tel Aviv and open U.S. support for Israeli illegal settlements in occupied territories. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu remembered Graham as a close friend of Israel, while Israeli President Isaac Herzog noted his support for the country had never wavered throughout his career.

    Throughout Israel’s ongoing military campaign in Gaza, Graham repeatedly defended Israeli military actions and opposed any congressional or international efforts to limit U.S. military support for Israel, stances that drew harsh condemnation from Palestinian rights groups, human rights organizations, and Muslim civil rights communities. In July 2024, a social media post from Graham describing the Palestinian population of Gaza as “the most radicalized population on the planet who are taught to hate Jews from birth” sparked widespread international outcry. The Council on American-Islamic Relations condemned the comments, accusing Graham of spreading dangerous racist stereotypes about Palestinians and labeling his remarks “hateful and absurd.”

    Graham also faced heavy criticism for comments suggesting Israel could consider measures analogous to the U.S. atomic bombings of Japan in World War II, with opponents dismissing the remarks as dangerously inflammatory. During a 2019 visit to the illegally occupied Golan Heights, Graham argued that Israeli security and prosperity were core to U.S. national interests and formally called for the U.S. to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the territory. Earlier this year, International Criminal Court chief prosecutor Karim Khan confirmed Graham was among U.S. officials who threatened him over the ICC’s pursuit of arrest warrants for senior Israeli leaders over alleged war crimes in Gaza.

    A vocal proponent of hardline policy toward Iran, Graham repeatedly urged successive White House administrations to deploy military force to secure the Strait of Hormuz during periods of heightened U.S.-Iran tension, even comparing the confrontation with Tehran to Britain’s fight against Nazi Germany during World War II. His uncompromising stances on Middle East policy drew pushback from Gulf nations; in March of this year, he publicly blamed Saudi Arabia for refusing to join a potential U.S.-Israeli military campaign against Iran and warned of unspecified “consequences” for any nation that declined to back military action against Tehran.

    Graham’s confrontational diplomatic style also sparked controversy in Europe. As recently as 2025, Norwegian officials were forced to de-escalate diplomatic tensions after Graham threatened repercussions for Norway over a decision by the country’s sovereign wealth fund to divest from companies linked to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.

  • Iran strikes American military assets in Gulf and Jordan, after US hits Iranian cities

    Iran strikes American military assets in Gulf and Jordan, after US hits Iranian cities

    A rapidly escalating cycle of retaliatory violence has plunged the Persian Gulf into chaos this week, after the United States launched a third consecutive night of airstrikes targeting Iranian assets across Iranian territory, prompting Tehran to launch sweeping missile and drone counterattacks across multiple Gulf states and announce the immediate closure of the strategic Strait of Hormuz.

    The latest escalation traces back to an early Sunday strike by U.S. forces, launched after Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) opened fire on a Cyprus-flagged container vessel that the Iranian force claimed was traversing the Strait of Hormuz via an unapproved shipping route. The IRGC confirmed shortly after that it had targeted a second commercial vessel, accusing it of also violating regional maritime regulations.

    Local Iranian media reported multiple large explosions across key Iranian locations within hours of the U.S. Sunday strike, including the southern port city of Bandar Abbas, the coastal towns of Sirik and Jask, Qeshm Island off Iran’s southern coast, and the southwestern Khuzestan province — regions that host critical Iranian military and energy infrastructure.

    The conflict quickly spilled across national borders as air raid sirens blared across Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) just hours after the initial strikes. Qatar reported that it had intercepted incoming Iranian missile fire, with three people including one child wounded in the attack. Kuwait confirmed it was also working to intercept incoming hostile projectiles, while Jordan announced that three Iranian missiles had impacted inside its territory.

    In official statements carried by Iranian state media, the IRGC claimed responsibility for all cross-border attacks, stating it had destroyed a command and control center and drone storage hangars in Jordan, targeted a U.S. radar installation in Kuwait, and taken out a fighter jet maintenance hub and command facility in Qatar. The force also claimed it had destroyed U.S. naval logistics support centers and aircraft carrier refueling infrastructure at Oman’s Port of Duqm. The UAE later clarified that all missile threats detected earlier in the day had fallen outside its national borders, causing no damage or casualties on its territory.

    Per Iran’s official state news agency IRNA, the IRGC issued a formal announcement of the Strait of Hormuz closure shortly after the initial vessel attacks, stating: “Following this incident … the Strait of Hormuz will be closed until further notice and until the end of American interventions in this region.” The U.S. Central Command (Centcom) pushed back against this announcement immediately, confirming that commercial shipping traffic continues to move through the critical waterway, which handles roughly 20% of global oil trade.

    Details of the initial vessel attack have slowly emerged: Centcom confirmed the Cyprus-registered container ship GFS Galaxy was disabled by fire and structural damage to its engine room, with one crew member unaccounted for. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) agency reported the entire crew abandoned the damaged vessel and took shelter on a life raft, noting the incident occurred roughly 17 kilometers east of Omani territorial waters. India’s Ministry of External Affairs later confirmed that the missing crew member is an Indian national; of the 11 Indian citizens on board the vessel, 10 have been successfully rescued, and the Indian government has formally condemned the attack.

    U.S. defense officials laid out the scope of the three-night campaign this week, noting that U.S. forces struck 140 Iranian targets on Saturday alone, bringing the total number of targets hit to more than 300. Centcom says the strikes are intended to degrade Iran’s capacity to attack civilian mariners and commercial vessels moving freely through the strait. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a blunt warning following the counterattacks, stating: “Iran made a poor choice. Now they pay.”

    The rapid escalation of violence has effectively ended a weeks-long ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, a development confirmed by U.S. President Donald Trump. The breakdown of the truce has thrown deep uncertainty over ongoing diplomatic efforts to reach a long-term ceasefire and de-escalation agreement, which had been progressing slowly in recent weeks.

    Iran’s top parliamentary speaker and leading nuclear negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf reinforced Tehran’s hardening stance in a post on the social platform X, writing: “The era of one-sided deals is OVER. We told you: keep your word or pay the price. Reality is knocking.”

    Interestingly, the large-scale fighting broke out just one day after a round of diplomatic talks held in Oman on Saturday, which brought together Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and his Omani counterpart Badr Albusaidi. Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmail Baqaei confirmed Sunday that the talks were focused on coordinating new shipping and transit rules for the Strait of Hormuz, with legal and technical delegations from both sides discussing maritime security and safety standards. A Qatari delegation also attended the talks, and Baqaei added that both sides agreed to continue political and technical talks to reach a shared understanding on the issues.

    The escalation also comes on the heels of a formal statement from Iran’s new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, who issued a written threat Saturday to avenge the death of his father and predecessor, Ali Khamenei.

  • Israel elections to be held on October 27: parliament

    Israel elections to be held on October 27: parliament

    Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, announced Sunday that the country’s next national general election will take place on October 27 — the final date permitted under Israeli law — in a vote that is widely framed as a public referendum on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s tenure in office, shaped heavily by the fallout of the ongoing Gaza conflict. This election will mark the first time in decades that a sitting Israeli legislature has completed its full four-year term, with the current Knesset’s mandate set to expire on July 17.

    In an official statement, the Knesset clarified that no dissolution legislation would be required to pave the way for the vote, noting that “since the current Knesset is expected to serve its full term and the next general election is already set by law for October 27, with no intention of shortening the legislature’s tenure, there is no need to enact a Knesset Dissolution Law in the usual sense.”

    At 76 years old, Netanyahu — Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, who has held office across multiple non-consecutive terms — has already confirmed he will seek re-election, declaring publicly that he “intends to win” the upcoming contest. Political analysts widely view this election as the most consequential race of his decades-long political career.

    In recent weeks, Netanyahu’s ruling coalition, one of the most right-wing governments in Israel’s history, has rushed to advance a slate of priority legislation to shore up support within his alliance and position the government strongly ahead of the vote. In a shift from his previous ideological alignment, Netanyahu revealed last month that he aims to form a broad cross-party national unity government after the election, stating it would be “not a right-wing, not a left-wing government that depends on Arab parties, but a broad national government.” The move appears designed to reframe his campaign around national cohesion rather than partisan ideology, a pivot intended to broaden his appeal to centrist voters.

    Despite these strategic adjustments, recent public opinion polling paints a grim picture for the incumbent prime minister. Most Israeli voters currently support removing Netanyahu from office, with former Israeli military chief Gadi Eisenkot emerging as his most formidable challenger. A recent poll conducted by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem found that over 92% of Israeli respondents believe Iran emerged as the winner from recent regional conflict, while public support for Netanyahu’s leadership has plummeted from 40.5% in early March to just 29.4% in June.

    Widespread public criticism has centered on the February ceasefire between Israel and Iran, brokered with U.S. involvement, which resulted in a bilateral agreement between Tehran and Washington that many Israelis view as disadvantageous to their country’s security interests. Persistent public anger also continues over the major security failures that preceded the October 7 Hamas attacks, a controversy that has steadily eroded Netanyahu’s public standing over the past year.

    Several other divisive issues will shape voter sentiment ahead of the October vote. A bitter, long-running dispute over mandatory military service for ultra-Orthodox Jewish men has emerged as a major flashpoint. Netanyahu’s key ultra-Orthodox coalition allies have repeatedly threatened to bring down the current government if their community members are not granted continued exemption from military service, while the Israel Defense Forces and a large share of the general public argue that expanded conscription is critical amid years of ongoing conflict that have left the armed forces stretched thin. Other contentious issues include the controversial judicial overhaul package Netanyahu proposed before the Gaza war began, the prime minister’s ongoing personal corruption trials, and persistent uncertainty over long-term governance plans for the Gaza Strip post-conflict.

    Regional conflicts against the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah and Iran have created a uniquely volatile political backdrop for the election. Still, Netanyahu has framed his post-election agenda as advancing Israel’s regional strategic goals, arguing that a new unity government will help the country cement its military gains. “After we have removed the Iranian existential threat, the broad national government can make peace within ourselves, deal with the remnants of the Iranian axis and reap the fruits of our victory in political agreements like the one we are making with Lebanon — and there are a few more on the way,” he said in a recent statement.

    Netanyahu’s comments confirm that his campaign will center on Israel’s recent military campaigns against Iran and Hezbollah, as he shifts from governing through a narrow ideologically aligned right-wing coalition to campaigning for a broader, security-focused governing mandate from Israeli voters.

  • Zelensky orders new PM in major government reshuffle

    Zelensky orders new PM in major government reshuffle

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has announced a sweeping overhaul of the country’s top government bodies, confirming plans to replace sitting Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko and shake up leadership at several key law enforcement agencies, in an announcement made Sunday. As of the initial statement, the Ukrainian leader has not disclosed the identity of Svyrydenko’s successor, nor has he offered detailed public reasoning for the planned leadership changes.

    The shakeup arrives at a defining juncture in Ukraine’s more than four-year full-scale conflict with Russia. In recent weeks, Moscow has ramped up its campaign of lethal ballistic missile attacks across Ukrainian territory, while Kyiv is moving forward with plans to begin domestic manufacturing of U.S.-developed Patriot air defense systems — a capability that could drastically bolster Ukraine’s ability to fend off Russian airstrikes.

    In a public post on the social platform X, Zelensky outlined the core urgent priorities driving the need for cabinet-level changes. These included advancing Ukraine’s accession negotiations with the European Union, advancing the domestic Patriot production program (for which the U.S. has already promised to grant a manufacturing license), and completing critical pre-winter preparations. Annual Russian strikes on Ukraine’s critical energy infrastructure have become a regular feature of the conflict, putting immense pressure on energy systems as temperatures drop each year. “We determined that these changes require a renewal of the Cabinet of Ministers,” Zelensky stated, offering no additional context for the decision.

    Beyond the prime ministerial shift, Zelensky confirmed that Svyrydenko has been offered a new leadership role overseeing “relations with a key partner.” The outgoing prime minister previously led Ukrainian negotiations with the U.S. on a high-stakes minerals and investment agreement, though there has been no official confirmation that the new position is tied to that partnership. In her own response on X, Svyrydenko thanked Zelensky for the trust placed in her and affirmed she remains “ready to serve the Ukrainian state.” Zelensky also confirmed that leadership changes are planned for the heads of several law enforcement agencies, but declined to share further details on those adjustments.

    Under Ukrainian parliamentary rules, all cabinet reshuffle moves require formal approval from the country’s legislature. However, since the 2022 Russian full-scale invasion, Ukrainian lawmakers have consistently unified behind Zelensky’s policy and personnel proposals, and rarely move to block his agenda. Ukrainian media outlets have already circulated two early potential candidates for the prime minister post: Sergiy Koretsky, chief executive officer of Ukraine’s state-owned energy giant Naftogaz, and Denys Shmygal, who previously held the prime minister role before Svyrydenko. It should be noted that the office of Ukrainian prime minister does not typically hold authority over military strategy or frontline combat operations, which remain under the direct control of Zelensky and his top military command.

  • Former Qatari emir Sheikh Hamad dies at 74

    Former Qatari emir Sheikh Hamad dies at 74

    Qatar’s royal court announced Sunday the passing of former Emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the transformative leader who turned a small Gulf state into a consequential global player across energy, diplomacy, and media. He was 74 years old, and no official cause of death has been released to the public.

    In an official statement, the Amiri Diwan expressed: “With hearts steadfast in faith in God’s decree and destiny, the Amiri Diwan mourns the great loss to the nation of the late – may God have mercy on him – His Highness the Father Amir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, who passed away this morning.”

    Sheikh Hamad held power from 1995, when he rose to the position via a bloodless palace coup that ousted his father Sheikh Khalifa bin Hamad Al Thani, until 2013. In a move that shocked observers across the Middle East and beyond, he made the unprecedented choice to voluntarily abdicate the throne in favor of his son, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. This peaceful handover of power marked a first in modern Arab history, a rare departure from a regional pattern where leadership transitions only follow the death of a ruler or violent political upheaval. At the time of his resignation, Sheikh Hamad framed the shift as a new chapter for the nation, saying: “The future lies ahead of you, the children of this homeland, as you usher in a new era where young leadership hoists the banner.”

    Over his 18-year tenure, Sheikh Hamad engineered a radical transformation of Qatar’s global and domestic standing. He guided the small state to become the world’s top exporter of liquefied natural gas, turning its vast energy reserves into outsized geopolitical influence that stretched far beyond the country’s tiny borders. Domestically, his administration oversaw a series of landmark changes: the launch of influential global media network Al Jazeera in 1996, the adoption of Qatar’s first permanent constitution in 2004, and the introduction of municipal elections that extended voting and candidacy rights to women, a progressive step for the region.

    Sheikh Hamad also built Qatar’s reputation as a trusted regional mediator, with the country playing key diplomatic roles to resolve conflicts spanning Lebanon, Sudan, Afghanistan, and the Palestinian territories. For the Gaza Strip, his government committed hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure investment, including major coastal road projects, and a hospital in Gaza City still carries his name in recognition of his contributions.

    Beyond diplomacy and energy, Sheikh Hamad’s administration pursued aggressive international investments across aviation, infrastructure, business, and sports. These long-term investments laid the critical groundwork for Qatar’s successful hosting of the 2022 FIFA World Cup, an event that cemented the country’s status on the global stage. Even after stepping back from official rule, Sheikh Hamad remained a widely respected public figure in Qatar, and received a warm welcome during the opening ceremony of the 2022 tournament in Doha.

    Following the announcement of his death, tributes quickly poured in from leaders across the Middle East and beyond. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi offered condolences to Qatar’s ruling family and public, while Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari commended Sheikh Hamad’s “visionary leadership” and his far-reaching contributions to Qatar’s development and cross-regional cooperation. United Arab Emirates President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan also shared his respects, writing on X: “I extend my sincere condolences and sympathy to my brother Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and his family on the passing of his father, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani.”

    Sheikh Hamad is survived by Sheikh Tamim and his extended family. Today, the Qatar that his family governs is a country whose enormous influence across global energy markets, international diplomacy, and global affairs is almost entirely the product of the vision and policies Sheikh Hamad put in place during his rule. For context, Qatar is one of the smallest Arab states, with a total population of roughly 3 million, the majority of whom are migrant workers. It was a British protectorate for 55 years until gaining independence in 1971, and has been governed by the Al Thani royal family since the mid-19th century.