Global Pulse

分类： politics

  • With Graham Platner’s exit from Senate race looming, Democrats line up to replace him

    With Graham Platner’s exit from Senate race looming, Democrats line up to replace him

    The fight for Maine’s critical U.S. Senate seat has been upended by the expected exit of Democratic candidate Graham Platner, who suspended his campaign following public misconduct allegations, leaving state Democrats scrambling to name a replacement ahead of November’s general election against Republican incumbent Susan Collins.

    Platner, who won Maine’s Democratic primary earlier this year running as an outsider with populist policy positions, had been plagued by ongoing misconduct claims throughout his general election campaign. In an 11-minute video announcing his campaign suspension, Platner said he would formalize his withdrawal only once he verifies that the Maine Democratic Party will run an open, transparent candidate selection process. That formal withdrawal is required by a July 13 deadline, just days away from Platner’s announcement, and the party must select a new nominee by July 27.

    The race is widely viewed as make-or-break for national Democrats, who are targeting a longshot takeover of Senate control in November. To flip the majority from Republicans, Democrats must unseat Collins — the longest-serving Republican woman in Senate history — hold every one of their current Senate seats, and pick up three additional seats nationwide. A win in Maine is non-negotiable for Democrats to achieve this majority, which they say would let them push back against the policy agenda of President Donald Trump.

    Even before Platner officially confirmed his exit, a crowded field of Democratic hopefuls has already stepped forward to declare their candidacy for the open nomination.

    Among the early contenders is Nirav Shah, a public health expert who narrowly missed the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in Maine earlier this year. Shah has centered his campaign on the urgent goal of defeating Collins, and called for a transparent selection process that includes at least one televised debate and multiple public town halls to let voters weigh in on the contenders.

    Former state senator Troy Jackson, a former logger who also ran in this year’s gubernatorial primary, has also entered the race. Jackson has close ties to Platner: he appeared alongside the former candidate at dozens of campaign events, and he has the implicit backing of Platner’s most prominent national ally, left-wing Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. Jackson ultimately placed third in this year’s gubernatorial primary.

    Jordan Wood, a former U.S. House staffer who unsuccessfully sought the Democratic nomination for a Maine U.S. House seat earlier this year, has switched races to run for the open Senate nomination. Wood has pledged to run a grassroots-funded campaign, rejecting all corporate and lobbyist donations entirely.

    Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows officially launched her campaign Thursday. Bellows, who also ran in this year’s gubernatorial primary, previously challenged Collins in 2014 and lost. In her announcement, she pledged to unify Maine Democrats and run a campaign centered on working-class interests, focused on overturning the current political system that she says fails most Americans.

    Dan Kleban, founder of the popular Maine Beer Company, who suspended his own initial Senate campaign last year, re-entered the race Wednesday ahead of Platner’s announcement. Kleban, who frames himself as a non-career politician, noted he built his small business from a kitchen table operation into a major employer that now supports more than 100 Maine workers.

    While speculation has swirled around a potential bid from former Democratic gubernatorial candidate Janet Mills, who suspended her primary campaign once Platner gained momentum, it remains unclear whether Mills — who was backed by Senate Democratic leadership as an establishment-friendly candidate — will rejoin the race. Meanwhile, celebrity speculation around actor Patrick Dempsey, best known for his role on *Grey’s Anatomy*, was put to rest when the Maine native wrote an opinion piece ruling out a run, saying he can best contribute to public service through his existing work. Local media also report that Platner has encouraged state legislator Valli Geiger, a close supporter, to enter the race, but he has not issued a formal endorsement of any candidate to replace him.

    All contenders are walking a careful political line: they must embrace the populist policy positions that drove Platner’s primary win, while also proving they have the experience and campaign infrastructure to take on Collins’ well-funded, well-established political operation.

    Maine Democrats are moving forward with plans to select a new nominee via a party convention attended by roughly 600 delegates, but the party faces a tight timeline: once a nominee is selected, they will have just four months to unify the party and build voter support ahead of the November election. Despite the last-minute disruption, state party leaders struck an optimistic tone in a post-suspension statement.

    “There is an unprecedented amount of energy and enthusiasm among Maine Democrats, driven in part by many of the dedicated volunteers and supporters who were inspired by Graham Platner’s campaign,” the party said. “We look forward to coming together and harnessing that energy around our new nominee as we work to defeat Susan Collins in November.”

  • Colombia’s court on the conflict with FARC rebels in limbo as president-elect vows to dismantle it

    Colombia’s court on the conflict with FARC rebels in limbo as president-elect vows to dismantle it

    Ten years after the Colombian government signed a landmark peace agreement that ended Latin America’s longest-running guerrilla insurgency, the specialized justice body created to investigate and prosecute conflict-related crimes stands at a crossroads, as incoming president Abelardo de la Espriella has pledged to dismantle it.

    Known officially as the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP), the tribunal has been a source of deep national division since its creation, mirroring the longstanding political split over the 2016 peace deal with the now-disbanded Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). De la Espriella, a conservative candidate endorsed by former U.S. President Donald Trump, has publicly labeled the SJP a “failed” institution. However, legal analysts and international law experts warn that dismantling the body is far from a straightforward process, as it is protected by both domestic constitutional safeguards and international legal frameworks.

    The SJP is enshrined in Colombia’s constitution and receives formal backing from the International Criminal Court (ICC). In 2021, the ICC closed its own 18-year preliminary investigation into the Colombian conflict, concluding that the country was meeting its international justice obligations largely due to the steady progress made by the SJP. Alejandro Ramelli, president of the tribunal, told the Associated Press that the ICC’s decision to close its probe was explicitly conditional on the SJP continuing its mandated work. An abrupt end to the tribunal, Ramelli warned, would push Colombia into violation of its international legal commitments to the global court.

    The SJP’s official mandate runs through 2028, with an additional five-year window set aside for completing ongoing trials, after which Colombia’s Congress will hold a vote on whether to extend the body’s authority for another five-year term. It began formal operations in 2018, and to date has opened cases involving more than 14,000 suspects accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the decades-long conflict. Of these suspects, approximately 70% are former FARC guerrillas, 29% are retired or former members of Colombian security forces, and the remaining 1% are civilians linked to conflict violence.

    Supporters of the tribunal frame it as a historic breakthrough for transitional justice, crediting it with creating the conditions for ending the insurgency and finally holding perpetrators of atrocities accountable to victims. Critics, meanwhile, have repeatedly argued that the court is structurally biased against former military personnel. In a seeming contradiction, the stance of de la Espriella’s own transition team has shifted slightly in recent weeks: Iván Cancino, the president-elect’s nominee for justice minister, told Colombia’s Caracol Radio this week that the administration does not plan to fully eliminate the SJP, but will instead push for faster results and launch a full review of the tribunal’s spending.

    Colombia’s outgoing president Gustavo Petro, who has himself expressed criticism of the SJP’s performance over his term, recently took to social media platform X to argue that the tribunal’s budget “must be strengthened,” emphasizing that “establishing the judicial truth about the conflict is fundamental to national reconciliation.” Even as political debate swirls around its future, Ramelli warned that budget cuts to the court would “seriously affect the fundamental right of access to justice” for millions of victims of the decades-long armed conflict, and that an abrupt termination of the SJP’s work would leave thousands of unresolved cases in legal limbo.

    Ramelli pointed to the court’s key landmark rulings to underscore its impact: the tribunal has convicted FARC’s former top leadership for their role in more than 21,000 kidnappings, and convicted a group of former military officials for over 100 documented extrajudicial killings. In both high-profile cases, the accused parties acknowledged responsibility, and were granted alternative non-custodial sentences that required them to complete community restitution projects directly benefiting victims of the crimes. The court has also handed down a 20-year prison sentence to a former soldier who rejected charges of involvement in extrajudicial killings.

    Ramelli emphasized that beyond convictions and sentencing, the tribunal has unlocked critical truth about the full scale of the conflict’s violence that was previously unknown to the Colombian public. “What is the value of the truths uncovered through the judicial process?” he said. “We now know the true scale of FARC kidnappings, the recruitment of more than 18,677 children, the sexual violence committed by the FARC and the extrajudicial killings carried out by security forces. The country simply did not know the full extent of these crimes.”

    Today, a decade after the original peace accord was signed, Colombia still struggles to break a persistent cycle of violence: armed groups including FARC dissident factions that rejected the 2016 deal, the National Liberation Army (ELN) guerrilla group, and the Clan del Golfo drug cartel continue to battle for control of lucrative illegal economies centered on drug trafficking and unregulated mining.

  • Khamenei’s body arrives in Mashhad for burial after week of processions

    Khamenei’s body arrives in Mashhad for burial after week of processions

    Nearly five months after Iran’s former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in a US-Israeli joint military airstrike, the final chapter of his national funeral process moved to his hometown of Mashhad this week, carrying with it rising regional tensions and unprecedented displays of public grief. After a week of cross-country and cross-border mourning ceremonies, Khamenei’s remains—along with the bodies of four of his family members killed alongside him in the February 28 assassination—were transported to Mashhad’s Shahid Hasheminejad Airport early Thursday. The special flight carrying the caskets was escorted by Iranian military fighter jets, a formal honor for the country’s decades-long top leader.

    Originally scheduled to take place at 6 a.m. local time, the burial service was pushed back eight hours to 2 p.m. local time, a last-minute change announced by official Iranian media just hours after the United States and Iran resumed exchange of air strikes following a brief temporary ceasefire. US airstrikes targeting railway infrastructure have damaged key bridges connecting the capital Tehran to Mashhad, disrupting overland travel between the two cities. However, senior Iranian officials have flatly rejected any connection between the delay and the renewed military attacks, instead attributing the postponement to an overwhelming influx of mourners that has strained the city’s security and logistics capacity.

    Mashhad, a city of deep religious importance to Shia Islam globally, draws millions of pilgrims annually to the shrine of Imam Reza, one of the faith’s most venerated figures. Khamenei, a native of the city, left explicit instructions before his death to be interred on the grounds of the holy shrine, according to Mohammad Mohammadi Golpayegani, head of the late supreme leader’s office. Tens of thousands of mourners have flooded into the city from across Iran and neighboring Iraq in the days leading up to the burial, filling public squares and thoroughfares surrounding the shrine. Many of the gathered mourners carried signs and chanted virulent anti-US and anti-Trump slogans, with placards reading “Kill Trump” and crowds calling out “Death to America” and threats against the former US president for his administration’s role in the assassination strike.

    Before Khamenei’s remains reached Iran’s northeastern holy city, they were taken to two of Shia Islam’s most sacred sites in Iraq: Najaf and Karbala, for multi-day mourning processions. Iraq’s prominent state-aligned paramilitary group Hashd al-Shaabi confirmed that more than 2.3 million people joined the procession held in Najaf alone, marking one of the largest public gatherings the country has seen in recent years. Iran’s sitting President Masoud Pezeshkian and senior commanders from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) traveled to Iraq to take part in the memorial events.

    Notably absent from all public mourning events has been Mojtaba Khamenei, Ali Khamenei’s son and the newly sworn-in Supreme Leader of Iran. A recent report from The New York Times revealed that Mojtaba’s request to attend his father’s funeral processions was denied by Iranian security officials over persistent fears that he could also be targeted for assassination. Since assuming the country’s highest office just days after his father’s killing, the new supreme leader has not made any public appearances and remains completely out of public view.

    The funeral and burial come at a moment of extreme volatility across the Middle East, with the resumption of hostilities between Washington and Tehran raising fears of a broader regional conflict that could draw in neighboring powers and global stakeholders.

  • Accused Charlie Kirk shooter confessed, roommate says in video played in court

    Accused Charlie Kirk shooter confessed, roommate says in video played in court

    A Utah preliminary court hearing for the accused killer of high-profile conservative activist Charlie Kirk unfolded dramatic new details Thursday, as prosecutors released recorded testimony from the defendant’s former roommate tying 23-year-old Tyler Robinson directly to the September 2025 shooting. This marked the fourth day of witness testimony in the high-profile capital case, where prosecutors are working to establish probable cause to move the case to a full trial.

    In a pre-recorded investigative interview played for the court, Lance Twiggs — who shared a St. George apartment with Robinson at the time of the killing — outlined a months-long timeline of clues that Robinson had been preparing for an attack, followed by an explicit confession to the crime after the shooting. Twiggs told investigators that in the months before Kirk was killed, Robinson asked to borrow an engraving tool, claiming he planned to etch bullets for a family hunting and camping trip. He also testified that Robinson regularly listened to political talk radio while commuting to his job as an electrician, mostly focusing commentary on former President Donald Trump and new legislative proposals, but that he never once heard Robinson mention Charlie Kirk’s name or discuss LGBTQ issues, the topic the activist often centered in his public speaking.

    On the morning of the shooting, Twiggs said Robinson left the apartment far earlier than his usual routine, departing around 4 a.m. Twiggs assumed he was traveling to a distant work site and thought nothing of it. Hours later, after news broke that Kirk had been fatally shot during a public university event in Orem, over three hours north of St. George, Robinson sent Twiggs a series of startling text messages. He first told Twiggs to stop what he was doing and check underneath his keyboard, then directly admitted to the killing when Twiggs pressed him for clarity. When Twiggs asked why he had carried out the attack, Robinson replied: “I’d had enough of his hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”

    Twiggs’ testimony also laid bare Robinson’s movements after the shooting. The defendant texted from near the campus, explaining he had stowed his rifle in bushes after changing clothes, and was waiting for an opportunity to retrieve the weapon without being seen by law enforcement. He complained about loud crickets, worried police sniffer dogs would locate the hidden firearm, and noted that a marked police squad car was parked near the drop site, forcing him to wait in his car scrolling social media for over an hour before abandoning the plan to retrieve the weapon. Robinson then told Twiggs he was driving back to their shared apartment from Orem. When Twiggs woke up the next morning, Robinson was already at the apartment, and again confirmed the confession when asked in person. Twiggs testified that Robinson cried, expressed deep regret for the killing, and spent the day distracting himself with routine tasks. Robinson also told his roommate he planned to turn himself in to authorities.

    That account aligns with previous testimony from Utah State Bureau of Investigation agent Brian Davis, who told the court Wednesday that Robinson arrived at the Washington County Sheriff’s Office around 9 p.m. that same day, accompanied by his parents and a family friend, to surrender to law enforcement.

    Portions of Twiggs’ recorded interview and the full set of text messages have been redacted, with some sensitive sections only shown to people inside the courtroom and barred from public release. A days-long legal debate preceded the release of the evidence, with attorneys for media outlets and Kirk’s surviving family, Erika Kirk, arguing for public access, while the defense pushed for tighter restrictions. Judge Tony Graf ultimately ruled that the redacted versions of the evidence could be released publicly.

    Robinson has not yet entered a formal plea in the case. Prosecutors are expected to wrap up presentation of all evidence against him by Friday, after which the judge will rule on whether sufficient probable cause exists to move the case forward to a full jury trial. If convicted, Robinson could face the death penalty. The defense has repeatedly objected to prosecution evidence throughout the preliminary hearing; earlier this week, after the prosecution presented an FBI forensic report linking Robinson’s DNA to a rifle, screwdriver and towel recovered near the crime scene, defense attorneys spent hours cross-examining the forensic analyst to question testing protocols, analytical interpretation and margins of error.

  • Technology is driving an increase in online threats to the UK, senior officials say

    Technology is driving an increase in online threats to the UK, senior officials say

    LONDON — Senior British counterterrorism officials issued a stark public warning Thursday, outlining a rapidly growing landscape of digital and cross-border threats targeting the United Kingdom, ranging from state-backed hostile operations to homegrown far-right extremism, all enabled by modern online platforms.

    Vicki Evans, the Metropolitan Police’s senior national counterterrorism coordinator, framed the fight against these evolving threats as an unending, daily challenge that law enforcement cannot win without urgent support from global technology firms. Speaking at New Scotland Yard, Evans emphasized that hostile state activity is now the “most rapidly escalating mission” for UK counterterrorism policing, a shift echoed by Laurence Taylor, head of national counterterrorism policing, who noted that while Islamic extremism remains the single largest threat, risks from far-right extremist networks and hostile foreign governments have surged sharply over the past five years.

    Recent months have seen a string of high-profile convictions linked to state-backed hostile operations on UK soil. In July, two Romanian men were imprisoned for the stabbing of a Persian-language journalist, with a judge confirming the attack was orchestrated on behalf of the Iranian government. Just one month prior, a Ukrainian man and a Romanian man were jailed for their role in an arson plot targeting property connected to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer — an operation that matches the pattern of Russian state-directed sabotage. In May, a serving UK border official and a former Hong Kong police officer were convicted of conducting espionage activities on behalf of the Chinese government.

    Evans added that 2025 has already seen more than 20 Iranian-backed plots uncovered, ranging from targeted assassinations and kidnappings to other violent criminal acts against UK interests. Investigations remain ongoing into whether a series of arson attacks on Jewish sites across the UK earlier this year can be connected to Iran.

    On the Russian front, Evans detailed that Moscow has orchestrated a steady flow of surveillance plots targeting individuals and institutions across the UK. The Kremlin’s operatives work to embed themselves in everyday British life, identify individuals willing to spread pro-Russian disinformation, and recruit proxies to carry out illegal operations on the Kremlin’s behalf. Across the European continent, Russia has leveraged mainstream messaging apps including Telegram to recruit individuals to carry out vandalism and arson attacks — one prominent example being a 2025 attack on a London warehouse storing communications equipment bound for Ukraine. The plot’s ringleader, Dylan Earl, was recruited directly on Telegram by the Wagner Group, a Russian mercenary organization formally designated as a terrorist group by the UK government.

    A particularly troubling development flagged by Evans is the recruitment of teenagers as young as 15 to carry out these proxy plots. The open nature of online platforms means literally anyone can be targeted for radicalization or recruitment, she explained. “This isn’t something that’s happening elsewhere,” Evans told reporters. “It’s happening here. This risk is in our neighborhoods, in our online spaces and in our workplaces.”

    Alongside rising state threats, counterterrorism leaders also highlighted a dramatic surge in far-right extremism that prompted a national threat level upgrade in April, when officials raised the UK’s overall terror threat rating from “substantial” to “severe.” Taylor explained that the upgrade was driven in large part by substantial growth in far-right linked extremism cases. Online platforms have been flooded with what Taylor described as “vile” extremist content that blends racism, misogyny, and extreme homophobia into a dangerous radicalizing mix.

    He noted that extreme harmful views are increasingly going unchallenged in online spaces, creating conditions where once-unacceptable ideological positions have become widespread. As an example, he cited the case of 18-year-old Alina Burns, who was sentenced to nearly 20 years in prison in May for an ax attack on a random stranger — an act Taylor confirmed was directly motivated by the woman’s extreme far-right beliefs.

    Counterterrorism officials also emphasized that children and young teenagers are increasingly being targeted for online radicalization. Taylor pointed to the recent sentencing of 22-year-old Alfie Coleman, who received a 13.5-year prison term Wednesday after attempting to purchase a firearm from an undercover MI5 officer. Coleman had been radicalized online starting at just 14 years old.

    Evans explained that extremist actors and state operatives deliberately design online content to appeal to young people by blending extremist propaganda with popular gaming footage, historical imagery, and mainstream music. Young users are then slowly pushed toward carrying out real-world violence, even being instructed to replicate deadly attacks from video games in public spaces. In some of the most extreme cases, members of “sadistic online groups” compete with one another to carry out harm across both digital and physical spaces, including cyberattacks, extremist violence, child sexual abuse, and terrorist acts.

    The widespread presence of what officials call “lawful but awful” content online — including graphic depictions of extreme violence and gore — has warped many young people’s understanding of what is normal and acceptable, leaving them far more vulnerable to manipulation by both extremist groups and hostile state actors, Evans said.

    While the UK government has moved forward with plans to ban social media use for children under 16, Evans argued that this policy alone is insufficient to curb the growing threat. She called for sustained regulatory and public pressure on technology companies to proactively remove harmful content and restrict access to extremist material, noting that existing regulations targeting harmful online content quickly become outdated as platforms evolve their algorithms to push engaging, often divisive content to vulnerable users. For many young people drawn into harmful online ecosystems, Evans warned, the shift from passive consumption of extreme content to active participation in violence can happen shockingly quickly.

  • Mexico to press for criminal charges over deaths in US custody

    Mexico to press for criminal charges over deaths in US custody

    A fatal shooting of a Mexican citizen by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer in Houston, Texas, has triggered widespread public protest and formal legal action from the Mexican government, escalating tensions between the two nations over immigration enforcement practices.

    Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, a 52-year-old undocumented migrant who had worked as a construction builder in the Houston region for 30 years, was shot and killed by an ICE agent on Tuesday while he was traveling to his job site, according to his family. His son, Ronaldo Salgado, pushed back against early official framing of the incident, telling reporters that his father did not deserve to be reduced to a dehumanizing headline labeling him as just a ‘Mexican man shot and killed by ICE.’

    The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defended the agent’s actions in a public statement posted to the social platform X, claiming the shooting was an act of self-defense. Officials wrote that ICE agents were conducting a vehicle stop as part of a targeted enforcement operation when Salgado allegedly attempted to evade arrest, rammed an ICE vehicle, ignored repeated verbal orders, and used his car as a weapon to try to run over an officer.

    The incident quickly sparked outrage on both sides of the border. On Wednesday, more than 1,000 demonstrators gathered in Houston to protest the killing, joining the growing chorus of voices calling for accountability. Four Democratic members of the U.S. Congress have also joined the call, demanding a fully independent and transparent investigation into Salgado’s death. In a letter to DHS leadership, the lawmakers noted that this fatal shooting is far from an isolated incident, pointing to a pattern of unnecessary deadly force use by ICE agents. They reminded DHS Secretary of the 2025 January killing of two U.S. citizens, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, by federal agents in Minneapolis, an incident that sparked nationwide protests over excessive force. The lawmakers criticized DHS and ICE for repeating familiar justifications for the killing — claims of evasion, vehicle weaponization, and self-defense — without providing meaningful answers or accountability to the public.

    Beyond U.S. domestic criticism, the Mexican government has announced it will take formal legal action against the deaths of its citizens connected to ICE operations and custody. Mexican Foreign Minister Roberto Velasco confirmed Wednesday that the government would pursue forceful legal action in the U.S. to protect the human rights of Mexican nationals living north of the border. Official counts from the Mexican government show that 14 Mexican citizens have died while held in ICE detention facilities, and three more have been killed during ICE arrest operations. The Houston shooting of Salgado pushed the administration to move beyond diplomatic protest.

    Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum, who took office earlier this year, has called for action beyond formal diplomatic notes, directly instructing Velasco to file criminal complaints over the deaths. The legal filings will seek to have all deaths of Mexican nationals in ICE custody or during ICE operations investigated as criminal cases. Velasco added that the Mexican government also plans to file civil lawsuits against the private companies that manage the U.S. detention facilities where the 14 Mexican citizens died.

    Community leaders in Houston have echoed calls for transparency, noting that the incident has deepened existing mistrust between local immigrant communities and federal immigration enforcement agencies, as community members gather to support Salgado’s grieving family in the wake of the shooting.

  • Democratic hopeful Rahm Emanuel calls for end to unconditional US aid to Israel

    Democratic hopeful Rahm Emanuel calls for end to unconditional US aid to Israel

    Ahead of the 2028 U.S. presidential election, influential Democratic figure and likely White House hopeful Rahm Emanuel has delivered a sharp rebuke of Washington’s decades-long policy of unqualified, blind support for the Israeli government, calling the long-standing approach a fundamental misstep. Speaking at a public event hosted by Tel Aviv University’s Center for the United States on Wednesday, Emanuel — a Jewish former White House official with deep roots in U.S. Middle East policy — argued that current Israeli leadership has steered the country toward growing international isolation, branding it a “territorial pariah” on the global stage.

    Emanuel emphasized that no nation can sustain perpetual conflict once the international community no longer accepts the legitimacy of its fight. “You must instead find a new sustainable path to peace, security, and economic prosperity. America stands ready,” he added. He also took a sarcastic swipe at the Israeli government’s recent diplomatic efforts, noting that its most high-profile new diplomatic win is recognition from Somaliland, a self-declared state that lacks broad international recognition. Quoting his grandmother, he joked, “You lost Europe, you lost America, and you picked up Somaliland; such a deal,” prompting laughter from the audience.

    During his current visit to Israel, Emanuel held a meeting with Israeli President Isaac Herzog but intentionally skipped a meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The two have a long-standing feud: Netanyahu labeled Emanuel a “self-hating Jew” back in 2008 after Emanuel condemned Israel’s expansion of illegal settlements in Palestinian territories. Speaking to reporters ahead of his Wednesday speech, Emanuel explained his choice to avoid sitting with Netanyahu, noting that Israeli general elections are scheduled for this autumn. “I’m not going to give the prime minister an opportunity to twist this politically,” he said. In a post-meeting social media statement, Herzog highlighted that maintaining strong, positive ties with both U.S. major political parties — Democrats and Republicans alike — is a critical priority for Israel.

    Breaking from the long-standing mainstream U.S. framing of a two-state solution to the conflict, Emanuel put forward what he calls a “23-state solution”: he proposed that 21 existing Arab states take on active, shared responsibility to support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, while also formalizing international recognition of Israel’s territorial claims.

    Throughout his remarks, Emanuel made clear that his criticism reflects a broader, long-building shift in attitudes within the U.S. Democratic Party toward U.S.-Israel relations, a shift that has sparked intense public debate since the launch of Israel’s 2023 military campaign in Gaza. He warned that the bilateral relationship between Washington and Tel Aviv is currently “at a crossroads” that demands “significant changes and a new direction.” “The status quo is unacceptable, where you can’t say anything negative, which acts as an implicit endorsement,” he stated.

    In his sharp rebuke of Netanyahu’s leadership, Emanuel argued that decades of unconditional U.S. backing have enabled the Israeli prime minister to act without accountability: “Unconditional support has produced a prime minister who has presumed that his strategic interest would incur no political costs if he ignored America’s concerns about settlements and sparked a regional war.” Emanuel also put forward concrete policy changes, suggesting that Washington cut defense subsidies to Israel, and impose targeted sanctions on Israeli settlers who carry out attacks against Palestinian civilians as well as Israeli politicians who openly endorse settler violence. In a separate interview with Israeli Channel 12, he even noted that Palestinian scholar and activist Edward Said is more popular among American Jewish voters than Netanyahu.

    Emanuel’s political credentials on Middle East policy carry significant weight: he served as a senior advisor to President Bill Clinton during the 1990s Oslo peace negotiations, and held the post of White House Chief of Staff under President Barack Obama from 2009 to 2010, where he shaped U.S. policy across the Middle East. A former U.S. congressman and Chicago mayor, he has been open about his plans to launch a 2028 Democratic presidential bid, even though no major contender has formally declared candidacy for the race yet.

    His high-profile criticism comes as public opinion across the United States has shifted dramatically on the Israel-Palestine conflict, particularly within the Democratic base. A recent joint poll conducted by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research recorded a steep drop in public support for Israel, with growing opposition among Democrats and emerging internal divisions among Republicans. The data shows that 58 percent of Democratic voters now believe the U.S. is “too supportive of Israel,” up sharply from 45 percent in January 2024. Furthermore, roughly one-third of all U.S. adults — including half of all Democratic respondents — agree that Israel has committed acts of genocide against Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

    Stances on unconditional U.S. support for Israel and the Gaza war have become a defining litmus test for Democratic candidates, most recently in party primary elections where progressive candidates openly critical of the status quo have secured multiple upset victories against more establishment opponents.

  • Orbán allies protest in Hungary against plans to oust President Tamás Sulyok

    Orbán allies protest in Hungary against plans to oust President Tamás Sulyok

    BUDAPEST, Hungary — Thousands of demonstrators converged outside Sándor Palace, the official seat of Hungary’s presidency in Budapest’s historic Castle District, on Thursday for a protest organized by former long-serving prime minister Viktor Orbán’s far-right Fidesz party to oppose the new government’s push to oust sitting President Tamás Sulyok. The demonstration comes amid a bitter political power struggle just months after pro-European center-right Prime Minister Péter Magyar ended Orbán’s 16-year autocratic rule in a landslide April election, and has cast a sharp spotlight on competing claims of what constitutes democratic governance in Hungary.

    Magyar’s administration has made dismantling what it calls Orbán’s “mafia-style” autocratic regime a top policy priority, moving quickly to remove dozens of political appointees and institutional leaders installed by the former government who were accused of enabling its anti-democratic agenda. The centerpiece of this current push is a constitutional amendment scheduled for a parliamentary vote next week that would cut Sulyok’s term short, alongside sweeping reforms including new term limits for members of parliament, overhauls to the national judiciary, and the creation of a new anti-corruption body empowered to investigate allegations of widespread financial misconduct during Orbán’s tenure.

    Orbán, whose government spent 16 years systematically dismantling independent democratic institutions in Hungary, has now framed the effort to remove Sulyok as an attack on the rule of law and a dangerous first step toward authoritarian rule. He spent weeks promoting the “Stop Tyranny” protest across his social media channels, though he did not appear at the event itself, which comes as Fidesz continues to grapple with its identity after its catastrophic election defeat in April. For many protesters, the demonstration was not a defense of Sulyok personally, but of the integrity of the presidential office. “The point is not whether Tamás Sulyok is popular or not, but that this is simply unacceptable in a democracy,” protester Krisztina Nemerkényi told reporters on Thursday.

    Fidesz lawmaker János Pócs defended his party’s record of constitutional changes during its time in power, noting that Fidesz unilaterally rewrote Hungary’s constitution in 2011 and has since amended it 15 times. “We have always done so in the interest of the country, in order to protect the country, but not for the sake of dictatorship,” Pócs told the Associated Press at the protest.

    Magyar, for his part, has stood firmly by his pledge to remove Sulyok, arguing that the president failed to uphold his constitutional duties by standing aside as Orbán’s government rolled back democratic checks and balances. The prime minister campaigned explicitly on ousting Sulyok ahead of April’s election, and points to his party’s two-thirds parliamentary majority as a clear voter mandate to follow through on the promise. While Hungary’s presidency is largely a ceremonial role, it holds key powers: the office must sign all legislation into law and can send parliamentary bills to the Constitutional Court for judicial review. Magyar’s allies warn that Sulyok, as an Orbán appointee, could use these powers to block the new government’s planned democratic and anti-corruption reforms.

    Since taking office in May, Magyar’s administration has moved rapidly to deliver on other key campaign promises. It immediately suspended operations at the public television and radio news service, which Magyar accuses of operating as a state propaganda mouthpiece for Fidesz during Orbán’s tenure. The government has also implemented an eight-year term limit for future prime ministers, removed the heads of national security and intelligence agencies appointed under Orbán, and enacted rapid democratic reforms that unlocked 16.4 billion euros ($19 billion) in frozen European Union cohesion funds that had been withheld over the democratic backsliding of Orbán’s era.

  • Netanyahu’s son Yair adopts new name in latest family name change

    Netanyahu’s son Yair adopts new name in latest family name change

    Israel’s oldest daily newspaper Haaretz revealed this week that Yair Netanyahu, eldest son of sitting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has officially changed his legal name to Yonatan Hon, a move that comes as the Netanyahu family confronts cascading legal troubles and global political backlash.

    Official Israeli tax withholding documents issued in December 2024 still bore Yair’s birth name, but updated records from 2025 list the new identity alongside the unusual, seemingly symbolic fictional address “Balfour 0” – a reference to Balfour Street, the location of the official prime minister’s residence in Jerusalem. This is not the first time Yair has altered his surname: on public social media platforms, he previously used the name Yair Hoon, a close variation of his new legal name. The root of the surname traces to his maternal grandfather Shmuel, who originally bore the last name Hoon before changing it to Ben Artzi later in life.

    The name change unfolds against a backdrop of intensifying political and legal peril for the Netanyahu family, both domestically and on the global stage. In the United States, the Israeli prime minister has become an increasingly divisive and toxic figure in mainstream politics, as public backlash grows over his government’s conduct of the war in Gaza. Separately, the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity stemming from the military campaign in Gaza.

    Yair himself has long faced public scrutiny over his business dealings in the U.S. and longstanding ties to wealthy conservative and far-right actors. The most high-profile controversy dates back to 2018, when Israeli public television leaked an audio recording of Yair speaking outside a strip club, where he appeared to boast that his father had advanced a multibillion-dollar natural gas deal that delivered major profits to a prominent Israeli tycoon. In Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu currently battles three separate active corruption investigations that have dogged his third term as prime minister.

    This pattern of name changes among the Netanyahu family is not new, nor is it an isolated practice in Israeli political history. Five years ago, Yair’s younger brother Avner changed his surname to Avi Segal, Israeli outlets confirmed. Under that new identity, Avner paid £502,000 ($672,000) in cash to purchase an apartment in Oxford, England, a move widely interpreted as an effort to avoid public scrutiny and media attention. The surname Segal was the original last name of Tzila Segal, Benjamin Netanyahu’s mother, before she married family patriarch Benzion Netanyahu.

    Even Benjamin Netanyahu himself adopted an alternate name during the 1980s while residing in the United States: he went by Ben Nitai at the time, later explaining he had considered permanently settling in the country. The family’s history of name changes stretches back a full century, to Benzion Netanyahu, the prime minister’s father. Born Benzion Mileikowsky in Poland, he changed his surname after immigrating to British Mandate Palestine in the 1920s to participate in Zionist settlement efforts. That choice aligned with a widespread Zionist practice of the era, where European Jewish immigrants discarded their diaspora surnames in favor of Hebrew names to frame themselves as indigenous to the land they were colonizing.

    Many of Israel’s founding and early leaders followed the same convention. Israel’s first prime minister David Ben-Gurion was born David Gruen in Poland; founding foreign minister Moshe Sharett was born Moshe Shertok in Russia; early prime minister Levi Eshkol was born Levi Yitzhak Shkolnik in Russia; fourth prime minister Golda Meir was born Golda Mabovitch in Ukraine; seventh prime minister Yitzhak Shamir was born Yitzhak Yezernitsky in Russia; eighth prime minister Shimon Peres was born Szymon Perski in Poland; 10th prime minister Ehud Barak was born Ehud Brog in Mandatory Palestine; and 11th prime minister Ariel Sharon was born Arik Scheinermann in Mandatory Palestine.

    This report was originally compiled with contributions from independent reporting on Middle Eastern affairs from Middle East Eye.

  • Exclusive: UK government lawyer warned ICC bureau its Khan disciplinary process ‘unlawful’

    Exclusive: UK government lawyer warned ICC bureau its Khan disciplinary process ‘unlawful’

    In an exclusive bombshell revelation obtained by Middle East Eye, the United Kingdom’s most senior government legal official raised urgent red flags last year over fundamental legal flaws in the International Criminal Court’s planned disciplinary proceedings against its chief prosecutor, Karim Khan.

    Sir James Eadie KC, the UK’s first treasury counsel and the British government’s permanent senior legal advisor, prepared the confidential 21-page legal opinion in a private capacity in November 2025. The document was submitted to the president and Bureau of the ICC Assembly of States Parties (ASP) at the request of Khan’s own legal team, which sought Eadie’s expertise to guide the bureau as it weighed the structure of the misconduct probe.

    At the core of Eadie’s criticism is the narrow, restrictive mandate the ASP Bureau assigned to a three-judge panel convened to review misconduct allegations against Khan. Eadie argued that bureau leaders had stripped the panel of its core adjudicative authority, eliminating any independent judicial fact-finding role entirely. He stressed that this framework leaves “no judicial, or independent, fact-finding phase at all” and renders the process “unlawful, unsustainable in principle”.

    Eadie further argued that the United Nations Office of Oversight Services (OIOS), which was tasked with leading the underlying investigation into the allegations, should be limited only to compiling evidence and documenting witness statements. Any final determination of disputed facts, he insisted, must rest with the independent judicial panel. “It would be entirely inappropriate in principle for the investigator (in effect the prosecutor of the misconduct charges) also to be the judge,” Eadie wrote in the opinion obtained via diplomatic sources.

    The legal expert outlined that minimum fair process standards require a judicial proceeding, including an oral hearing where the panel can test witness credibility through cross-examination of live evidence, and that any final decision on findings of fact cannot be carried out by executive or political bodies. Despite Khan’s legal team formally requesting this foundational fair process in a July 2025 letter to ASP President Paivi Kaukoranta, the bureau rejected all such requests, and even denied the panel’s request for an extension to review Khan’s submissions.

    The disciplinary process traces back to November 2024, when Kaukoranta authorized an ad hoc probe led by OIOS after the complainant in the case refused to cooperate with the ICC’s own internal investigative body. Four allegations were opened against Khan: a complaint from a female staff member alleging unwelcome sexual conduct and abuse of authority, plus three additional claims of retaliation against other office employees. Khan has issued a full denial of all misconduct and breach of duty allegations.

    Over 12 months, OIOS collected evidence and submitted a 150-page investigative report alongside 5,000 pages of supporting evidence to the three-judge panel in December 2025. After nearly three months of review, the panel issued a unanimous ruling: the evidence presented by UN investigators failed to meet the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard for finding misconduct or breach of duty under ICC rules.

    Weeks after the panel’s ruling, however, a majority of ASP Bureau members representing 21 member states voted to disregard the judges’ conclusion and signal that they believed Khan likely committed misconduct. The move sparked widespread concerns that the entire process had been tainted by political interference. In early June, the bureau gave Khan and the complainant a final opportunity for additional submissions before formally suspending Khan and referring the entire matter to the full ASP. The court’s 125 member states will now convene a special session at UN Headquarters in New York on July 24 to vote on whether to remove Khan from office permanently.

    Eadie’s opinion specifically tied the need for a fair, independent process to the intense political pressure surrounding Khan’s leadership of the ICC’s ongoing investigation into alleged Israeli war crimes and genocide in Gaza. He noted that the political context, including punitive sanctions imposed by the United States on Khan and other ICC staff after the court announced arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and senior Hamas officials, makes procedural integrity critical to protecting the court’s credibility.

    “If such officials can be removed or disciplined without a proper adjudication of the allegations against them, against that political context, the integrity of the ICC and its perceived integrity will be fundamentally undermined,” Eadie wrote.

    Khan, a British barrister, was elected as the ICC’s third chief prosecutor in February 2021, nearly two decades after the court’s founding in 2002. During his tenure, his office has opened investigations into grave international crimes allegedly committed by leaders across the globe, including issuing arrest warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin, Myanmar’s junta leadership, and Taliban officials in Afghanistan. His work targeting powerful state leaders has drawn retaliation: the Trump administration first imposed US sanctions on Khan in 2025, and a Russian court has issued an in absentia arrest warrant for him. Sanctions have since been expanded to target two deputy ICC prosecutors, eight ICC judges involved in the Palestine and Afghanistan investigations, the UN special rapporteur on Palestine, and multiple Palestinian non-governmental organizations that provided evidence to the court. None of the US, Russia, or Israel are member states of the ICC, but the court holds jurisdiction over crimes committed by their nationals on the territory of ICC member countries.

    The exclusive disclosure of Eadie’s confidential legal opinion comes as the ICC faces an unprecedented crisis that threatens to undermine its standing as the world’s permanent international criminal tribunal, with critics warning that a political vote to remove Khan amid pressure over the Gaza investigation would fatally damage the court’s reputation for impartiality.