分类: world

  • Ghana becomes the latest African country to reject a US health deal, citing data sharing concerns

    Ghana becomes the latest African country to reject a US health deal, citing data sharing concerns

    On Friday, a senior Ghanaian official confirmed to the Associated Press that Accra has turned down a proposed bilateral health partnership with the United States, joining a growing list of African nations walking away from the agreement over unaddressed data privacy and national sovereignty risks. The core sticking point for Ghana was the deal’s provisions granting U.S. entities broad, unsupervised access to the country’s most sensitive health data without adequate regulatory safeguards, according to Arnold Kavaarpuo, executive director of Ghana’s Data Protection Commission, the government body directly involved in negotiation talks. Kavaarpuo emphasized that the scope of data access the U.S. demanded far exceeded the standard parameters aligned with the deal’s stated public health objectives.

    The U.S. State Department has not issued an immediate response to requests for comment on Kavaarpuo’s remarks. The framework of these health partnerships was first rolled out under the Trump administration’s “America First” global health strategy, which replaced a fragmented network of older health aid agreements overseen by the now-restructured U.S. Agency for International Development. To date, Washington has finalized similar deals with close to 24 African countries, offering hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to nations that previously faced U.S. aid cuts, with the stated goal of shoring up local public health systems and strengthening outbreak response capacity.

    Despite the financial incentives on offer, the agreements have sparked widespread criticism and pushback across the continent over long-standing concerns about data governance and national sovereignty. Zimbabwe became the first country to publicly reject the proposal back in February, citing identical worries around health data access, unfair terms, and threats to national sovereignty. Zambia has also pushed for revisions to problematic sections of the draft agreement, though it has not yet announced a final decision on whether to move forward.

    African privacy and public health activists have repeatedly flagged that most versions of the agreement lack sufficient guardrails for sensitive personal and population health data. In some cases, the deals also include restrictive provisions: for example, in Nigeria, the U.S. has committed to prioritizing funding exclusively for Christian faith-based healthcare providers, limiting access to support for broader public health infrastructure. Jean Kaseya, Director General of the Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, previously told reporters that the organization holds “huge concerns” about the deal’s terms around both health data and pathogen sharing between African nations and U.S. entities.

    For Ghana, the proposed $300 million total agreement would have allocated roughly $109 million in U.S. funding to the country over a five-year period, with matching supplemental investment from the Ghanaian government. Kavaarpuo outlined that the most problematic provision allowed U.S. entities to de-identify patient data at their own discretion, a policy that effectively amounted to outsourcing Ghana’s entire national health data governance infrastructure to a foreign power. The agreement would have granted access not just to aggregated health datasets, but also to underlying metadata, public health dashboards, national reporting tools, standardized data models, and official data dictionaries. Up to 10 separate U.S. entities would have been permitted to access this full suite of data with no requirement for prior approval from Ghanaian authorities, regardless of the intended use case.

    “We did not get any assurance that Ghana would retain meaningful governance and oversight over how this sensitive data would be used,” Kavaarpuo explained. “The agreement only required U.S. entities to notify Ghana after they had already completed a project involving data access, rather than establishing a mandatory prior approval framework.”

    Kavaarpuo confirmed that Ghana has formally communicated its rejection of the current draft agreement to U.S. officials, and has requested revised negotiations to address the country’s core concerns around data governance and sovereignty before any new deal can be reached.

  • Thousands of ‘lost Canadians’ have applied for dual citizenship – is Canada ready?

    Thousands of ‘lost Canadians’ have applied for dual citizenship – is Canada ready?

    For more than a century, millions of people with French-Canadian roots across the United States have carried unrecognized ancestral ties to Canada, cut off from formal citizenship by outdated and discriminatory laws. That historic injustice began to be corrected in December 2024, when a landmark Canadian citizenship law came into force, opening the door for any descendant of a Canadian citizen to prove their ancestral connection and claim citizenship – a change that has sparked a surge of applications and reignited conversations about cultural identity across North America.

    The roots of this crisis stretch back to the 19th and early 20th centuries, when more than one million French-Canadians left Canada for New England in search of mill and farm work. In Maine, where many settled, state laws once banned French instruction in public schools, and social stigma labeled French speakers as second-class citizens. Compounding this displacement, outdated Canadian citizenship rules barred generations of descendants born in the U.S. from claiming citizenship, leaving millions of people now referred to as “lost Canadians” disconnected from their formal national identity.

    Joe Boucher, the youngest of five children growing up in a French-Canadian family in Maine, embodies this generational disconnect. While both his parents spoke French to one another and raised their children with pride in their heritage, Boucher never learned to speak the language; his older siblings defaulted to English when talking among themselves, shaped by the stigma and legal barriers that once marginalized French speakers in the state. Today, Boucher is among the thousands of applicants pursuing formal citizenship proof under the new law. For him, the process is not about seeking a new home – though he dreams of one day retiring in Quebec City, where his 17th-century ancestor Pierre Boucher once served as governor of the French colonial settlement – but about reclaiming a core part of his identity.

    “It’s nice to know that the connectivity to the home country, as it were, is there,” Boucher told the BBC. Growing up, his father instilled fierce pride in their Acadian and French-Canadian heritage, and now as a musician, Boucher celebrates that history, even adapting Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem *Evangeline*, which chronicles the 18th-century expulsion of Acadians by British forces, into a original song. “My ancestors arrived in Canada 400 years ago and spent generations creating communities and cultivating the land in Quebec and Acadie. This is the family I know and this is in large part who I am,” he explained.

    For many applicants, the new law comes at a moment of particular uncertainty, coinciding with the start of the second term of U.S. President Donald Trump. Multiple applicants, including another Mainer of French-Canadian descent Tim Cyr, note that current political uncertainty has made securing a second citizenship an appealing safety net. “It’s not a great time to have an American passport,” Cyr said, though he added he has no plans to leave the U.S. permanently. Boucher emphasized that his own motivation goes beyond political contingency, centered on cultural identity rather than an “escape hatch” from the U.S., where his immediate family and life are rooted.

    In the first six weeks after the law took effect – between December 15, 2025, and January 31, 2026 – Canadian immigration officials received 12,430 applications, processed 6,280, and granted citizenship to 1,480 applicants. The surge in interest has upended industries that support the application process, most notably professional genealogy. Montreal-based genealogist Ryan Légère, who specializes in tracking French-Canadian ancestral records, says his former side business has quickly become a full-time occupation, so busy he is now considering hiring additional staff. “It’s completely taken over my life,” he said.

    But Légère also warns of growing challenges and unforeseen strains on the system. The law was passed after an Ontario court ruled that limiting citizenship eligibility to only first-generation descendants was unconstitutional, but Légère says Canadian institutions are understaffed, overwhelmed, and poorly prepared for the volume of applications they have received.

    Many applicants also face steep practical barriers to proving their ancestry. Quebec did not standardize civil birth certificates until the 1990s; before that, most births were recorded only in parish baptismal records, which are often handwritten in archaic, hard-to-read French script. Many families anglicized their surnames after moving to the U.S., erasing paper trails: Desjardins became Gardner, Bonenfant became Goodchild, and countless other names were altered to fit English language norms. The low nominal application fee of just C$75 (around $55 USD) can balloon to thousands of dollars when factoring in genealogist fees, record retrieval costs, and legal assistance, putting the process out of reach for some applicants.

    A spokesperson for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada confirmed to the BBC that all applications are reviewed on an individual basis to confirm eligibility, and warned that data from commercial online genealogy platforms cannot be used as the sole proof of ancestry. The law does include some parameters: applicants must trace their lineage to a direct parental ancestor who became a Canadian citizen on or after January 1, 1947, when Canada’s first Citizenship Act came into force. Going forward, any Canadian parent must have resided in Canada for at least 1,095 days to pass citizenship to their children born abroad. No limit is placed on how far back an eligible ancestor can be, however, meaning millions of U.S. residents could qualify for citizenship under the new rules.

    For people like Boucher, the law represents more than a change in immigration policy: it is a long-overdue recognition of a history of displacement and marginalization, and a chance to formalize the connection to the heritage his parents worked hard to preserve.

  • How Iranian monarchists have targeted anti-war activists

    How Iranian monarchists have targeted anti-war activists

    Across Western diaspora communities, Iranian dissidents who speak out against foreign military intervention in Iran and express solidarity with Palestine are facing an escalating, coordinated campaign of violence and harassment, perpetrated by pro-monarchist Iranian opposition groups with ties to far-right and pro-Israel actors. The pattern of abuse, enabled by inadequate law enforcement responses, has already resulted in a fatal stabbing in Canada and a non-fatal attack in the UK, leaving dozens of activists living in constant fear for their safety.

    Arjang Alidai, an Iranian-British engineer based in Greater Manchester, is one of dozens of activists who have been targeted in recent months. Alidai became a marked figure after he participated in the 2024 Iranian presidential election – a vote that many anti-government Iranian exiles boycotted, and which they frame as complicity with the current Islamic Republic government. His activism at anti-war rallies in support of Gaza and against a US-Israeli military strike on Iran has only intensified the abuse. He has received hundreds of grotesque threats, including the chilling line: “We’re going to find you, we’re going to rape you, we’re going to kill you.”

    Alidai told Middle East Eye that the intimidation campaign became relentless after large-scale protests erupted inside Iran this past January. Pro-monarchist counter-protesters regularly harass him at public demonstrations, hurling accusations of treason and personal, sexualized abuse. Monarchist-linked social media accounts have published his personal information, forcing him to shut down all his public online profiles. He has even received death threats via phone calls from untraceable international numbers. After reporting the full scope of abuse to Greater Manchester Police, the only guidance officers offered was to close his social media and change his phone number – a response Alidai calls deeply disappointing. “I’ve had to keep looking over my shoulder,” he said.

    Alidai’s experience is far from an isolated case. Ghazal Diani, an Iranian tech startup founder and anti-war activist, says she has received online threats to track her down and stab her, wiping her out entirely. At one recent anti-war demonstration, she said a monarchist counter-protestor directly threatened to stab her in person. Many of the insults targeting Diani are explicitly misogynistic, she added, and she no longer dismisses the threats as empty words. “At the beginning you think these are just words and don’t take it seriously, but these things can escalate. I genuinely feel scared,” Diani said. She reported the threats to London’s Metropolitan Police, but was told investigators would only open a case if a violent attack actually occurred.

    That “something more serious” Diani and police warned about has already happened. On April 22, Mohammed Reza, an Iranian father of two who was demonstrating against war on Iran outside London’s Downing Street, was stabbed multiple times by an Iranian-origin counter-protestor. Reza, who had previously faced repeated verbal and physical abuse in public, survived the attack, but the incident underscored the lethal danger the harassment campaign has created.

    To understand the ideological roots of this violence, experts point to the core ideology of the Iranian monarchist movement, which positions itself as the ideological opposite of the Islamic Republic that ousted the Pahlavi dynasty in the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Monarchists identify as secular nationalist, drawing heavily on imagery and language from Iran’s pre-Islamic history, often referring to themselves as “Children of Cyrus” after the ancient Achaemenid Empire founder. At rallies, they fly the historic lion and sun flag that served as Iran’s national standard under the shah.

    The movement is led by Reza Pahlavi, son of the last shah of Iran, whose dynasty built an ideology rooted in de-Islamicization and alignment with Western powers. Reza Shah, who founded the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925, launched a widespread campaign to remold Iranian national identity around pre-Islamic heritage, banning traditional Muslim practices, forcing women to abandon hijabs, and spreading state propaganda that blamed Arab conquests for Iran’s national decline. Reza Zia-Ebrahimi, a reader in the history of nationalism and race at King’s College London, describes this ideology as “dislocative nationalism.”

    “It is derived from European colonial ideas and aims to dislodge Iran from its objective reality as a Muslim country in the Middle East, and rather reimagines it as some kind of lost European nation where people who speak Indo-European languages become connected via the Aryan race theory,” Zia-Ebrahimi explained. “It is fundamentally Islamophobic and embraces colonialism and western hegemony.”

    This ideological framework explains why many monarchists actively support Western military intervention and sanctions against Iran, and back Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. “It stems from the fact that Palestinians are Arabs, and monarchists view Arabs as responsible for their downfall because they brought Islam to Iran,” Zia-Ebrahimi said.

    In recent months, the movement has increasingly targeted Iranian Muslim community spaces across the UK. Clashes have broken out outside the Islamic Centre of England, a London-based Shia institution linked to Tehran, and outside Birmingham’s Imam Reza Cultural Centre, where monarchists gathered for successive nights to hold loud, disruptive counter-protests during a public mourning ceremony following the death of Ayatollah Khamenei in February.

    A defining feature of the modern Iranian monarchist movement in diaspora is its formal, institutional alliance with pro-Israel groups and Western far-right actors, whose ideologies reinforce one another. At monarchist rallies, the lion and sun flag is often displayed alongside Israeli flags and British far-right St George’s Cross banners, with protesters chanting openly anti-Muslim slogans. High-profile Western far-right and pro-Zionist figures, including pro-Israel campaigner Mark Birbek, Campaign Against Antisemitism director Gideon Falter, and British far-right activist Tommy Robinson, have all appeared at monarchist events.

    Zia-Ebrahimi confirmed that this alliance has become fully formalized and institutionalized, and that the campaign targeting anti-war Iranians is part of a broader coordinated effort. “There has been a lot of Israeli investment in amplifying monarchist messaging on diaspora news channels and on social media, where they create an army of bots that attack, insult and intimidate alternative Iranian voices,” he said.

    In recent weeks, footage has emerged of monarchist activists marching through British cities clad in black, flying flags associated with the Savak – the brutal, notorious secret police force of the Pahlavi era that imprisoned and tortured thousands of political dissidents. Zia-Ebrahimi warned that what once seemed like a fringe movement is growing into a far more dangerous threat, emboldened by open backing from mainstream Western political figures. “Before we were dealing with a bunch of clowns, but now it is turning into something far more dangerous,” he said.

    The lethal potential of this rising extremism was demonstrated earlier this year in Canada, where Masood Masjoodi, an Iranian-Canadian university professor and public critic of both the Islamic Republic and Reza Pahlavi, was murdered. Two individuals with known ties to the monarchist movement, who had previously targeted Masjoodi with harassment, have been charged with his killing. Samira Mohyeddin, an Iranian-Canadian journalist and founder of On The Line Media, said Masjoodi repeatedly warned authorities he was under threat for months before his death – a failure that underscores how seriously the movement is being overlooked.

    “There are a lot of us being threatened on a daily basis, and unfortunately our police don’t do anything until something happens to someone,” Mohyeddin said. She added that community organizers have heard rumors of monarchist groups drawing up target lists of people they deem acceptable to attack. Mohyeddin warned that without urgent intervention to rein in the movement, violence will only escalate. She drew a parallel between the group’s authoritarian rhetoric and 20th-century fascist movements, noting that chants of “One flag, one leader one country” mirror slogans used by the Nazi regime.

    “Going down this path has nothing to do with liberty, justice, freedom, equality – we’re heading towards another kind of fascism that is very dangerous, and I think we’ll see a very hardcore group of people escalate even further,” she said.

  • Mali accuses military officers of working with jihadis to carry out attacks against government

    Mali accuses military officers of working with jihadis to carry out attacks against government

    In a stunning development that has deepened the security crisis across conflict-wracked Mali, Malian authorities confirmed late Friday that active and recently dismissed military officers colluded with jihadi and separatist insurgents to carry out the largest coordinated offensive the country has seen in more than 10 years. This wave of attacks has already forced government and allied Russian forces to retreat from strategic territory and claimed the life of the nation’s defense minister.

    The string of unprecedented assaults, which opened with near-simultaneous strikes targeting multiple population centers including Bamako’s main international airport, was launched earlier this month through a rare partnership between Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), an al-Qaida-affiliated jihadi group, and the Azawad Liberation Front (FLA), a separatist movement fighting for northern Mali’s independence. Fighters carried out the raids using motorcycles and heavy trucks, striking at least 10 separate locations across the country in coordinated action.

    By the start of this week, the offensive delivered a major blow to Mali’s ruling military junta, which seized power in a 2020 coup: insurgents seized control of Kidal, a major northern city, in the retreat that followed the attacks. The violence also killed Malian Defense Minister Sadio Camara, marking one of the highest-profile casualties of the Sahel’s long-running extremist conflict.

    On Friday, separatist commander Achafghi Ag Bouhanda announced in a verified online video that FLA fighters had captured another critical strategic site: the military camp in Tessalit, a northern town located near the Algerian border and adjacent to a key regional airport. The announcement came after Malian army troops and fighters from Russia’s Africa Corps withdrew from the camp ahead of the separatist advance. The Associated Press has not been able to independently verify conditions on the ground at the camp, and Malian officials have not yet issued an official response to requests for comment on the fall of Tessalit.

    The most shocking revelation of the unfolding crisis came via an official statement read on Malian state television from the public prosecutor of Bamako’s Military Court. Investigations into the coordinated attacks have uncovered “solid evidence regarding the complicity of certain military personnel” – including both currently serving and recently discharged officers – in the assault, the prosecutor confirmed. The statement added that these officers directly participated in “the planning, coordination, and execution” of the attacks, and also named exiled prominent opposition politician Oumar Mariko as a co-conspirator in the plot.

    The collapse of government control across swathes of northern Mali comes as the capital Bamako faces mounting pressure from insurgent blockades. JNIM this week announced a full blockade of all four major road arteries leading into Bamako, expanding on a partial fuel and supply blockade that militants imposed on the city late last year. Traffic into the capital was severely disrupted on Friday, with multiple confirmed militant roadblocks along major routes. The persistent instability and blockades have already forced multiple travel agencies to suspend operations, leaving residents facing dangerous and restricted travel across the country. “These days, traveling by road is a dangerous undertaking,” said Aminata Traoré, a frequent traveler between Bamako and the southern Sikasso region.

    Mali’s junta leader Assimi Goita has pledged to press forward with counteroffensives to retake lost territory. “Military operations will continue until the armed groups involved have been completely neutralized and security has been sustainably restored throughout the country,” Goita said earlier this week. The Sahel region, a vast expanse of land south of the Sahara Desert spanning multiple West African nations, has become the global epicenter of violent extremist activity in recent years, with jihadi groups expanding their control across remote border areas as national governments struggle to contain the insurgency.

  • US criticises allies over failure to stop Gaza aid flotilla

    US criticises allies over failure to stop Gaza aid flotilla

    Tensions between the United States and its European allies have escalated sharply in recent days, after Washington publicly blamed its partners for failing to block a Gaza-bound humanitarian aid flotilla that Israeli naval forces intercepted and seized in international waters earlier this week.

    On Wednesday, Israeli commandos seized at least 21 vessels participating in the aid mission, detaining 175 activists on board. Organizers with the Global Sumud Flotilla, the coalition behind the effort, have labeled the interception an outright act of piracy carried out in neutral international waters.

    One day after the raid, State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott released a formal statement dismissing the flotilla as a “baseless, counterproductive stunt”. Pigott argued that the mission bypassed existing official channels designed to deliver humanitarian support to Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and said the Biden administration expects allied nations to take “decisive action” against vessels involved in the effort. That action, he specified, includes blocking access to ports, denying docking privileges, prohibiting departures from allied territories, and refusing refueling services to participating ships.

    “The United States will explore using available tools to impose consequences on those who provide support to this pro-Hamas flotilla and supports our allies’ legal actions against [it],” Pigott added.

    The U.S. rebuke comes as growing rifts have emerged between Washington and its European partners over U.S. and Israeli policy in the Middle East, particularly amid escalating tensions with Iran. According to a recently leaked internal Pentagon email, the U.S. government threatened last week to punish NATO member states that refuse to back the U.S.-led campaign against Iran, and even considered expelling Spain from the alliance over Madrid’s public opposition to the conflict. The same email also revealed U.S. officials have floated recognizing Argentina’s territorial claims over the Falkland Islands, a move that would directly target the United Kingdom for what Washington claims is insufficient support for its Iran policy.

    The U.S.-led “Board of Peace”, a body created by the Trump administration to oversee a new governing framework for Gaza, also issued a public statement on the social platform X condemning the aid flotilla. The organization dismissed the effort as “performative love-boat activism”, and called on critics of Israeli policy to instead redirect pressure toward Hamas. In the same statement, the Board claimed it has drastically expanded humanitarian support for Gaza’s civilian population, asserting that three times as many Gaza residents are now receiving food aid compared to previous periods.

    These claims, however, stand in stark contrast to on-the-ground data and reporting from the region. Back in April, the Gaza Government Media Office reported that an average of just 227 aid trucks enter the blockaded strip each day, which amounts to only 37 percent of the daily delivery volume agreed to under the October 2024 ceasefire deal. Despite a U.S.-mediated truce agreement, Israel has continued to tighten entry restrictions on humanitarian aid, leading to a steady decline in food deliveries to Gaza’s 2 million residents. Independent reporting from Middle East Eye has documented widespread fears of imminent famine across the strip, as Palestinians grapple with acute shortages of basic food ingredients, cooking gas, and fuel needed to power homes and medical facilities.

    In response to the Israeli raid and the U.S. criticism of allied inaction, officials from Germany and Italy issued a joint statement expressing “deep concern” over the interception and calling for “full respect of international law” in the incident. The Italian government additionally demanded that Israel immediately release the Italian nationals who were unlawfully detained during the seizure of the flotilla.

  • Israel ‘sent advanced laser defence system to UAE’ during Iran war

    Israel ‘sent advanced laser defence system to UAE’ during Iran war

    Against the backdrop of open conflict between the US-Israeli bloc and Iran that has roiled the Persian Gulf since February, new details have emerged of deepening military cooperation between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, the Financial Times revealed in a report published Thursday. Two anonymous sources familiar with the deployment confirmed to the outlet that Israel has transferred a modified variant of its domestically developed Iron Beam laser defense system to Abu Dhabi, as the UAE braces for continued drone and missile attacks from Iranian forces.

    Iron Beam, which entered operational service with the Israeli military only in December 2025, is engineered to intercept low-altitude, short-range threats including rockets and unmanned aerial vehicles — exactly the type of projectiles that have formed the bulk of Iran’s cross-region retaliatory attacks. Alongside the high-powered laser system, the FT report adds that Israel also supplied the UAE with Spectro, a compact advanced surveillance platform capable of detecting incoming unmanned aerial threats from distances of up to 20 kilometers.

    This latest weapons transfer builds on a previous deployment reported last month by Axios, which revealed that Israel had already sent a complete Iron Dome air defense battery to the Gulf nation, accompanied by dozens of trained Israeli personnel to operate the system. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu personally authorized the deployment of the battery, which includes both interceptor missiles and specialized support staff. One insider told the FT that the number of Israeli troops deployed on the ground in the UAE is “not small”, confirming a substantial and ongoing Israeli military presence in the country. Beyond weapons systems, the report notes that Israel has also maintained continuous real-time intelligence sharing with Emirati authorities for the full duration of the conflict, helping the UAE anticipate and respond to incoming attacks.

    Iranian officials have previously stated to Middle East Eye that they view the UAE as an active participant in the US-Israeli war campaign against Tehran, a claim that aligns with the scope of military cooperation now coming to light. The two countries first normalized diplomatic relations in 2020 under the US-brokered Abraham Accords, and have steadily expanded their strategic, economic and defense ties in the years since that agreement. That partnership has grown exponentially since the United States and Israel launched a major bombing campaign against Iranian targets in February. In response, Tehran launched a wave of retaliatory strikes targeting US, Israeli and allied assets across the Middle East, with the UAE emerging as one of the most heavily targeted nations in the region.

    Emirati officials confirm Iran has fired approximately 550 ballistic and cruise missiles, plus more than 2,200 drones at targets across the UAE. While the vast majority of these incoming projectiles have been intercepted, falling debris from failed attacks has caused significant damage across major population and economic centers including Abu Dhabi, Dubai, the Burj Al Arab luxury hotel, the Palm Jumeirah development, Dubai International Airport and the Fujairah oil industrial hub.

    Israeli and Emirati officials have publicly acknowledged that the two countries have coordinated closely on both military and political strategy since the outbreak of hostilities. Beyond supplying defense systems, the Israeli Air Force has also conducted pre-emptive strikes against short-range missile launch sites in southern Iran to prevent projectiles from being fired at the UAE and other neighboring Gulf states. Tensions escalated further in mid-March when Iran’s critical South Pars gas field, a cornerstone of the country’s energy infrastructure, was hit by airstrikes. Tehran responded with another wave of strikes across the Gulf, targeting hotels, airports, data centers, ports and US diplomatic missions across the region.

    A temporary ceasefire between the United States and Iran went into effect last month, halting large-scale offensive hostilities and reopening diplomatic negotiations. As of the latest reports, those talks have not yet yielded any major breakthrough toward a lasting peace deal, leaving the region in a fragile state of heightened alert.

  • War criminal Mladic close to death, say lawyers asking judge for jail release

    War criminal Mladic close to death, say lawyers asking judge for jail release

    Eighty-four-year-old convicted Bosnian Serb war criminal Ratko Mladic, infamously known as the “Butcher of Bosnia”, is at the center of a high-stakes legal battle before a United Nations tribunal, as judges prepare to rule on a desperate appeal for his early release on humanitarian grounds.

    Mladic’s path to a cell in The Hague has been decades in the making. First indicted for atrocities during the 1992-1995 Bosnian War, he evaded capture for 16 years after disappearing in 1995, and was only tracked down and arrested in rural Serbia in 2011. He has remained in UN detention ever since, going on trial at the international tribunal in 2012 before receiving a life sentence in 2017 on charges of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. That conviction was upheld on appeal in 2021.

    The gravity of Mladic’s crimes is well-documented. As commander of Bosnian Serb forces during the breakup of the former Yugoslavia, he oversaw a campaign of ethnic cleansing across Bosnia and Herzegovina, a nearly four-year siege of the capital Sarajevo that killed more than 10,000 civilians, and the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, where 8,000 Bosniak men and boys were systematically executed.

    Now, Mladic’s legal team argues the 84-year-old’s declining health makes continued detention unnecessary and cruel. In a formal submission to the tribunal Friday, his lawyers outlined a rapid deterioration of his condition: Mladic has long been confined to a wheelchair or bed, and recently suffered a suspected stroke during a phone call with his son that left him nearly unable to speak. Two independent doctors who have evaluated Mladic have concluded his condition is critical, with a high risk of imminent death.

    The defense is pushing for immediate provisional or conditional release to a Serbian-language hospital or hospice, an ask widely interpreted as a bid to allow Mladic to return to Serbia to spend his final days. Serbian Justice Minister Nenad Vujic has confirmed the Serbian government is prepared to provide all required assurances to the UN court to facilitate the transfer.

    Mladic’s legal team argues that the current UN detention unit and its on-site prison hospital lack the capacity to provide adequate end-of-life care for the former general. They maintain that keeping Mladic behind bars now constitutes cruel and inhumane punishment, and no longer serves the original goals of his conviction.

    In response to the request, presiding judge Graciela Gatti Santana ordered an independent medical evaluation of Mladic’s health, with final findings due Friday. The assessment is tasked with evaluating the adequacy of his current care, confirming his diagnosis and prognosis, and outlining available treatment options.

    But the appeal has drawn fierce pushback from Bosnian victim and survivor groups, who reject the claim that this is a purely humanitarian request. They argue Mladic’s release bid is nothing more than a calculated legal tactic, pointing to multiple failed attempts by his defense team to secure his freedom in recent months: A similar release request was rejected in July 2025, and an application for temporary release to attend a family member’s memorial was also turned down last November.

    As the international tribunal weighs its decision, Mladic’s son Darko told Serbian media that there has been no recent change to his father’s condition, and he plans to visit him in the prison hospital next week. The ruling on the release bid, which will close one of the most high-profile chapters of international war crime prosecutions stemming from the Yugoslav Wars, is now imminent.

  • China has now dropped tariffs on imports from every African country except 1

    China has now dropped tariffs on imports from every African country except 1

    CAPE TOWN, SOUTH AFRICA – A landmark Chinese trade policy that grants duty-free market access to Africa’s largest economies for a two-year period officially entered into force on Friday, launching at a moment of stark contrast with the United States’ ongoing push for protectionist trade measures under former President Donald Trump.

    The new tariff exemption framework covers the 20 biggest economies across the African continent, including regional powerhouses South Africa, Egypt, Nigeria, Algeria and Kenya. Prior to this update, China had already eliminated import tariffs for 33 low-income African nations, bringing the total number of African countries eligible for full tariff-free treatment for their exports to 53 out of the continent’s 54 sovereign states. The sole exception is the small southern African kingdom of Eswatini, which remains the only African country to maintain official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, a self-governing island that China claims as part of its own territory.

    Chinese authorities frame the policy as a concrete step toward shared bilateral growth. The Customs Tariff Commission of China’s State Council emphasized that the initiative will advance mutually beneficial development between China and African trading partners. According to China’s state-run Xinhua News Agency, the first shipment to benefit from the new rules cleared customs in the southern Chinese tech hub of Shenzhen in the early hours of Friday: a 24-metric-ton consignment of fresh apples sourced from South African orchards.

    China’s Ministry of Commerce noted that the policy will deliver particular gains for high-demand African agricultural exports that previously faced import duties ranging from 8% to 30%. These include cocoa from top global producers Ivory Coast and Ghana, coffee and avocados from Kenya, and citrus fruits and wine from South Africa. Combined, Ivory Coast and Ghana control more than half of the world’s total cocoa supply, while South Africa ranks as one of the world’s top exporters of citrus produce.

    The policy rollout comes as many leading African economies have been actively diversifying their export markets away from the U.S., after the Trump administration implemented steep reciprocal tariffs on African goods roughly a year ago. At the height of those measures, South Africa, Africa’s most industrialized economy, faced tariffs as high as 30%, while some other African nations saw rates exceed 40%.

    “South Africa looks forward to working with China in a friendly, pragmatic and flexible manner,” South African Trade Minister Parks Tau stated during bilateral trade talks held in Beijing this past February. Though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Trump’s broad global tariffs unconstitutional and struck them down in the same month, the former president quickly announced that his administration held “very powerful alternatives” and immediately enacted new temporary import taxes to replace the invalidated measures.

    Today, China already holds the position of Africa’s largest single trade partner, at a time when the continent’s demographic footprint is expanding rapidly: the United Nations projects Africa’s current population of 1.5 billion will nearly double to 2.5 billion by 2050, accounting for more than a quarter of the global population at that time.

    Despite Beijing’s framing of the deal as a win-win for development, analysts point to persistent structural imbalances in the China-Africa trade relationship, alongside billions of dollars in outstanding African sovereign debt owed to Beijing. In 2025, total bilateral trade hit a record high of $348 billion. However, Chinese exports to Africa grew roughly 25% to reach $225 billion over the period, while African exports to China rose only around 5% to $123 billion, widening the existing trade deficit for African nations.

    For decades, the core of the trade relationship has centered on China importing raw materials from Africa and exporting finished manufactured goods back to the continent. Thierry Pairault, a leading China-Africa researcher at France’s National Center for Scientific Research, points out that most African raw material exports – including crude oil and industrial minerals – already enjoyed tariff-free access to Chinese markets before the new policy. While Pairault acknowledges the policy will deliver modest benefits for African agricultural exporters, he argues its broader geopolitical purpose is deliberate.

    “Xi Jinping is positioning China as the antithesis of Western protectionism. This gesture is intended to appeal to both African public opinion and global markets,” Pairault explained in an analysis published by the China Global South Project, a research initiative focused on China’s engagement with low and middle-income nations. Even so, he added, the policy “only applies where it costs China almost nothing.”

  • Ukraine says a strike hit Tuapse oil terminal, the fourth attack on the region in 2 weeks

    Ukraine says a strike hit Tuapse oil terminal, the fourth attack on the region in 2 weeks

    In a sharp escalation of cross-border military strikes amid the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, Ukrainian forces have carried out a new attack on an oil terminal located in Tuapse, a Russian city on the Black Sea coast, Ukraine’s General Staff confirmed Friday. This strike marks the fourth assault on Russian oil infrastructure in the Black Sea region in just over two weeks.

    Ukraine’s top military body confirmed that explosions and a large fire broke out at the terminal site following the strike. Russian local authorities clarified that the blaze was triggered by an incoming Ukrainian drone, and noted that no fatalities or injuries have been reported from the incident.

    Records of repeated attacks show this same Tuapse oil facility was targeted three times earlier this month, on April 16, April 20, and April 28. In a coincidence that underscores the pace of strikes in the region, Veniamin Kondratyev, the governor of Russia’s Krasnodar Krai which administers Tuapse, announced just 24 hours before Friday’s strike that crews had fully extinguished a fire at the city’s oil refinery from a previous attack.

    The strike on Russian infrastructure came as Russian forces launched a wave of large-scale drone attacks across multiple regions of Ukraine Friday, causing civilian casualties and widespread damage to public infrastructure.

    Serhii Nadal, mayor of Ternopil, a major city in western Ukraine, reported that Russia launched more than 50 drones at the city. Strikes hit local industrial sites and key public infrastructure, leaving at least 10 people wounded and cutting power to multiple residential neighborhoods, Nadal said.

    In southern Ukraine’s Odesa region, overnight Russian drone strikes caused damage to two multi-story residential apartment buildings and local port infrastructure, local emergency management officials confirmed. Ukraine’s State Emergency Service reported that one apartment in a 16-story residential building was completely destroyed by the strike, and the building’s roof caught fire. In a second nearby high-rise, flames engulfed the entire 12th floor.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy wrote in a Telegram post Friday that the Odesa strikes left at least five people injured. He added that damage from overnight Russian attacks was also documented in two other Ukrainian regions: the central city of Kryvyi Rih, and the northeastern Kharkiv region, where Russian strikes hit critical railway infrastructure.

    In his statement, Zelenskyy emphasized the scale of Russia’s recent aerial campaign, noting that Russian forces had carried out 210 total drone strikes against Ukraine in recent days, with roughly 140 of those strikes conducted using Iranian-made Shahed attack drones, the most commonly used loitering munition in Russia’s cross-border strikes. “Russia continues to attack our energy infrastructure, critical infrastructure, and civilian objects,” Zelenskyy wrote.

  • Iran offers new proposal amid stalled US peace talks

    Iran offers new proposal amid stalled US peace talks

    Nearly two months into a ceasefire between US-led coalition forces and Iran, hopes for a diplomatic breakthrough have moved forward slightly after Tehran delivered a new negotiating proposal to Washington via Pakistani mediators, Iranian state media confirmed Friday.

    According to Iran’s official IRNA news agency, the full text of the proposal was transferred to Islamabad for onward transmission to US officials on Thursday evening. This development comes after the only completed round of direct peace talks between the two parties ended without progress, even as a cessation of active hostilities has held since April 8. The conflict, launched on February 28 via a surprise joint strike campaign by the United States and Israel, has paused on the battlefield but left a tangled web of economic blockades that are roiling global markets.

    A key point of ongoing friction remains control of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for 20% of the world’s daily oil trade. Iran has continued its restrictions on commercial shipping through the strait, cutting off millions of barrels of oil, natural gas, and fertilizer supplies from global markets. In response, Washington has enforced a full counterblockade of Iranian ports. The Wall Street Journal reported Thursday that US President Donald Trump has instructed national security officials to prepare for the standoff to extend through coming months, a revelation that immediately pushed up global crude prices.

    Speaking in a video published by Iran’s judiciary website Mizan Online, top Iranian judicial official and senior cleric Gholamhossein Mohseni Ejei reaffirmed Tehran’s position on negotiations this week. “The Islamic Republic has never shied away from negotiations,” he said, while adding that Iran would never accept externally imposed terms for a peace deal. Ejei also stressed that Tehran has no interest in resuming full-scale conflict. “We do not welcome war in any way; we do not want war, we do not want its continuation,” he added.

    Even with the ceasefire holding, global markets have remained roiled by the uncertainty of the prolonged standoff. Crude oil prices remain more than 50% higher than pre-conflict levels, as traders price in extended disruption to Hormuz shipping. The European Central Bank opted this week to hold interest rates steady, driven by new concerns that sustained energy price hikes could reignite global inflation.

    Domestically, the conflict has amplified political and economic pressure on both sides. In Washington, a bitter legal debate over war powers has broken out, centered on a 60-day deadline for the president to secure congressional authorization for military action under the War Powers Resolution. Trump administration officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, argue that the ceasefire has paused the clock on the deadline, claiming active hostilities that began on February 28 have formally ended for the purposes of the law. But critics have pushed back on the claim, and Trump faces growing discontent over the conflict, which has coincided with rising domestic inflation, slower-than-expected economic growth, and looming November midterm elections. US government data released Thursday put national inflation at 3.5%, well above policymakers’ target levels.

    For Iran, the conflict has compounded economic hardship that built up over years of harsh international sanctions. The US Pentagon reported this week that its counterblockade has prevented Iran from exporting $6 billion worth of oil since the conflict began. Iran’s national statistics center shows that domestic inflation, already above 45% before the war, has climbed to 53.7% in recent weeks.

    “For many people, paying rent and even buying food has become difficult, and some have nothing left at all,” Mahyar, a 28-year-old Iranian resident who spoke to AFP on condition of safety, said. He added that the private company he works for has laid off 34 staff, roughly 40% of its total workforce, amid the economic downturn.

    On the diplomatic front, Washington has moved forward this week with plans to launch a new international shipping coalition, branded the “Maritime Freedom Construct”, to restore commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Trump has repeatedly criticized US allies for dragging their feet on coalition efforts to reopen the waterway. Previously, France and Britain had organized a broader international coalition that pledged to support reopening Hormuz only after a diplomatic peace deal is reached.

    After the US announcement of its separate coalition, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot sought to downplay tensions between the two initiatives during a visit to the Gulf this week. Barrot said the two coalitions have different mandates and will complement rather than compete with one another. “The US mission is not of the same nature as the one we established… it comes as a sort of complement,” he explained.