博客

Andy Burnham to meet Irish Taoiseach for first time

In a landmark moment for post-Brexit UK-Ireland relations, Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin will become the first international leader to visit the UK’s newly established Number 10 North in Manchester on Friday, for his first official summit with British Prime Minister Andy Burnham.

The UK government confirmed the historic nature of the visit ahead of the scheduled talks, noting that the meeting will center on deepening collaborative ties between the two nations across trade, security, and joint engagement with the European Union. Following the closed-door summit, the two leaders will travel to a local Irish community hub in Greater Manchester to meet with representatives of the region’s large Irish diaspora.

In pre-summit remarks, Burnham expressed his enthusiasm for hosting Martin, framing the occasion as a milestone for both Manchester and the bilateral partnership. “Number 10 North exists to unlock new opportunities for working people across the UK, and our deep alliance with Ireland is core to that mission,” he said. “From our shared commitment to upholding the Good Friday Agreement to growing cross-border trade and collaborating with European partners to supporting Ukraine, we have an enormous shared agenda to advance. We are the closest of friends, and I am eager to build on that bond.”

The meeting comes amid heightened attention to Northern Ireland’s constitutional status, just days after former U.S. President Donald Trump made public comments expressing support for a unified Ireland. The topic has drawn renewed debate following controversial remarks Burnham made during his first visit to Northern Ireland last month, when he initially described a border poll on unification as “off the table.” Burnham later moved to clarify his position, reaffirming his full commitment to the terms of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, the landmark peace deal that ended three decades of sectarian conflict known as the Troubles.

Martin outlined the full scope of the planned discussions in an official statement, noting that the agenda will include the UK-Ireland 2030 Strategic Cooperation Framework, ongoing reform of Northern Ireland’s Stormont devolved institutions, and progress on replacing the widely criticized Troubles Legacy Act. The two leaders will also turn to broader European and global issues, including Ireland’s ongoing presidency of the Council of the EU, preparations for the upcoming EU-UK Summit, and ongoing crises in Ukraine, Gaza and the wider Middle East.

Last week, Martin called for greater legal clarity around the conditions for triggering a border poll, arguing that leaving the decision solely to the discretion of the Northern Ireland Secretary is an unsatisfactory arrangement. Under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, Northern Ireland remains part of the United Kingdom, and unification can only happen if a majority of voters in Northern Ireland support the change in a referendum. The agreement requires the Northern Ireland Secretary to call a poll if evidence suggests majority support for unification exists, but it provides no clear framework for how that assessment should be made, leaving the decision as an open-ended “judgement call.” Polls must also be held no more frequently than once every seven years.

Northern Ireland Secretary Sir Chris Bryant later clarified that the UK prime minister and the government “stand full square” behind all provisions of the Good Friday Agreement, including the legal right to a border poll. Speaking to BBC Radio Ulster’s *Borderland* podcast last week, Martin noted that Burnham had clearly affirmed his acceptance of the principle of consent, a core pillar of the 1998 deal. “Burnham made it very clear that he accepts that a referendum is permitted under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement,” Martin said. “It is true that the circumstances around triggering a poll were deliberately left ambiguous when the agreement was negotiated. There is no question we need to discuss this as part of a wider conversation between all parties, because all of us are co-guarantors of the peace. I also welcome his commitment to advancing legacy reform, and I share his view that the Stormont institutions need urgent reform.”

The 1998 Good Friday Agreement, also referred to as the Belfast Agreement, ended 30 years of sectarian violence that claimed more than 3,500 lives. It was approved by popular referendums in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, and established a power-sharing devolved government for Northern Ireland that gives representation to both unionist, who support remaining part of the UK, and nationalist communities, who favor unification with the Republic of Ireland.

17 9 月, 2026
Five missing women feared dead after images and videos found in Philadelphia home

A sprawling, deeply disturbing criminal investigation unfolding in Philadelphia has left authorities fearing at least five women are dead, after law enforcement recovered a massive cache of firearms, illegal narcotics, counterfeit identification, and thousands of graphic digital files from a residential property in the city’s Olney neighborhood. The home is co-occupied by 44-year-old Eugene Horsch and his late father, Raymond “RC” Horsch, who died in 2023. As the probe stretches into its fourth month, investigators are still working to untangle what is real crime and what may have been staged content captured on camera.

The investigation traces its origins back to June 2024, when a park ranger with the U.S. National Park Service encountered an illegally parked BMW near Independence National Historical Park, one of Philadelphia’s most visited historic landmarks. Inside the vehicle, the ranger found Eugene Horsch and an unidentified woman, alongside illegal drugs, counterfeit federal law enforcement badges, and loose ammunition. Most notably, the woman was carrying an identification card registered to Blair Tonzelli, a Philadelphia woman who has been listed as missing since 2023.

Following this discovery, Eugene Horsch was taken into custody, and local law enforcement secured a warrant to search the Olney home he shared with his father. What they found extended far beyond the initial seizure in the park: in hidden basement compartments and other concealed spaces, investigators reported uncovering hazardous chemicals, ballistics equipment, an unlicensed large-scale marijuana growing operation, and a 55-gallon drum modified to connect to the home’s water lines.

The most staggering find, however, was a digital collection of more than one million photos and videos. Philadelphia Police Department Deputy Commissioner of Investigations Frank Vanore told reporters this week that the archive contains footage of dozens of women, captured in various poses throughout the home. Among the content, investigators located images of Gabrielle Amarando, 27, and Maribel Fresses, 26, both of whom were previously reported missing to local authorities. According to law enforcement, the dated images show the two women alive in the home, with later files appearing to show them deceased, with the earliest images dating back to 2017.

Beyond Amarando and Fresses, investigators identified three additional women in the files who also appear to be dead. Two of the three have been named, but authorities have not released their identities publicly, while the third remains an unidentified “Jane Doe.” One graphic video allegedly shows a woman being strangled, an act that police believe was carried out by Raymond Horsch, who lived in the home until his death last year.

Investigators have cautioned that they are still working to verify the authenticity of the footage, noting that Raymond Horsch had a history of recording homemade videos that may have included staged violence. “Let’s remember, he was making movies,” Vanore said. “Some of this is play acting, and some of it we believe could be real.”

As of Thursday, authorities have linked seven missing women to evidence recovered from the property: Amarando, Fresses, the two identified but unnamed women, Jane Doe, Tonzelli, and Amy McHale, who was previously married to Raymond Horsch and disappeared years ago. McHale’s family reached out to investigators after news of the probe became public to share their own concerns.

Overall, law enforcement has identified 58 different people captured in the recovered images. Of those, 25 people have agreed to cooperate with the investigation, while 16 others have been located but refused to speak with detectives. “They don’t really want to talk about what occurred in that house,” Vanore added.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has joined the case to assist Philadelphia police in sorting through the massive volume of digital evidence, and as of this week, only around 30% of the files have been fully reviewed. Eugene Horsch has not been charged with any crimes connected to the missing women or the disturbing digital content. He remains in federal custody on separate felony weapons and drug charges, and has not yet entered a plea. Authorities have not ruled out the possibility that he was involved in the alleged crimes, and the investigation is still ongoing.

17 9 月, 2026
UK settlements ban: How conspiracy theory accusing Burnham of courting ‘Islamist voters’ went global

Over less than three years, more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, 66 Palestinian communities have been erased under a state-backed ethnic cleansing agenda encouraged by top Israeli ministers, and long-held hopes for a sovereign, viable Palestinian state have been all but destroyed by Israel’s expansion of the E1 settlement bloc. For decades, successive British governments have responded to escalating Israeli aggression against Palestinians with little more than rhetorical condemnation and weak, widely criticized half-measures that fell far short of international legal obligations.

That long-standing status quo shifted dramatically earlier this month, just seven weeks after Ed Miliband took office as British Foreign Secretary. In a break from decades of cautious British policy, Miliband announced a full trade ban on goods produced in Israeli settlements built on illegally occupied Palestinian land. Even as some progressive and pro-Palestinian observers argue the move does not go far enough—given Miliband ruled out broader, economy-wide sanctions against Israel, despite widespread evidence that the Israeli military enables and protects violent settler attacks against Palestinian communities—the new ban marks a historic step toward aligning British policy with international law.

The move follows the landmark July 2024 ruling from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which formally declared Israel’s decades-long occupation of Palestinian territory illegal and required all UN member states to refrain from providing any assistance that perpetuates Israel’s unlawful presence. For two years, former Prime Minister Keir Starmer had ignored this binding international obligation, making Miliband’s announcement all the more consequential.

Beyond its legal significance, the announcement was a major diplomatic breakthrough for the new Labour government: Miliband successfully convinced 11 other middle-ranking global powers, including France and Canada, to adopt similar restrictive measures. Many foreign policy analysts argue this marks the first clear, meaningful foreign policy win for Britain since the country completed its exit from the European Union in 2020. Public opinion polling conducted after the announcement also confirms the policy enjoys broad support across the British public, including a narrow majority of self-identified Conservative voters.

Despite this broad public backing, the policy has faced an unprecedented wave of vitriolic opposition from right-wing political and media forces in Britain, and their allies abroad. Rather than engaging in a substantive debate over the legality of Israeli settlements or the merits of holding violators of international law accountable, opponents have pivoted to bad-faith smears, baseless conspiracy theories, and anti-Muslim rhetoric to attack the Labour government.

A sharp new political dividing line has now emerged in British politics. On one side sits the Labour government led by Prime Minister Andy Burnham, which has aligned itself with international law, opposed Israeli settlement expansion, and adopted a policy that reflects majority public opinion. On the other side are Kemi Badenoch’s Conservative Party, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK, and a growing slate of further-right factions, which have stridently opposed any measures that would constrain settlement expansion and associated settler violence, despite stopping short of explicitly endorsing violence against Palestinians.

Opponents have almost universally avoided criticizing the substance of Miliband’s trade ban, instead leaning on a manufactured narrative that claims the policy was adopted solely to pander to British Muslim voters, whom they falsely accuse of advancing a sectarian “Islamist” agenda to take over British politics. This unfounded claim has rapidly spread from British right-wing circles to become a global talking point, embraced by the Israeli government and the second Trump administration in the United States.

The narrative builds on a years-long discourse that gained traction after Britain’s 2024 general election, which claims independent Muslim politicians and left-wing Green Party candidates are sectarian entryists who inject religiously motivated anti-Israel views into secular British politics, and are now pulling the strings of a Labour government desperate to win their support.

The most extreme iteration of this false narrative came from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is currently wanted on war crimes charges by the International Criminal Court. Last month, in an apparent retribution for the planned sanctions, Netanyahu famously labeled Britain the “Islamic Republic of Britain” and absurdly claimed it could become the first Islamic nuclear power—ignoring the obvious facts that Britain is a constitutional monarchy, not a republic, and Pakistan has held that title for decades. Even before Miliband’s announcement, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, a key architect of West Bank settlement expansion, claimed Britain had become a “doormat” for an “antisemitic government conquered by radical Islam.” After the ban was announced, Israeli Diaspora Minister Amichai Chikli doubled down, dismissing Miliband by claiming he could not even remember the foreign secretary’s name, and declaring that Israel and Britain stand united against “globalists and Islamists” who seek to impose Sharia law on the UK.

This rhetoric has been fully echoed by top U.S. Republicans. Weeks before the announcement, former President and current U.S. President Donald Trump falsely claimed London had once been a safe city but now suffers from crime because of a “different culture” that has entered the country, repeating the false claim that Sharia courts operate with legal standing in Britain, and attacking London’s Muslim mayor Sadiq Khan as “absolutely terrible.” Florida Republican Congressman Randy Fine, who was among the most vocal U.S. opponents of the British sanctions, labeled the country the “United Islamic Kingdom” and claimed Muslim immigrants—who he falsely described as illegal arrivals who do not share British values—are “coming to take over” the country, and that the sanctions are merely an appeal to voters “obsessed with Israel.”

Back in Britain, top right-wing leaders have repeated these exact claims. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accused Burnham of “throwing British interests under the bus to win back Islamist and far left activist votes.” Reform UK Deputy Leader Richard Tice claimed the “wrong-headed sanctions” put British Jews at risk as part of Labour’s “desperate bid to win back hard-left and Islamist voters.” Rupert Lowe, the leader of the far-right anti-immigration group Restore Britain, claimed “The Labour government’s foreign policy is now decided on what will best maintain/retrieve Muslim votes in Britain.” Even multiple former Conservative prime ministers have joined the attacks: Liz Truss, whose 2022 premiership lasted only 44 days, called the government an “Islamist appeasing disgrace,” while Boris Johnson wrote in the right-wing tabloid Daily Mail that Burnham pursues “radical and sectarian policies” because he fears backlash from Muslim communities in 57 Labour constituencies with Muslim populations exceeding 15 percent.

This anti-Muslim framing dominates right-wing media coverage, which reaches roughly 80 percent of British newspaper readers. The Daily Mail’s editorial board the day after the announcement claimed the sanctions were “entirely self-serving for the Labour Party as it attempts to claw back the Muslim bloc vote, which they largely lost over the conflicts in Gaza and Iran.” Even mainstream broadsheet outlets have amplified extreme rhetoric: The Sunday Times commentator Matthew Syed claimed a “pincer movement between left-wing progressives and Islamists” poses a growing threat to both Israel and the wider West, going so far as to claim left-wing parties across Europe and the U.S. have become “the principal engine of Islamofascism.” Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson dismissed the policy’s broad public support, claiming it only appealed to “far-Left Gaza obsessives on the Labour benches” desperate to hold off Green challenges for Muslim votes.

Many right-wing commentators have gone even further, claiming the entire policy was a cynical ploy to win an upcoming by-election in the London seat of Holborn and St Pancras, where the Greens are expected to run a strong pro-Palestinian campaign. Former MI6 head Richard Dearlove, who infamously oversaw the false intelligence claims that Saddam Hussein held weapons of mass destruction ahead of the 2003 Iraq War, lent credibility to this claim, arguing Miliband shifted Britain’s Middle East policy solely to outflank the Greens on the issue. Absurdly, this narrative has even been adopted by Netanyahu’s office, which last week claimed the sanctions were only implemented to influence the outcome of a single local by-election—a claim that requires believing Burnham and Miliband convinced the leaders of France and Canada to upend their own foreign policies, in defiance of U.S. pressure, solely to win a single parliamentary seat in London.

For the British right, this culture war framing serves a clear purpose: it allows them to avoid any substantive engagement with the core issue at hand—the illegality of Israeli settlements under international law, and the ongoing displacement and violence faced by Palestinians in the West Bank. Instead of debating policy, they have chosen to stoke anti-Muslim fear to mobilize their base. In the process, the mainstream British right has aligned itself not with the Israeli people, but with the far-right Netanyahu government, its agenda of unilateral settlement expansion, and its radical religious Zionist ideology.

This position is already facing pushback, even within pro-Israel circles in Britain. Last week, the progressive British Jewish organization Yachad released a statement backing Miliband’s sanctions, noting that restrictions on actors tied to settler violence are an inevitable consequence of years of unpunished terror against Palestinians enabled by the Israeli government. The statement was signed by prominent Israeli figures including former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and former Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Dan Halutz, putting senior former Israeli leaders directly at odds with the British right’s position.

For the British right, this alignment with Netanyahu’s far-right agenda is a politically risky position. British politics has long followed trends set by U.S. politics, where Donald Trump’s MAGA movement has already split dramatically over unwavering support for Netanyahu’s government. If that divide crosses the Atlantic, Badenoch, Farage, and their far-right allies will find themselves dangerously exposed. Early signs of internal disaffection have already emerged: when Shadow Foreign Secretary Tom Tugendhat rose to speak against Miliband’s announcement in Parliament last week, only half a dozen Conservative MPs showed up to support him.

17 9 月, 2026
War on Iran: How the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps underpins the republic

Widely described as a “state within a state”, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) stands as one of the most influential and heavily scrutinized military-political organizations in the Middle East, anchoring Iran’s Islamic establishment for more than four decades while emerging as a central target of pressure from the United States, Israel and Western allies. This deep dive examines the corps’ foundational origins, sprawling institutional structure, pervasive domestic influence, regional geopolitical role, and its current position amid ongoing external targeting and international sanctions.

Founded in March 1979, just one month after conservative militias toppled the Western-backed monarchy of Shah Reza Pahlavi, the IRGC was created with two core missions: to safeguard the newly established Islamic revolutionary order and to act as a check on Iran’s traditional national army, the Artesh, which retained deep ties to the deposed shah and was widely suspected of plotting a counter-revolutionary coup. Known locally as the Pasdaran, or “guardians”, the organization was structured as a parallel military force separate from the official Artesh, which today counts roughly 600,000 active troops. From its earliest days, the IRGC moved to sideline leftist factions that had joined the anti-shah uprising, viewing these groups as ideologically incompatible and too closely aligned with the Soviet Union.

Today, the IRGC operates five distinct branches: a ground force, an air division, a navy, the elite overseas Quds Force (translated as “Jerusalem Force”), and the Basij, a large volunteer paramilitary network. Current estimates place the corps’ active-duty personnel at more than 150,000, while Basij part-time reserve volunteers number anywhere between 100,000 and one million. Beyond conventional military duties, the IRGC holds exclusive control over Iran’s ballistic missile program—weapons it has deployed against Israeli targets—and is tasked with protecting the country’s border infrastructure and nuclear facilities.

Unlike Iran’s elected government institutions, the IRGC is an unelected body that operates directly under the authority of Iran’s supreme leader, currently Mojtaba Khamenei. Its influence extends far beyond the military sphere, penetrating nearly every aspect of Iranian domestic life, from commerce and governance to education and sports. Thousands of IRGC veterans occupy senior positions in the cabinet, parliament, and state agencies, giving the corps effective veto power over political appointments and private business ventures. Through the Basij network, plainclothes volunteers are embedded in neighborhoods, schools and universities to enforce conservative religious social norms, leading critics to label the Basij a state-sanctioned “morality police”. The network has also played a central role in cracking down on political dissent, crushing major public protest movements including the 1999 student protests, the 2009 Green Movement, and ongoing 2024–2025 demonstrations, which human rights groups say have left thousands of civilian protesters dead. Despite this repressive role, the IRGC maintains some domestic support through its provision of social services, including disaster response and job creation in impoverished rural regions.

As a major economic actor, the IRGC controls hundreds of state-owned contracts, a portfolio that expanded dramatically during the 2005–2013 presidency of hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The organization has built near-monopolies across key Iranian industries, and analysts estimate it captures roughly 50% of all revenue from Iran’s critical oil sector. Thomas Juneau, a professor at the University of Ottawa’s Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, notes that these vast business holdings allow the IRGC to cement its hold on power. “The corps’ business interests allow the IRGC and its sympathisers to themselves profit, to have access to pots of cash with which they can buy off the loyalty of others, and to marginalise competing business interests,” Juneau explained to Middle East Eye. “In that sense, the IRGC has both a vested interest in the survival of the Islamic Republic and its web of cronyism, as well as the means to protect its survival.”

The IRGC’s most consequential international role is its leadership of what Tehran calls the “Axis of Resistance”, a regional network of armed and political groups opposed to Israeli, U.S. and Saudi influence in the Middle East. Through its Quds Force overseas wing, the IRGC provides funding, training and weapons to a coalition that includes Hamas in occupied Palestine, Hezbollah in Lebanon, factions of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, and the Houthi movement (Ansar Allah) in Yemen. Support for the Palestinian cause has long been a core ideological pillar of the IRGC, and each member of the network has launched sustained military action against Israeli and Western targets: Hamas carried out the October 7, 2023 attacks that sparked the ongoing Gaza war, Hezbollah has maintained a low-intensity conflict with Israel along the Lebanon border since the 1980s, and the Houthis have launched drone strikes on Israeli territory and blockaded commercial shipping in the Red Sea. It is important to note that each group retains a degree of operational independence from Tehran; Iran publicly denied any advance knowledge of the October 7 attacks, a conclusion that U.S. intelligence agencies have corroborated.

The IRGC also provided critical military and political support to Bashar al-Assad’s government throughout Syria’s 13-year civil war, which killed hundreds of thousands of people and displaced millions more. For decades, Assad-controlled Syria served as a key supply route for IRGC weapons bound for Hezbollah in Lebanon, a link that was broken when Assad’s government fell in December 2024.

The IRGC’s institutional identity and modern worldview were deeply shaped by the 1980–1988 Iran-Iraq War, one of the deadliest conflicts of the late 20th century. Just months after the revolution, the IRGC led Iran’s response to Saddam Hussein’s invasion, with tens of thousands of young, minimally trained volunteers deployed to frontline battles where chemical weapons and widespread minefields left massive casualties. Sina Azodi, an assistant professor of Middle East politics at George Washington University’s Elliott School of International Affairs, calls the conflict a turning point in the corps’ development. “The current Iranian political leadership were the volunteers of the Iran-Iraq war who with very basic training went to the front lines with nothing more than assault rifles,” Azodi notes. He adds that the widespread international support for Saddam Hussein’s Iraq during the conflict left a lasting collective trauma that defines the IRGC’s outlook today: “Their mindset is shaped by those traumas and the need for Iran to be able to stand on its own feet to defend the country.”

After the war ended in 1988, the IRGC took the lead on national reconstruction, growing steadily in power and influence under the long tenure of former supreme leader Ali Khamenei. It expanded its independent intelligence branch, which now operates as a rival to Iran’s official Ministry of Intelligence. Much of the IRGC’s transregional network was built by Qassem Soleimani, the charismatic Quds Force commander who led the wing from 1998 until his assassination in a U.S. drone strike in 2020. At the time of his death, Soleimani was widely regarded as the second most powerful figure in Iran, behind only the supreme leader. His killing triggered massive outrage across Iran, and just five days later, the IRGC accidentally shot down a Ukrainian commercial passenger plane departing Tehran’s main airport, killing all 176 people on board. The organization later issued a public apology, admitting it had misidentified the civilian aircraft as an enemy military plane.

For decades, the IRGC has been labeled an adversary by most Western governments and many Arab states in the region, and it has been subject to sweeping international sanctions. In recent years, more than two dozen countries have gone beyond sanctions to formally designate the entire IRGC as a terrorist organization, a designation that criminalizes any form of trade, communication or public support for the corps and its affiliates. The U.S. first proscribed the Quds Force as a terrorist entity in 2007, and extended the designation to the entire IRGC in 2019 under then-President Donald Trump. That move faced private pushback from some Pentagon and CIA officials, who noted that designating an official arm of another sovereign government as a terrorist group is unprecedented in diplomatic practice. The Biden administration reportedly considered reversing the designation, though it ultimately did not act. Following the U.S. lead, Canada proscribed the IRGC in 2024, and the European Union added the corps to its terrorist list in January 2026 after documented mass killings of anti-government protesters in Iran. The United Kingdom followed with its own designation in July 2026, pressured by years of lobbying from pro-Israel groups and Iranian diaspora activists, and after a series of attacks on Jewish communities in London that the UK government linked to the IRGC. In total, 23 countries outside the EU’s 27 member states have designated the IRGC as a terrorist organization, including Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Canada, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Ukraine.

Even for countries that have not imposed formal sanctions or designations, U.S. secondary sanctions—which penalize any foreign company that does business with IRGC affiliates—have effectively isolated the organization from most of the global economy. In response, the IRGC has deepened economic and military ties with other states that are also cut off from the U.S.-dominated international financial system or powerful enough to resist U.S. retaliatory pressure. The IRGC has supplied large quantities of drones and missiles to Russia for its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, sold jet fuel to Myanmar’s military junta during that country’s ongoing civil war, and ships most of Iran’s crude oil exports to China via a shadow fleet of unregistered tankers designed to evade U.S. sanctions controls.

In recent years, the IRGC has suffered heavy losses from repeated assassinations of top commanders by U.S. and Israeli forces. However, analysts note that the organization has maintained its operational capacity due to longstanding contingency succession planning. All senior IRGC positions, including the commander-in-chief role, are directly appointed by the supreme leader. After Israel killed former commander-in-chief Mohammed Pakpour in March 2025, and his predecessor Hossein Salami in an Israeli airstrike during the June 2025 cross-border war, former Iranian defense minister Ahmad Vahidi was appointed to fill the role. Esmail Qaani has led the Quds Force since Soleimani’s 2020 assassination, while Hossein Taeb, a former IRGC intelligence chief, now heads the Basij after Israel killed Basij commander Gholamreza Soleimani in March 2025. Other senior IRGC figures killed by Israel in 2025 include IRGC Navy commander Alireza Tangsiri and intelligence wing head Majid Khademi. Israeli airstrikes have even targeted moderate Iranian political figures with ties to the IRGC, including former Security Council head Ali Larijani, who was assassinated in March 2025. The role is now held by Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr, a longstanding IRGC hardliner.

Juneau argues that while the IRGC has sustained significant damage from repeated U.S. and Israeli strikes, it remains far from defeated. “On the one hand, the IRGC has been badly hit by the US and Israel during the war, as have other pillars of the Islamic Republic,” he says. “If we simply count strikes, military installations damaged or destroyed, ships or aircraft damaged or destroyed, then we can conclude that the IRGC has been significantly weakened.” But he adds that the organization spent decades preparing for this kind of coordinated pressure: “The US and Israel have destroyed an important proportion of the IRGC’s missiles and drones, but the force still has more than enough to continue threatening shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.”

For that reason, Juneau notes that hardline factions within the IRGC see no need for political compromise or a negotiated end to ongoing regional tensions, and remain committed to expanding their influence. “The way out of the war to the IRGC is to consolidate and institutionalise its geopolitical gains,” he says. “It wants, in particular, to see a new arrangement in the Persian Gulf whereby it can de facto veto maritime traffic.”

17 9 月, 2026
White House withdraws Trump’s ICE nominee as Republican senator objects

In a significant setback for former President Donald Trump and his administration’s immigration agenda, the White House has formally withdrawn the nomination of Richard Schroyer to lead U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), after a high-profile Republican senator joined Democratic lawmakers in blocking his confirmation.

Schroyer, a 29-year veteran of the Oklahoma Highway Patrol and former U.S. Marine, was tapped by Trump in June to fill the top ICE leadership role while serving as a senior aide to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, a close political ally of Schroyer’s. The Department of Homeland Security oversees ICE and all federal border and immigration enforcement agencies, and Schroyer’s nomination raised eyebrows from the start, given his long history in state-level law enforcement and no prior experience managing a large federal agency of ICE’s size and scope.

The nomination hit an immediate wall after Sen. Rand Paul, a Republican who chairs the Senate Homeland Security Committee, refused to advance Schroyer’s candidacy to a full Senate vote, blocking the nomination in committee amid demands for more transparency around two fatal January shootings of U.S. citizens by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis. Paul’s opposition created a deadlock that left the White House with no path to confirmation, leading officials to pull the nomination in a brief one-paragraph memo released Thursday that offered no public explanation for the decision. The BBC has confirmed it reached out to the White House for additional context and comment following the withdrawal, with no response issued as of reporting.

The vacancy at the top of ICE is far from a new issue: the agency has not had a Senate-confirmed permanent director since 2017, and has been led by a rotating cast of acting chiefs for nearly a decade. Currently, the agency is headed by David Venturella, a former private prison industry executive who took over after former acting director Todd Lyon announced his departure from the role in April.

Thursday’s withdrawal represents a clear defeat for both Trump and Mullin, who had pushed Schroyer’s candidacy as part of the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to fulfill a core 2024 campaign promise of carrying out the largest mass deportation operation in U.S. history. The January shootings that sparked Schroyer’s confirmation block also triggered nationwide public protests earlier this year: the two victims, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, were both U.S. citizens killed in separate confrontations with ICE agents while participating in local protests in Minneapolis.

17 9 月, 2026
Why Canadians are ready for closer ties with Europe

When Canadians opened their news feeds on a recent Thursday morning, the top headline carried a bold diplomatic proposal: Prime Minister Mark Carney had stood before the European Parliament in Strasbourg to lay out a vision for unprecedentedly close ties between Canada and the European Union, including a potential path for Canada to become the bloc’s first-ever associate member. In his address, Carney called for deepened collaboration across defence and energy sectors, and put forward a sweeping plan to break down barriers for cross-Atlantic movement, saying, “We should deepen our people-to-people ties, allowing our youth to live, work and study where they want on either side of the Atlantic.” Framing the alliance as a necessary response to growing global geopolitical instability, Carney emphasized that Canada and Europe share core values and are far stronger when they act together.

For many ordinary Canadians, the proposal struck an immediate positive chord, particularly amid lingering friction with Canada’s longstanding primary trade partner, the United States. In on-the-ground interviews with the BBC across major Canadian cities, dozens of residents expressed enthusiasm for the new direction.

Miriam Levin-Gold, a Toronto commuter, called the plan a game-changing opportunity for young Canadians. “I think that’s great for young people to explore different parts of the world and work in different places and have different experiences,” she said. Alex Nash, a resident of Montreal, echoed that excitement, noting that closer alignment would eliminate the cumbersome visa and permit barriers that currently complicate Canadian travel and work in the EU. “It would certainly be really nice for that to be easier, more convenient and to be able to visit more easily,” she noted.

The announcement quickly ignited widespread discussion across Canadian social media platforms, with users sharing a range of personal benefits the alliance could bring. One commenter in the Facebook group *A Canadian Outlook* wrote that the opportunity would let their grandchildren access affordable tuition at European universities, while another noted it would simplify cross-border life for Canadians who already own property in European countries. Many users also pointed out that the arrangement would be a major win for Canadian “snow birds” — retirees who travel south to warmer climates each winter, many of whom increasingly choose European destinations over the U.S.

A large part of the public support for closer EU ties stems from growing dissatisfaction with Canada’s bilateral relationship with the U.S., spurred by trade tensions and provocative rhetoric from the Trump administration. David Jardine, a Toronto resident who grew up viewing the U.S. as an iconic cultural destination, said his perspective has shifted dramatically in recent years. “I remember wanting to go and visit New York all the time,” he said. “But I would say I think not only does it make more sense to associate closely with Europe, it’s a place that I would rather be associating with given the way things are these days.”

Maggie Stainton, a pub manager in Toronto’s historic St. Lawrence Market district, called the U.S. relationship increasingly unpredictable, and said Europe offers much-needed stability. “It’s too volatile with the United States. I feel that there’s some stability in Europe,” she explained. For decades, American cultural influence has been inescapable for Canadians: Hollywood employs countless Canadian actors, and Canadian radio is dominated by U.S. music. “I think we’re forced to feel more American simply by the influences that we have,” Stainton added. “However, I think deep down, I definitely lean towards feeling more European in my ideas and ideals.”

Carney, a former governor of both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England, campaigned for his current position on a platform that combined a hard line against Trump’s trade policies with a pledge to diversify Canada’s economic partnerships away from its heavy reliance on the U.S. Currently, up to 72% of all Canadian exports flow to the U.S., a level of dependence that has left the country disproportionately vulnerable to trade disputes. Persistent tensions have pushed the Canadian government to actively seek deeper economic and diplomatic ties with other global partners, and the EU stands out as a natural ally: the 2021 Canadian census found that more than half of the country’s population traces its ancestry to Europe, and a pre-speech Abacus Data survey found that 80% of Canadians support deeper strategic cooperation with the EU, with more than half saying they feel closer culturally and politically to Europe than to the U.S.

Despite the broad public support, the proposal faces significant practical hurdles. The EU does not currently have an “associate member” status, and any new institutional arrangement would require unanimous approval from all 27 EU member states — a process that could take years to complete. Details of Carney’s plan also remain sparse, prompting criticism from opposition lawmakers who are calling for greater transparency. Adam Chambers, an Ontario Conservative MP, noted that the existing Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) still has not been ratified by several EU countries years after it was first negotiated. “It could be a concrete, meaningful proposal. Or it could be just words and vibes,” Chambers told the BBC.

Even among supporters of closer EU ties, many Canadians agree that the country must not abandon its relationship with the U.S., even amid current strains. Ahmed Khalil, a 40-year Ontario resident, said building stronger ties with Europe makes economic and cultural sense. “I think it brings in more money for Canada and more culture, brings Europeans over, probably solves a lot of problems,” he said. But he added that Canada cannot overlook its southern neighbour: “I grew up here. America’s always been the neighbour. I think both are equally valuable to us, both are equally valid.”

17 9 月, 2026
Tommy Robinson backs Ed Sheeran as Paloma Faith and Ms Rachel side with Macklemore

What began as a planned cross-country pop tour has erupted into a polarizing international controversy centered on the Israel-Palestine conflict, leaving British megastar Ed Sheeran facing the very real possibility of scrapping his entire U.S. run.

The crisis ignited earlier this week when supporting act Macklemore was dropped from the tour lineup, a move the Grammy-winning rapper says was triggered by his public pro-Palestine statements during live performances. In recent shows, Macklemore—legal name Benjamin Haggerty—has performed his track *Hind’s Hall*, which condemns what it calls Israeli genocide in Gaza, and called out for a free Palestine from the stage. He has also pushed back against claims that his criticism of Israeli policy amounts to antisemitism, telling Jewish fans that opposing apartheid and mass violence is not an attack on them as a people.

According to Macklemore, the pressure to remove him came from American billionaire Robert Kraft, owner of the NFL’s New England Patriots and Gillette Stadium, one of the largest venues on Sheeran’s planned route. Kraft, a well-known public supporter of Israel who once led a delegation of Pro Football Hall of Fame inductees on a tour of the country where he met then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, allegedly issued an ultimatum: if Macklemore remained on the tour, Kraft would bar Sheeran from using his stadium and coordinate with other venue owners across the U.S. to do the same.

In the wake of Macklemore’s removal, a mass exodus of talent has gutted Sheeran’s tour. All four of his remaining supporting acts, along with his entire touring band, have stepped down from the lineup, sparking widespread speculation that the star will have no choice but to cancel the entire tour entirely. The situation has split public opinion across the entertainment industry and beyond, with high-profile figures lining up on both sides of the debate.

Until recently, Sheeran had garnered little public backing from his celebrity peers—many of whom have publicly praised Macklemore for his stance. But a handful of prominent public figures have come out in support of the pop star. Among the most notable is British far-right activist Tommy Robinson, real name Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, a convicted offender with a long history of anti-Muslim rhetoric, who took to X to post, “I support @edsheeran , fuck Palestine. Barrassin [embarassing] all im seeing on socials from middle class brats who live in suburbia.”

Former Culture Club frontman Boy George, who has long positioned himself as a vocal defender of Israel, also backed Sheeran, condemning Macklemore for what he called using the long-running Middle East conflict as a “photo op.” Even British Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has weighed in, saying she holds “enormous sympathy” for Sheeran and hopes the controversy will not derail his tour.

On the opposing side, dozens of high-profile figures have criticized the decision to remove Macklemore, including YouTube creator Ms Rachel, U.S. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, and climate activist Greta Thunberg. British singer Paloma Faith also pushed back against Sheeran’s claim that he avoids bringing politics into his performances, pointing out that the star has previously publicly expressed support for Ukraine against Russia’s invasion during his live shows.

Sheeran has pushed back against criticism, arguing that the choice to remove Macklemore was made by tour promoters, not himself. “I have my personal views on this devastating conflict. Just because I choose not to speak publicly, it doesn’t mean I don’t have them, and it doesn’t mean I don’t care,” he wrote in an Instagram statement, adding that concertgoers attend his shows for music, not a “political forum.” He also noted that he could not abandon the touring crew and supporting musicians who rely on the tour for their income.

In the aftermath of the controversy, all parties have announced major donations to humanitarian aid in the Middle East. Macklemore says he will donate the $1 million he was set to earn from the tour to Palestinian aid groups, and publicly challenged Kraft to match the sum. Sheeran followed with an announcement that he would donate $2 million to regional aid efforts, though he offered no specifics on which organizations would receive the funds. Kraft subsequently said he would match Sheeran’s $2 million donation to support humanitarian relief efforts in the region.

Even with the donations, the damage to Sheeran’s tour appears done. The mass withdrawal of collaborating musicians has left the tour’s future hanging in the balance, with no clear path forward for the pop star to salvage the planned U.S. run amid the intensifying political backlash.

17 9 月, 2026
This Olympics river has 500 crocodiles in it – but that’s not the main concern

For years, the annual school rowing regatta on Queensland’s Fitzroy River flew under the radar. Drawing more than 600 top young rowers to the crocodile-populated waterway in the regional city of Rockhampton, the event never attracted national or international media attention, according to Anthea O’Loughlin, chief of Rowing Queensland. But 2026 marks a historic turning point: this same stretch of river has formally cleared technical assessment and earned official endorsement to host rowing and canoe sprint competitions at the 2032 Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games.

The approval comes after months of heated debate within the global rowing community, with concerns raised on multiple fronts. The most widely discussed issue centers on competitive fairness, not the presence of around 500 saltwater crocodiles that call the Fitzroy home – reptiles that can reach up to four meters in length. While crocodile sightings are common along the river, official state records stretching back more than 40 years show zero recorded attacks on humans, and the apex predators were never the top priority for critics.

Instead, critics have zeroed in on the Fitzroy’s natural characteristics as a tidal river, with shifting bends and variable currents that many rowing leaders argue create an uneven playing field for elite athletes. Three-time Australian Olympic rowing gold medalist Drew Ginn shared his concerns with BBC Radio, flagging potential flooding risks and questions over the venue’s commitment to competitive fairness and integrity. Ginn noted that while crocodiles are not his primary worry, the reptile presence remains a low-priority concern that was raised early in discussions.

Other global rowing leaders have questioned the sustainability and logic of hosting the event 600 kilometers outside of Brisbane, the main Olympic host city. German Rowing Federation president Moritz Petri emphasized that athletes’ concerns stem from their four years of dedicated training for a shot at Olympic gold, a dream that demands the best possible competitive conditions. New Zealand Rowing chief executive Simon Wickham echoed that sentiment, stressing that criticism focused solely on fairness, not any bias against regional venues.

Queensland Premier David Crisafulli pushed back hard against these objections, dismissing the concerns as pressure from out-of-state and international elites who simply do not want to travel to regional Queensland. “It is a group of interstate and overseas elites who are trying to bully their way because they don’t want to go to regional Queensland, and that’s not right,” Crisafulli said shortly after last month’s World Rowing congress in Amsterdam, where the venue was debated. Rowing leaders declined to directly respond to Crisafulli’s remarks when contacted by the BBC ahead of the final approval vote.

The final decision rested with global governing bodies World Rowing and the International Olympic Committee (IOC), which greenlit the venue following a comprehensive technical assessment conducted by an independent engineering firm and the Brisbane 2032 Games infrastructure authority. The assessment evaluated the riverbed, competition course layout, natural flow patterns, water levels, and typical weather conditions during the July-August Olympic window. “Based on the extensive analysis undertaken, we now know that the Fitzroy River is capable of providing fair competition conditions during the period of the Games,” World Rowing president Jean-Christophe Rolland said in a statement announcing the approval. Thomas Konietzko, president of canoe sprint governing body Paddle Worldwide, added that the assessment also delivered confidence the river would meet the needs of his sport’s athletes.

Crisafulli celebrated the outcome in state parliament, declaring: “The Fitzroy has passed with flying colours. It’s official. Signed, sealed and delivered.” Notably, the approval came despite a 2025 report commissioned by the Queensland government itself that deemed the Fitzroy unsuitable and recommended using the purpose-built rowing venue constructed for Sydney’s 2000 Olympic Games as a more viable option. The Fitzroy now only needs to pass a final assessment of its design, cost efficiency, and long-term legacy benefits for the local community, a hurdle that is widely expected to be cleared given the state government’s unwavering support for the project.

Questions do remain, however, about Rockhampton’s ability to accommodate the sudden influx of tens of thousands of athletes, officials, and spectators in 2032. The regional city, whose surrounding economy is dominated by cattle production, typically only sees a major visitor surge every three years during its popular Beef Week event. Ongoing debate also continues around whether heavy public investment in upgraded rowing facilities at the site represents the best use of state resources.

When it comes to the most famous talking point – the crocodiles – the IOC and World Rowing’s latest official update does not mention the reptiles at all, and they were not included in the formal technical assessment. But local event organizers take the risk seriously: the safety plan for this year’s school regatta mentions “crocodile” 28 times, explicitly noting that the Fitzroy sits within recognized crocodile habitat and that no natural waterway in the region can ever be guaranteed to be completely crocodile-free. The regatta’s protocols call for an immediate suspension of racing and a full return of competitors to shore if a crocodile is spotted, with a repeated three-word call serving as the official alert.

Hancock Prospecting, the company owned by Australian billionaire Gina Rinehart that has poured millions of dollars into supporting Rockhampton’s bid, has dismissed concerns about crocodiles and flooding as manufactured fake narratives. “The people of Rocky for many years have sent their own children to train in this river, and for competitions, without a single crocodile incident,” a company spokesperson said.
Brisbane 2032 organizers confirm they have maintained contingency plans, as they do for all Olympic venues, with the 2000 Sydney rowing course remaining on standby as a backup – an outcome that would be deeply unpopular with Queensland stakeholders.

For the young rowers competing in this year’s regatta, the high-stakes national and international debate means little as they take to the water they have trained on for years. Among them are likely future contenders who could compete on the same course at the 2032 Games. “For our students, the Fitzroy is first and foremost their home water,” said Phillip Moulds, headmaster of Rockhampton Grammar School. “The Fitzroy has also been the starting point for many… some of whom have gone on to compete at the highest levels of the sport nationally and internationally.”

17 9 月, 2026
Dubai court lifts travel ban on British-Pakistani shipping tycoon yet to settle UK case

In an exclusive revelation from court documents obtained by Middle East Eye, a Dubai court has removed a travel ban imposed on a British-Pakistani father and son duo previously found liable for conspiracy and deceit in a major UK fraud case, triggering deep anxiety among creditors who fear the pair will flee the United Arab Emirates. British citizens Muhammad Tahir Lakhani and his son Muhammad Ali Lakhani were first held liable for fraudulent misrepresentation at London’s Commercial Court in 2024, over false claims they made to secure a $45 million loan for Astir Maritime, a shipping firm ultimately controlled by the pair and another family member.

The loan, the court heard, was reportedly requested to shore up the family’s ship-recycling operations amid a global trade and market downturn, with the funds earmarked for the purchase of ageing vessels that would later be sold to shipyards for dismantling and resale of parts. The Lakhani pair has already admitted to fabricating explanations for their repeated failure to repay the outstanding debt to lenders, who are led by London-based investment firm Njord Partners Sma-Seal LP. To date, no final settlement has been reached in the case, and the pair has remained based in Dubai, where the Lakhani family has built a decades-long portfolio of shipping and ship-recycling enterprises.

As part of enforcement efforts to recover the unpaid debt, UAE authorities issued a travel ban barring the Lakhanis from leaving the country in 2025. However, court filings confirm that the ban was formally lifted on 26 August this year, following a formal request from the Lakhani family. In their submission to the Dubai court, the pair argued that unrestricted travel was necessary for them to conduct business operations, restructure their financial affairs, and ultimately meet their outstanding repayment obligations to creditors.

This decision has drawn fierce criticism from sources close to the creditor group, who note that the lifting of the travel ban is both concerning and contradictory to the Lakhanis’ own claims. During the period the travel ban was in effect, the family paid $5 million to resolve separate enforcement proceedings, and later offered a lump sum settlement of between $4 million and $5.5 million to address the outstanding 2024 High Court judgment. This track record of transactions, the source argues, directly undermines the claim that travel restrictions prevented the Lakhanis from organizing their finances to settle the debt. Creditors, including institutional stakeholders such as pension fund managers, now fear the pair will use their newly restored freedom of movement to escape to Pakistan, where the Lakhani family has its ancestral roots.

Middle East Eye’s repeated requests for comment from Muhammad Tahir Lakhani, who was born in Karachi, went unanswered, including inquiries about whether he planned to leave the UAE. The family’s Dubai-based legal representative also declined to respond to questions about the case. UK authorities have also maintained silence on the matter: the UK Home Office confirmed it does not comment on individual cases, while the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office noted it had not been approached for consular assistance but remained ready to provide support if requested. Sources close to the proceedings confirm that Geraldine McCafferty, the newly appointed British ambassador to the UAE, has been fully briefed on the situation.

The 2024 fraud judgment is not the first legal controversy the Lakhani family has faced in UK courts. In 2020, UK judges issued worldwide asset freezing orders against Tahir Lakhani and his sons after a separate group of lenders accused the family of fraud in connection with other ship-recycling ventures. The 2020 proceedings ultimately resulted in a $77 million judgment awarded to the lenders, which the Lakhanis settled in 2025 for just $5 million, a outcome Tahir Lakhani described as an “amicable” resolution. During the 2020 case, Tahir Lakhani was described in court filings as an “internationally recognised visionary shipping executive”, credited with founding Dubai Trading Agency, the first Middle East-based company to enter the large-scale ship recycling market.

More recently, in 2024 the Financial Times linked one of Lakhani’s companies to Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” of vessels used to evade Western sanctions imposed over the Ukraine conflict. In response to the reporting, Tahir Lakhani denied any involvement or facilitation of sanctions breaches, and has long positioned himself as a key figure in the development of the UAE as a global maritime hub. His professional biography, published by Thrive Global, the media firm founded by Ariana Huffington, notes he has played a “critical role in advocating the UAE as an essential zonal and global centre for maritime trade and logistics”.

A prominent industry figure, Tahir Lakhani, 63, served as vice chairman of the UAE Shipping Association until 2019. Beyond his shipping career, he has claimed to be the youngest player ever to represent Pakistan in tennis’ Davis Cup, and got his start in the industry as a supervisor at a family friend’s ship recycling yard in Pakistan. He inherited a stake in a Dubai trading business through his marriage to wife Uneza in 1985, before renaming the venture Dubai Trading Agency; by the late 1990s, the firm had grown to become one of the world’s largest ship recyclers, purchasing more than 100 end-of-life vessels annually for cash.

The case has also raised questions about the implementation of the 2021 UK-UAE Illicit Finance Partnership Agreement, a bilateral deal the British government hailed as a landmark effort to crack down on transnational crime, terrorist financing, and illicit money flows between the two nations. In March this year, Democratic Unionist Party MP Jim Shannon formally asked the Home Office to assess how the agreement applies to the Lakhani case, but Security Minister Dan Jarvis declined to comment on individual proceedings while reaffirming the stated benefits of the partnership.

Middle East Eye, which publishes independent coverage of the Middle East, North Africa and global affairs, first obtained the court documents confirming the lifting of the travel ban on an exclusive basis.

17 9 月, 2026
US bans Palestinian president from speaking at the UN

For the second straight year, the United States has moved to block senior Palestinian officials from participating in the United Nations General Assembly in New York, triggering sharp condemnation from the Palestinian government and reigniting global debate over Washington’s role as host of the UN headquarters.

The Trump administration first implemented this restriction in 2025, barring Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and other top leaders from traveling to New York for the annual high-level gathering. That decision drew widespread international backlash last year, with the General Assembly ultimately voting 145-5 to grant Abbas permission to address the assembly remotely, and leading to widespread calls to relocate future major UN meetings on the Israeli-Palestinian issue to Geneva, Switzerland.

This year, the Trump administration has replicated the policy, expanding the visa ban to cover all members of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and senior leadership of the Palestinian Authority (PA). Abbas remains among the high-profile figures excluded from entry to the US for next week’s gathering, US State Department officials confirmed in a statement issued Wednesday.

In justifying the renewed restrictions, the State Department framed the measure as a consequence of Palestinian authorities’ failure to meet US-mandated reform commitments, and accused the PA of pursuing actions that erode prospects for Middle East peace. Specifically, US officials criticized Palestinian efforts to bring legal cases against Israel at the International Criminal Court (ICC) and International Court of Justice (ICJ), as well as the PA’s campaign to secure broader international recognition for Palestinian statehood, which Washington claims bypasses direct bilateral negotiations.

The Palestinian foreign ministry immediately rejected these justifications in a strongly worded statement Thursday, condemning the visa ban as an unjustified overreach that directly undermines international efforts to rebuild trust between parties, advance normalization of Palestinian-American relations, and create a viable political pathway to a two-state solution that would deliver long-term peace and stability to the region.

The ministry emphasized that Palestinian recourse to international legal institutions and multilateral bodies is a fully legitimate sovereign right, not an act hostile to peace. It argued that this peaceful, legal strategy to defend Palestinian rights cannot be equated with Israel’s ongoing occupation, expansion of illegal settlements, annexation of Palestinian territory, forced displacement of Palestinian communities, and rising settler violence – actions the ministry says represent the actual primary threat to a two-state solution and any lasting peace agreement.

The new visa ban once again places the US and Israel in sharp opposition to the overwhelming majority of the international community on the question of Palestinian statehood and diplomatic representation. Currently, 157 UN member states – more than 80 percent of the organization’s total membership – recognize the State of Palestine as a sovereign nation.

The announcement also comes at a moment of rapidly escalating violence in the occupied West Bank, where Israeli settler attacks on Palestinian communities have surged to record levels. A UN report published in August documented more than 1,430 separate incidents of settler violence in the first eight months of 2026, with officials describing the frequency and severity of attacks as “unprecedented.”

17 9 月, 2026