Global Pulse

博客

  • Sudanese victims ask ICC to investigate Emiratis over RSF atrocities in el-Fasher

    Sudanese victims ask ICC to investigate Emiratis over RSF atrocities in el-Fasher

    Seven Sudanese survivors of the devastating atrocities in Darfur have taken a landmark step toward accountability, filing a formal communication with the International Criminal Court (ICC) asking prosecutors to open an investigation into senior United Arab Emirates (UAE) government officials and business leaders for their alleged role in enabling war crimes and genocide committed by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

    Submitted to the ICC Office of the Prosecutor on Tuesday under Article 15 of the Rome Statute — the legal mechanism that allows any individual or group to submit evidence to prompt a formal inquiry — the filing names UAE Vice President Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan among those accused of maintaining close ties to the RSF, and facilitating the group’s operations through critical financing and logistical backing. The submission specifically requests prosecutors examine the potential criminal liability of third-party actors under Articles 25(3)(c) and 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute, which cover individuals who aid, abet, or knowingly contribute to crimes carried out by a group acting with a shared criminal purpose.

    The UAE has repeatedly and publicly denied allegations that it has provided weapons, funding, or any other form of support to the RSF. However, a growing body of independent investigations published since mid-2023 has consistently linked the UAE to sustained arms and materiel flows to the RSF. Multiple inquiries have confirmed that weapons have reached the RSF via a secret airbridge operating out of Amdjarass, Chad, with the UAE named as the primary suspected supplier. In January 2024, Middle East Eye (MEE) exposed a sprawling cross-border network through which the UAE funnelled weapons to the RSF, with supply routes stretching across Libya, Chad, Uganda, and breakaway regions of Somalia. More recently, an April 2024 MEE investigation uncovered covert RSF support operations operating out of an Ethiopian military base in Asosa, Benishangul-Gumuz region, with identical military vehicles documented at the Port of Berbera in Somaliland — where the UAE maintains a permanent military base. A 2024 New York Times investigation, which is cited in the new ICC filing, further found that the UAE smuggled weapons to the RSF concealed within shipments labelled as humanitarian aid. In May 2024, Human Rights Watch reported that Colombian mercenaries hired by a UAE-based company transited through Emirati military bases before deploying to Sudan to support the RSF.

    The survivors — all now sheltering in a 26,000-person displacement camp in Sudan’s Northern State, many of whom walked more than 745 miles to escape violence — are not only seeking accountability for the RSF fighters who directly carried out atrocities. They are calling for the court to trace responsibility up the entire chain of support, investigating every individual and entity that funded, armed, or facilitated the RSF’s campaign of violence.

    The ICC already holds clear jurisdiction over crimes committed in Darfur, stemming from a 2005 United Nations Security Council referral that grants the court authority to prosecute individuals of any nationality for crimes committed in the region. Legal scholars consulted by MEE note that this jurisdiction could theoretically extend to Emirati nationals accused of aiding RSF crimes, though significant practical barriers remain. The UAE has not ratified the Rome Statute, and gathering admissible evidence and securing state cooperation would present major challenges for ICC investigators.

    The communication was brought to the court by Elise Le Gall, a Paris-based ICC counsel acting on behalf of the seven survivors. “International crimes cannot be committed without support networks,” Le Gall said in a statement accompanying the filing. She called on ICC prosecutors to closely examine private and public sector actors who may have enabled the RSF’s atrocities “through the provision of funding, logistical support, equipment, or personnel.”

    The filing centers on the catastrophic fall of El-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, which was captured by the RSF on October 26, 2025, after a 500-day siege that trapped more than 250,000 civilians without access to food, clean water, or life-saving medicine. The United Nations Human Rights Office has confirmed that more than 6,000 civilians were killed in the first three days of the RSF’s final assault on the city. Prior to the fall of El-Fasher, satellite analysis from Yale University’s Humanitarian Research Lab identified a ring of earthen fortifications built by the RSF around the city as a deliberate “kill box” designed to block civilian escape and enable mass killing.

    The submission details systematic allegations of mass murder, torture, sexual violence, forced displacement, and deliberate attacks on hospitals and medical infrastructure. It documents a repeated pattern of violence in which RSF fighters pursued fleeing civilian populations and deliberately ran them over with armed vehicles. Mohamed Ismail Abdelrahman Hassan, a doctor from El-Fasher who treated injured civilians throughout the entire siege, stated in the filing that heavy weapons supplied to the RSF “devastated infrastructure, besieged civilian populations, and killed civilians indiscriminately.”

    The survivors’ filing draws substantial support from the findings of the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan, which concluded in February 2025 that the RSF’s conduct in El-Fasher bears all the legal hallmarks of genocide, in addition to widespread crimes against humanity and war crimes. Mona Rishmawi, a member of the fact-finding mission, told MEE earlier this year that the targeted killing of El-Fasher’s Zaghawa and Fur communities left “only one reasonable inference”: that the RSF acted with explicit genocidal intent. Rishmawi called on all governments to immediately halt arms flows to the RSF, warning that any state providing backing to either side in the Sudan conflict risked being held legally complicit in acts that meet the legal threshold of genocide. The mission has already shared confidential evidentiary materials with the ICC, Rishmawi confirmed, though the court’s constrained operational capacity, weakened by long-standing United States sanctions, makes swift investigative action far more difficult.

    Earlier this year, ICC Deputy Prosecutor confirmed that the court’s office is already conducting an active investigation into the atrocities committed in El-Fasher. While the ICC has been probing alleged RSF atrocities since 2023, prosecutors have not yet requested arrest warrants for any Sudanese nationals linked to the violence.

  • Dáil passes abortion bill to remove three-day wait

    Dáil passes abortion bill to remove three-day wait

    In a landmark vote that marks the most substantial shift to abortion legislation in Ireland since the 2018 repeal of the 8th Amendment, Ireland’s lower parliament the Dáil has approved a bill to eliminate the controversial three-day mandatory waiting period between a general practitioner consultation and an early abortion. The vote on Sinn Féin’s private members’ bill passed by a clear margin of 86 votes in favour to 70 opposed, clearing its first major legislative hurdle before moving to the Oireachtas health committee for further line-by-line scrutiny.

    Under current Irish law, anyone seeking an abortion in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy is required to wait a full three days between their initial GP consultation and receiving the termination procedure, a restriction that supporters of the bill frame as an unnecessary, harmful barrier to care. Notably, both Taoiseach (Irish Prime Minister) and Tánaiste (Deputy Prime Minister) backed the bill, and government party Teachtaí Dála (TDs, members of the Dáil) were granted a free conscience vote on the socially divisive issue, according to Irish public broadcaster RTÉ.

    Sinn Féin, the main opposition party which tabled the legislation, celebrated the outcome of the vote as a long-overdue win for reproductive rights. “This is an important step forward for women’s healthcare and one of the most significant changes since we voted to repeal the 8th amendment,” Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald said following the vote. Speaking earlier in the week, Sinn Féin TD Donna McGettigan framed the bill as a fundamental question of autonomy, saying it centered on “trusting women” to make their own unpressured decisions about their pregnancies. McDonald added that women, reproductive health care providers, and campaigners had spent years calling for the removal of what she called an unnecessary barrier to safe, timely care.

    The bill faced pushback from a cross-section of politicians who retained opposition to rolling back existing restrictions. Children’s Minister Norma Foley was among the high-profile government figures who voted against the legislation, arguing ahead of the vote that the three-day waiting period was a core component of the abortion framework put before and approved by Irish voters in the 2018 8th Amendment referendum. Aontú party leader Peadar Tóibín claimed there is no broad public demand for the rule change, while Fine Gael TD Peter Roche said his vote against was shaped by accounts of many women who changed their minds about terminating their pregnancy during the three-day waiting window.

    As debate moves to the next legislative stage, the Irish Labour Party has called on the government to go beyond eliminating the waiting period, and fully implement all recommendations from a 2022 abortion law review conducted by senior barrister Marie O’Shea. O’Shea’s independent review proposed additional reforms, including dropping the threat of criminal penalties for health care providers who deviate from the formal provisions of abortion law, and removing the 28-day mortality rule that restricts late-term abortions for lethal fetal abnormalities to cases where the fetus is expected to die within 28 days of birth. Currently, abortions for lethal fetal conditions are only permitted if two doctors confirm the fetus will die either before or within 28 days of delivery. The bill now advances to committee review, where it will undergo further amendment and debate before a final vote in the Oireachtas.

  • South Africa bounce back with win over Pakistan

    South Africa bounce back with win over Pakistan

    At Edgbaston’s Group Two clash of the ICC Women’s T20 World Cup, South Africa fought to their first win of the 2025 tournament, edging past Pakistan by two wickets in a tense, low-scoring encounter that kept their semi-final hopes alive.

    Coming into the match, the Proteas – who have reached the final of the last two consecutive T20 World Cups, falling to Australia in 2023 and New Zealand in 2024 – faced an early uphill battle after a crushing opening defeat to tournament favorites Australia. Drawn in one of the competition’s toughest groups that also includes 50-over world champions India, a second loss would have left their campaign on the brink of elimination.

    It was 36-year-old veteran all-rounder Marizanne Kapp who set the tone for South Africa’s victory, delivering a devastating opening over that claimed two top-order Pakistani wickets before the first over was even completed. What followed was a string of catastrophic running between the wickets from Pakistan’s batting line-up, which gifted the Proteas three additional run-outs and left the side reeling at 29-5 inside the early overs, and later collapsing to 50-8.

    Just when a total well below 100 looked inevitable, Pakistan captain Fatima Sana produced a captain’s innings to drag her side back into contention. Teaming up with last-wicket batter Tuba Hassan for a 71-run ninth-wicket partnership, Fatima smashed an unbeaten 55 off 38 deliveries, including a spectacular final over that saw her hit two sixes off Nadine de Klerk and plunder 19 runs from the six balls. That late blitz pushed Pakistan’s final total to a competitive 126-9 from their 20 overs.

    Fatima then turned her impact to the bowling crease, claiming three wickets for just 16 runs to keep South Africa’s chase on the back foot. The Proteas stuttered through the middle overs, losing wickets at regular intervals and making hard work of the modest target, highlighting a persistent vulnerability in their batting order that analysts say will need significant improvement if the side is to compete with Australia and India for one of the group’s top two semi-final spots.

    But contributions from the lower order kept South Africa on track: all-rounder Annerie Dercksen anchored the chase with a polished 52 off 35 balls, while de Klerk backed up her bowling with a useful 37 runs from the lower order. The pair guided the Proteas across the finish line in the 17th over (16.4 overs to be exact), securing a two-wicket win with more than three overs to spare.

    For Pakistan, the defeat marks their second consecutive loss of the tournament, following a narrow defeat to India on Sunday, leaving them still searching for their first win in this year’s competition. For South Africa, the result resets their campaign, giving the side much-needed momentum ahead of their upcoming group matches as they aim to go one step further than their back-to-back final losses.

  • Takeaways from the G7: Trump’s new attitude toward allies buoyed by their praise for Iran deal

    Takeaways from the G7: Trump’s new attitude toward allies buoyed by their praise for Iran deal

    EVIAN-LES-BAINS, France – U.S. President Donald Trump has long been known for his skepticism of large-scale international leader summits, even cutting his 2023 G7 appearance short to return to Washington early just one year prior. But at this year’s gathering held in the scenic French Alpine resort of Evian-les-Bains, Trump emerged with a far more enthusiastic posture – buoyed by widespread backing from fellow G7 leaders for his newly struck tentative agreement with Iran to end ongoing hostilities.

    The shift marked a stark reversal from just weeks earlier, when Trump had openly lambasted U.S. allies for refusing to join Washington and Tel Aviv in launching bombing campaigns against Iran to force the rollback of its nuclear program. Now, standing before reporters at the close of the three-day summit, Trump struck a unifying tone. “We found a great deal of unity here at the G7,” he told the press corps, adding that he had received nothing but positive feedback from other leaders, who share Washington’s goal of lowering volatile global oil prices in the aftermath of the Iran conflict. “This meeting could not have come at a better time.”

    Beyond the Iran deal, the summit delivered a series of notable shifts and outcomes across key global issues, from the ongoing war in Ukraine to economic tensions with China, and even the format of the summit itself. Here are the major takeaways from Trump’s trip to France:

    ### A Clear Blame-Shifting Strategy for the Iran Deal
    True to his long-documented pattern of claiming credit for successes while deflecting responsibility for setbacks, Trump has positioned Vice President JD Vance as the party on the hook if the Iran agreement fails. Vance, who took a leading role in negotiating the deal, has spearheaded a cross-country media push to promote the agreement while Trump attended the G7, and is set to represent the United States at a formal ceremonial signing in Switzerland scheduled for Friday.

    When a reporter asked if Trump’s plan was to claim credit as a political “genius” if the deal succeeds, while pinning blame on his second-in-command if it collapses, Trump did not shy away from the framing. “I like that idea, sure,” he said. “This way, if it works out, I’m going to take the credit. If it doesn’t work out, I’m blaming JD. You better be careful, JD.”

    ### Unlikely Unity Emerges on Two Long-Divisive Issues: Iran and Ukraine
    For months, G7 leaders have been deeply at odds with Trump over both Iran and Ukraine, with European leaders openly criticizing Trump’s decision to launch hostilities against Iran without any prior consultation with allies. But by the final day of the summit, the bloc had closed ranks: in an official joint statement, all seven leaders welcomed the tentative Iran deal and explicitly acknowledged that “the strong leadership of President Trump” was instrumental to reaching the agreement.

    The gathering also delivered a breakthrough on Ukraine, another issue where Trump had long clashed with European allies. Trump has repeatedly claimed Ukraine holds “no cards” in its war against Russia and that Kyiv must make territorial concessions to Moscow to reach a negotiated end to the conflict. But after three days of closed-door talks, Trump agreed to join his fellow leaders in reaffirming “unwavering support for Ukraine.”

    The joint statement called on all nations to ramp up deliveries of air defense systems, interceptors, and long-range military capabilities to Ukraine, and commended Kyiv for “its resilience and progress on the battlefield in recent months.” European leaders, who have become the largest providers of military and financial aid to Ukraine, said they made meaningful progress in convincing Trump that Ukraine is capable of holding its own against Russia – contradicting the hardline position Trump laid out to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in 2023. Macron also invited Zelenskyy to participate in portions of the summit to make his case directly to leaders.

    ### Contradictory Messages on China Undermine Bloc Unity
    While G7 leaders presented a united front on Iran and Ukraine, cracks emerged on economic policy toward China. The bloc centered its discussion on what leaders describe as China’s practice of flooding global export markets with heavily subsidized goods, a trend they say has eroded manufacturing jobs across G7 economies.

    French President Emmanuel Macron opened the discussion by arguing that Beijing’s trade practices are a core driver of global economic imbalance, pointing specifically to what he called China’s systemic industrial overcapacity, excessive state subsidies for manufacturing, and chronically weak domestic consumer demand. In their closing joint statement, G7 leaders affirmed shared concern: “We seek to deter and stand ready to take actions, where necessary in a coordinated manner, against economic coercion,” the statement read.

    But Trump immediately undercut the bloc’s unified message with his own closing remarks, where he thanked both China and Russia – which has long aligned politically with Iran – for remaining neutral during the Iran conflict. Trump noted that Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin “could have made it much more difficult for us” if they had chosen to intervene on Iran’s side, and specifically thanked Xi for refusing to supply or sell weapons to Tehran. “I just want to thank them, because they made it a lot better,” Trump said.

    ### The Enduring Value of In-Person Diplomatic Dialogue
    As with all G7 summits, the 202X gathering faced criticism for its significant carbon footprint from the travel of dozens of leaders and their large delegations, the massive security deployment that disrupted daily life for local residents, and widespread public protests against the bloc’s policy priorities. But the informal, dialogue-focused format that has defined G7 summits since their launch in 1975 proved its value at this year’s meeting, giving U.S. allies nearly three full days to engage directly with Trump and advance their policy priorities.

    That engagement paid particular dividends on the Ukraine war, European officials said, after months of growing rifts between Washington and the bloc over Kyiv’s future.

    ### Macron Secures a Full Summit Stay: A Versailles Dinner Wins Out
    Last year, Trump left the G7 summit in Canada early, before the official closing of the gathering. To avoid a repeat snub, Macron turned to a time-tested diplomatic tool: an invitation to a private dinner at the opulent Palace of Versailles, located just southwest of Paris. The gambit worked.

    Trump, who has openly spoken of his appreciation for grand historic architecture and luxury properties, agreed to stay through the entire summit. The 18th-century royal palace carries deep symbolic weight for U.S.-French relations: it was at Versailles that King Louis XVI pledged French military support to Benjamin Franklin and the American revolutionary movement in 1778, a turning point in the U.S. war for independence. More recently, Macron hosted King Charles III and Queen Camilla at the palace in 2023 to mark the 400th anniversary of the palace’s construction, with a state dinner held in the iconic Hall of Mirrors, one of the most famous spaces in the palace’s 2,300-room complex. Macron described the 202X dinner for G7 leaders as a “convivial” occasion meant to celebrate the long-standing friendship between the United States and France.

    Superville reported from Geneva. Associated Press writer Collin Binkley in Washington contributed to this report.

  • Brazil’s Lula warns Trump not to meddle in Brazil’s elections

    Brazil’s Lula warns Trump not to meddle in Brazil’s elections

    Following the recent conclusion of the G7 summit in Evian-les-Bains, France, a sharp exchange of words between Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and former U.S. President Donald Trump has brought simmering cross-border tensions to a head, with Lula issuing a clear rebuke of U.S. interference in Brazil’s domestic political affairs ahead of the country’s October presidential vote.

    The confrontation was triggered by fresh comments Trump made this Wednesday, in which he claimed Brazil had grown “politically dangerous” and alleged the Lula-led government was seeking to arrest a member of the Bolsonaro family who is performing strongly in pre-election polling. While Brazil’s Supreme Court convicted former lawmaker Eduardo Bolsonaro — one of ex-President Jair Bolsonaro’s sons — on Tuesday of coercive actions tied to his father’s 2023 coup trial, sentencing him to four years and two months in prison, Trump’s comment was widely interpreted to reference Flávio Bolsonaro, Jair Bolsonaro’s eldest son, who is Lula’s main challenger in the upcoming presidential race and has not faced arrest warrants. The court found Eduardo Bolsonaro guilty of illegally meddling in his father’s trial by lobbying U.S. officials to pressure Brazilian judicial bodies into halting proceedings.

    When a journalist shared Trump’s remarks with Lula during a post-summit press conference, the Brazilian leader pushed back firmly. Lula argued that Trump’s comments revealed a fundamental lack of understanding of his country, rooted in his close ties to the Bolsonaro family. “If he knows Brazil through his relations with the Bolsonaro family, he doesn’t know Brazil,” Lula stated. “He can go on liking Bolsonaro — the father, the son, the grandson — that’s not my problem, it’s his. (…) But don’t interfere in Brazil’s elections, because Brazil’s elections are Brazil’s business.”

    This public clash is the latest in a series of growing rifts between the Lula administration and the Trump-led U.S. government that stretch back more than a year. Shortly after Eduardo and Flávio Bolsonaro traveled to Washington D.C. for meetings with Trump and other U.S. officials, the Trump administration took two controversial steps that Lula has openly opposed. First, it designated two of Brazil’s largest drug trafficking organizations, First Command Capital and Red Command, as foreign terrorist groups. On Wednesday, Lula repeated his criticism of this designation, noting that while the groups do inflict violence on Brazilian communities, their core goal is illicit profit rather than ideological political change, disqualifying them from the terrorist label.

    Second, the Trump administration has proposed imposing a new 25% tariff on Brazilian imports, basing the move on unsubstantiated claims that Brazil — the world’s 10th largest economy — engages in unfair trade practices. Lula even traveled to Washington earlier this year in a diplomatic push to convince Trump to abandon the tariff plan, making the final proposal all the more disrespectful in his view. Lula restated his grievance over the tariff this week, saying “I think what he did was disrespectful toward Brazil. He knows that. That’s why I said he still behaves like an emperor. We were negotiating an agreement.”

    Additional longstanding tensions stem from U.S. sanctions imposed on Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, a move the Trump administration justified by claiming the judge’s prosecution of Jair Bolsonaro was politically motivated. Bolsonaro, who lost the 2022 Brazilian presidential election to Lula, was convicted of orchestrating a coup attempt to remain in power, a process Lula has repeatedly defended as a legitimate part of Brazil’s judicial system. Lula has repeatedly framed U.S. actions, from the tariffs to the sanctions, as violations of Brazil’s national sovereignty, dating back to last year when Trump first imposed trade restrictions and called Bolsonaro’s prosecution a “witch-hunt trial.”

    As Brazil heads toward a highly competitive presidential election, the open confrontation between Lula and Trump underscores the deepening divide between the two countries and the growing risk of external interference in Brazil’s democratic process.

  • Irish PM warns about deep-fakes after financial scam video

    Irish PM warns about deep-fakes after financial scam video

    Ireland’s head of government has issued an urgent public warning following the circulation of a convincing AI-generated deepfake video that misuses his likeness to advertise a fraudulent financial scheme. Taoiseach Micheál Martin confirmed that the doctored clip, which has spread across multiple social media platforms, is an obvious example of malicious synthetic content, and is highlighting the urgent need for greater vigilance among internet users. The altered video, created to appear authentic using artificial intelligence technology, features a fake version of Martin speaking with a modified English accent. In the clip, the deepfake falsely promises that investors of any age can earn up to €40,000 (equivalent to roughly £35,000) by starting with just a €250 initial investment and a mobile phone. In an official response posted to his own social media channels, Martin addressed the fraudulent content directly. “So, this is clearly very false material pertaining to myself,” he stated. “It is illustrative of the kind of manipulation and distortion that can take place on social media, and a reminder to us all to be vigilant on social media and to take care.” Beyond warning the general public, Martin also placed responsibility on social media hosting platforms, calling for stricter proactive measures to block harmful manipulated content from being uploaded in the first place, and to implement rapid removal protocols whenever deepfakes are identified. Deepfakes — AI-manipulated video, image, or audio content crafted to mimic real people and events — have become far more accessible and simple to produce in recent years, thanks to the widespread availability of consumer-facing text-to-image and generative AI tools that lower the barrier to creating convincing synthetic media. This is not the first high-profile case of malicious deepfake use in Irish politics in recent months. During the country’s October presidential election, an AI-generated video pretending to show candidate Catherine Connolly announcing her withdrawal from the race spread widely online. Connolly, who ultimately won the election and is now President of Ireland, condemned the clip at the time as a “disgraceful attempt to mislead voters and undermine our democracy.” BBC News NI has reached out to two of the world’s largest social media platforms, Meta and X, to request comment on the recent deepfake scam targeting Martin.

  • Initial US-Iran agreement leaves many key issues to be negotiated

    Initial US-Iran agreement leaves many key issues to be negotiated

    At the G7 summit held in France, US President Donald Trump publicly touted a newly announced US-Iran memorandum of understanding as a landmark diplomatic victory for the United States. The tentative agreement, unveiled on Wednesday, paves the way for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and launches a 60-day negotiating window to work toward a full, final accord addressing the full scope of disputes between the two long-time adversaries. Despite the White House’s celebratory framing, new details shared by senior US administration officials during an off-camera press briefing reveal that critical gaps remain, and the current text falls far short of the president’s stated core goal: permanently eliminating Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear weapon.

    Trump has repeatedly claimed the preliminary deal guarantees Iran will never acquire, build or produce a nuclear weapon, a promise that does not align with the actual content of the agreement, which administration officials read aloud to reporters on background. Instead of locking in permanent restrictions, the MOU only extends an existing ceasefire and kickstarts a high-stakes two-month push for a lasting comprehensive nuclear pact. To put that timeline in perspective, it took the Obama administration 20 months of grueling, extended negotiations to reach the original 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, leaving many foreign policy observers questioning whether the Trump administration can resolve all outstanding sticking points in less than one-tenth that time.

    The only binding nuclear commitment included in the current text is Iran’s pledge to downblend its existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium, a process that will be monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Senior US officials characterized this commitment as a meaningful concession from Tehran, but all technical specifics — including the exact logistics of the downblending process and the mandatory timeline for completion — are left to be negotiated during the 60-day window that will open after the official signing of the MOU this Friday.

    On the issue of financial relief for Iran, Trump has drawn a clear contrast with his predecessor, claiming his administration will not send any direct US taxpayer funds to Tehran, a direct rebuke of the Obama administration’s 2016 $1.7 billion settlement that has long drawn criticism from conservative Republicans. Eager to cement a foreign policy legacy ahead of his term, Trump has repeatedly positioned his emerging Iran deal as far stronger than the 2015 agreement, using the rejection of direct US payments to bolster that argument. However, the text of the MOU tells a more ambiguous story: it states that the US will collaborate with regional partners to develop a formal, mutually agreed reconstruction plan for Iran that involves at least $300 billion in investment.

    While administration officials insist the agreement does not require the US to contribute any direct funding to Iran, the language of the text is intentionally vague, leaving open the possibility that the US could eventually provide financial concessions as part of a final settlement. This ambiguity creates significant political risk for Trump and Vice President JD Vance, who rose to political power campaigning on an anti-interventionist platform that promised no new endless wars in the Middle East. The MOU’s language around reconstruction funding could draw backlash from Trump’s core MAGA base, even if any future financial support for Iran does not come directly from US government coffers.

    Many other core priorities that Trump and his allies laid out at the start of the US-Iran conflict also receive only cursory attention in the one-and-a-half-page preliminary agreement. When the war first began, Trump identified cutting off Iranian funding for regional proxy groups like Lebanon-based Hezbollah as a top national security goal, a priority that aligned closely with the interests of Israel, which joined the US in the conflict and has waged a separate military campaign against the Iranian-backed militia. While the ceasefire laid out in the MOU extends to Hezbollah, the group is barely mentioned elsewhere in the text, and it remains completely unclear whether negotiations will force Iran to end its long-standing support for Hezbollah and other proxy militias across the Middle East.

    Similarly, the text does not include any detailed restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program, another core issue that Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu identified as a non-negotiable priority when the war launched.

    As things stand now, whether the MOU signed in Geneva this week will ultimately lead to a durable, comprehensive final agreement remains very much an open question. While the text sets a 60-day deadline for negotiations, it also explicitly allows for an extension if both sides agree, a clause that suggests neither Washington nor Tehran are confident a full deal can be reached in the allotted timeframe. Even Trump himself struck a noncommittal tone when asked about the prospects for lasting peace during his G7 press conference. “If it doesn’t get done in 60 days, it’s all right,” Trump said. “We go back to bombing.”

  • Trump has nothing but praise for Modi at G7 after tensions over US military strike, trade

    Trump has nothing but praise for Modi at G7 after tensions over US military strike, trade

    EVIAN-LES-BAINS, France — On the sidelines of the 2025 G7 Summit hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron, U.S. President Donald Trump moved swiftly Wednesday to project unbroken unity with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, lavishing public praise on the Indian leader as a “loyal friend” even as a cascade of thorny disputes — from trade frictions to oil sanctions, and most recently, the tragic death of three Indian mariners in a U.S. military strike — have put their long-warm bilateral relationship to the test.

    The high-stakes meeting came exactly one week after three Indian sailors lost their lives in a strike targeting a tanker in the Gulf of Oman, carried out amid a U.S. blockade intended to disrupt unauthorized oil shipments moving through the strategic Strait of Hormuz. India’s Foreign Ministry had already registered a formal diplomatic protest over the deadly incident ahead of the leaders’ sit-down, putting the fatal strike front and center on the bilateral agenda.

    Modi joined the G7 gathering as one of several guest invitees extended by Macron, marking a key opportunity for behind-the-scenes talks between the two leaders amid growing global geopolitical shifts. From the opening moments of the meeting, Trump pushed back firmly against any speculation of a rift between Washington and New Delhi, launching into a sustained series of compliments for Modi that acknowledged his shrewd negotiating style while framing their personal rapport as the foundation of a rock-solid bilateral relationship.

    “We have the best relationship. We cannot be closer than we are. Would you say that, sir? I don’t think we can be any closer,” Trump stated as he clasped Modi’s hand in a public show of unity. “Both him and I, and our nations. But it really starts with the two of us.”

    For his part, Modi did not shy away from addressing the deadly strike directly, raising the critical issue of maritime safety for the hundreds of thousands of Indian seafarers working on commercial vessels across the globe, including regular transits through the always tense Strait of Hormuz. “Their safety is of utmost importance to us,” Modi affirmed, before thanking Trump for his recent diplomatic efforts to broker a ceasefire agreement ending the war with Iran.

    “You made tremendous efforts towards reaching this understanding and this agreement, and I’m confident that the issue of seafarers will receive the highest priority during the implementation of this agreement,” he added.

    When pressed by reporters to offer words of condolence to the families of the deceased Indian mariners, Trump acknowledged the danger of the maritime profession and reaffirmed shared commitment to supporting global seafarers. “It’s a tough profession. There’s no question about it. And we work together on it,” he said. “We love all of those people. They’re great people.”

    The personal bond between Trump and Modi has been a defining feature of U.S.-India relations throughout Trump’s first term in office, marked by high-profile public displays of camaraderie. During a 2020 state visit to India, Modi drew global attention by organizing a massive welcoming rally for Trump at a packed cricket stadium, an event that left a lasting positive impression on the U.S. president. Just months before that trip, the two leaders shared the stage at the “Howdy Modi” rally in Houston, Texas, which drew a crowd of tens of thousands of Indian diaspora members to show their support for the Indian prime minister.

    But in recent months, that once smooth relationship has grown increasingly complicated by new geopolitical frictions. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has created a difficult diplomatic balancing act for New Delhi, which has maintained longstanding defense and energy ties with Moscow even as the U.S. has pressed allies to cut ties with the Kremlin. That rift spilled over into trade policy last year, when the Trump administration imposed steep new tariffs on a wide range of Indian exports, with the move explicitly tied to New Delhi’s decision to continue purchasing discounted crude oil from Russia.

    While the two economic powers eventually negotiated a limited interim trade agreement to de-escalate tensions, talks on a far more comprehensive broader trade pact remain ongoing, with no final deal yet reached. Speaking on Wednesday, Trump struck an optimistic note about the state of those negotiations, saying a new full agreement was “very close” even as he joked about Modi’s formidable negotiating skills.

    “He’s the most beautiful looking man. He looks so nice. He’s like an angel. But actually, he’s as tough as — he’s a killer,” Trump said of Modi.

  • Cape Verde goalkeeper set to be reunited with his mum

    Cape Verde goalkeeper set to be reunited with his mum

    The 2026 FIFA World Cup has already delivered one of its most heartwarming stories, as goalkeeper Vozinha – whose extraordinary performance secured a historic goalless draw for Cape Verde against defending giants Spain – is set to be reunited with his mother ahead of the nation’s second group stage match against Uruguay this Sunday. The 40-year-old shot-stopper, who earned player-of-the-match honors after making seven game-changing saves to block Spain’s relentless attacks, captured global attention when he opened up about his mother’s absence from the tournament following the match on Monday. After decades of chasing his World Cup dream, Vozinha shared that his mother could not travel to the United States to watch him play because the high cost of the required visa put the trip out of their reach.

    Vozinha, who became the oldest player ever to debut in a nation’s first ever World Cup match at 40 years and 12 days old, spoke emotionally about the loss of his grandparents, who raised him and died before they could see him reach football’s biggest stage. “I cried because I grew up with my grandparents,” he told reporters after the Spain draw. “Unfortunately, they were not here. They died a few years before. They were everything to me, everything in my life. And also because of my mum. She didn’t manage to be here because of the visa. Because of the money you have to pay for the visa, we didn’t manage it in time. I would like her to be here.”

    That public comment sparked swift action from US political leaders, who moved quickly to resolve the barrier. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, a Brooklyn-based Congressman, announced on social media platform X that the visa fees have been fully waived, and logistics are already underway to bring Vozinha’s mother to Miami for the upcoming Uruguay match. “No mother should miss the chance to see her child make history,” Jeffries said. He confirmed that he had coordinated with Secretary of State Marco Rubio to urge the State Department to use its authority to clear the way for Vozinha’s mother’s travel. “It is a privilege to announce that Vozinha’s mom will be able to secure a visa in time to attend the game this Sunday against Uruguay. All fees have been waived consistent with official policy. Travel arrangements are now being made for mother and son to reunite in Miami. I thank Secretary Rubio, US State Department officials, the government of Cape Verde and Fifa for working together to make this possible,” Jeffries added.

    A senior State Department official later confirmed the process is moving forward, saying, “We can confirm our visa team in Praia is in close touch with her and providing the needed services.” The high visa cost stems from a US policy requiring citizens of five World Cup participating nations to pay a refundable £11,000 visa deposit, though match ticket holders were granted an exemption to the rule back in May.

    Vozinha’s road to the World Cup has been far from conventional. He only turned professional at the relatively late age of 25 in 2012, and at one point considered stepping away from the Cape Verde national team before pushing on to pursue his lifelong dream of reaching the World Cup. Across his decades-long career, he has played club football across Europe and Africa, with stints in Slovakia, Angola, Moldova, and Cyprus, before landing his current role with Chaves in Portugal’s second-tier league. He has earned 91 caps for Cape Verde, and his heroics against Spain have turned him into a global cult hero, attracting millions of new followers on social media in the days since the historic draw.

    Cape Verde is competing in its first ever World Cup, and sits in Group H alongside Spain, Uruguay, and Saudi Arabia. Following Sunday’s clash with Uruguay, the African side will round out group play against Saudi Arabia on June 27.

  • Equatorial Guinea government resigns after missing targets, vice president says

    Equatorial Guinea government resigns after missing targets, vice president says

    In a sudden political shakeup in the Central African oil-rich nation of Equatorial Guinea, the full national cabinet has stepped down after an internal review found the administration delivered only 10 percent of its stated policy and development targets, Vice President Teodoro Nguema Obiang Mangue has confirmed.

    Obiang Mangue, the son of long-ruling President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, announced Tuesday that Prime Minister Manuel Osa Nsue Nsuga formally tendered the collective resignation of all cabinet ministers after the government fell drastically short of pre-agreed performance benchmarks. In an official statement published to the social platform X, the vice president noted that the administration’s delivery rate fell dramatically short of public expectations and the official commitments the government made when it took office. He did not, however, provide details on how the 10 percent achievement metric was calculated.

    The ruling Democratic Party of Equatorial Guinea (PDGE) has pinpointed the core issues that prompted the mass resignation: entrenched corruption across government agencies, persistent delays in key public development projects, and a years-long failure to advance economic diversification away from the country’s overwhelming dependence on oil exports. The party added that President Obiang Nguema Mbasogo himself expressed deep dissatisfaction with the sitting government’s overall performance.

    A new full cabinet is expected to be named and sworn in within the coming days, but political analysts widely note the reshuffle is unlikely to shift the country’s long-standing balance of power. President Obiang Nguema Mbasogo, who has held the presidency since 1979, is the longest-serving sitting head of state on the African continent, and maintains near-total control over the national political system, holding the sole authority to appoint all members of government.

    Dissent is effectively nonexistent in Equatorial Guinea, according to international human rights monitors. Rights advocacy organizations and the U.S. State Department have repeatedly accused the country’s ruling establishment of arbitrary detention, torture, and extrajudicial killing of political opponents and activists who challenge government policy. The country is also one of 10 African nations that entered into widely criticized deportation agreements with the former Trump U.S. administration, under which it accepts third-country asylum seekers deported from the United States.