Global Pulse

博客

  • International court tells BBC of breakthrough in Sudan war crimes probe

    International court tells BBC of breakthrough in Sudan war crimes probe

    Two decades after the International Criminal Court (ICC) first opened investigations into widespread atrocities in Sudan’s Darfur region, the court’s top deputy has announced a major investigative breakthrough: concrete evidence tying senior leaders of Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF) to war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the group’s violent 2024 seizure of key Darfur cities.

    Deputy ICC Chief Prosecutor Nazhat Shameem Khan shared the update in an interview with the BBC, following a recent visit to refugee camps in eastern Chad that host hundreds of thousands of people displaced by Sudan’s 27-month-long internal conflict. During her trip, Khan collected firsthand testimonies from survivors who fled the siege and takeover of el-Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, one of the deadliest chapters of the ongoing war between the RSF and Sudan’s regular armed forces.

    According to United Nations estimates, more than 6,000 civilians were killed during the RSF’s October 2024 offensive to capture el-Fasher, forcing tens of thousands of residents to flee their homes to neighboring Chad and other safe regions. UN investigators have previously stated that the violence in el-Fasher bears the clear “hallmarks of genocide,” with consistent allegations that the Arab-majority RSF has deliberately targeted non-Arab ethnic communities in Darfur — a pattern of violence that mirrors atrocities committed in the region in the early 2000s. A separate, equally brutal massacre of civilians is also alleged to have been carried out by RSF fighters in the West Darfur capital of el-Geneina.

    Khan confirmed that the court’s years-long investigation into these new atrocities has crossed a key threshold. “We have now found concrete evidence that links what is happening on the ground through linkage evidence to specific persons in leadership mode,” she told reporters, adding that “it may take time for justice to develop, to be brought to the court, but we will get there.” She also confirmed that the evidence gathered so far links RSF leaders not only to war crimes, but to crimes against humanity as well. While the court has not announced a timeline for when formal charges will be filed, Khan emphasized that investigative progress has been substantial. “We cannot say how quickly or how long it’s going to take,” she said. “But we can say that progress has been significant and that we have achieved a breakthrough.”

    The RSF has repeatedly pushed back against the allegations. The group has denied that it carried out widespread ethnically motivated killings across Darfur, claiming that the scale of atrocities has been greatly exaggerated by international observers. RSF representatives have acknowledged that isolated violations may have occurred during the el-Fasher campaign, and say that an internal probe into alleged abuses ordered by RSF leader Gen Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo shortly after the city’s capture remains ongoing.

    Khan noted that the patterns of violence observed in the latest outbreak of fighting in Darfur match exactly the patterns the ICC documented during its investigations into atrocities committed in the region in the 2000s, when the court first received a referral for the Darfur case from the UN Security Council. The current investigation draws on multiple streams of corroborating evidence, including survivor witness accounts, video and photographic documentation of atrocities, and forensic evidence.

    This is not the ICC’s first interaction with senior figures linked to Darfur atrocities. Over the course of 20 years of investigations, the court has secured seven arrest warrants and opened six separate cases against alleged perpetrators. The most high-profile defendant is former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, who was ousted from power in a 2019 coup and remains in Sudanese custody, evading transfer to The Hague decades after the ICC issued his arrest warrant. Four other suspects also remain at large with active arrest warrants. In 2024, the court convicted Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-Al-Rahman, a senior former leader of the Janjaweed militia, on 27 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed between 2003 and 2004, sentencing him to 20 years in prison. The Janjaweed, a pro-government militia that targeted non-Arab civilians in 2000s Darfur, is the direct predecessor organization to the modern RSF, which was built from former Janjaweed factions.

    Sudan’s ongoing civil conflict, which erupted in April 2023, grew out of a power struggle between the Sudanese Army, led by Gen Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the RSF, led by Dagalo. The conflict has displaced millions of people across the country and killed tens of thousands, with Darfur emerging as one of the worst-affected regions. The Hague-based ICC, the world’s only permanent international court with a mandate to prosecute genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, has maintained its investigation into Darfur atrocities through the latest conflict, as it continues to pursue accountability for crimes committed across more than two decades of violence in the region.

  • It was ‘love at first sight’ with their adopted baby. Then they were told he may have been trafficked

    It was ‘love at first sight’ with their adopted baby. Then they were told he may have been trafficked

    For Singaporean couple David and Ally — who asked the BBC to use pseudonyms to protect their case — the journey to parenthood ended in joy, only to be upended years later by a sprawling cross-border human trafficking investigation that now threatens to tear their family apart.

    After years of struggling with infertility and multiple devastating miscarriages, the couple turned to international adoption when domestic adoption waiting lists left them waiting years for a child. Like roughly two-thirds of adoptive families in Singapore, they looked to neighboring Indonesia, working with a local agency that specialized in placing Indonesian infants with Singaporean parents. Within weeks, they connected with an infant named Marcus over a video call, and David says he felt an immediate connection: “It was love at first sight.”

    The couple paid tens of thousands of dollars in fees, which they were told covered legal costs, agency services, infant care expenses, and a nominal token payment to Marcus’s biological parents. A few months later, Marcus arrived in Singapore, and his adoption was quickly approved by Singaporean authorities. The couple’s next step was applying for citizenship, a process they expected to go smoothly after all required checks had been completed. Instead, immigration officials suspended their application and informed them Marcus was likely one of at least 20 infants trafficked illegally from Indonesia to Singapore for adoption.

    The revelation came after Indonesian authorities broke up a major trafficking ring centered in West Java, where 19 people — most of them women — are currently on trial for their alleged roles in the scheme. Prosecutors accuse the ring, led by Indonesian woman Lie Siu Luan, of sourcing at least 20 infants from vulnerable biological parents, forging fake adoption and birth documents, and smuggling the babies to Singapore for thousands of dollars per child. Court documents reveal Lie admitted supplying infants to Singaporean contacts for at least S$17,000 (US$13,000) each, and coordinated a network of brokers who recruited expecting parents on social media, nannies to care for infants before transfer, and document forgers to create fake legal paperwork. In one documented case, a broker posed as a prospective adopter to trick an unemployed, bankrupt father into giving up his newborn son for a cash payment.

    Indonesian law defines the purchase and cross-border transfer of a child for exploitation as human trafficking, and the ring stands accused of bypassing the country’s strict formal transnational adoption processes entirely. Prosecutors are seeking prison sentences of between five and 10 years for all 19 defendants.

    The BBC’s independent investigation confirmed Marcus is indeed listed as one of the trafficked infants in Indonesian court documents, and the fake adoption paperwork lists one of the defendants on trial as his biological mother. The Singaporean adoption agency that connected David and Ally to Marcus is the same agency identified by Interpol’s Indonesian branch as linked to the ring, and remains a registered active business in Singapore; the BBC has not received a response to multiple requests for comment from the agency’s owner.

    The case has sparked urgent questions about how Singapore — a country renowned for its strict regulatory controls and rigorous border screening — failed to detect the illegal trafficking ring and formally approved multiple adoptions arranged by the syndicate. Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs has declined to comment on ongoing investigations into the agency and alleged Singaporean co-conspirators, citing active Indonesian court proceedings, and confirmed that the Ministry of Home Affairs and Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) are cooperating with Indonesian authorities to support the investigation.

    Lawmakers have raised repeated questions about the case in Singapore’s parliament, noting that the adoptions were approved on the recommendation of government officials, and that the adoptive parents are innocent parties who followed all legal requirements to the letter. However, the MSF has pushed back, arguing that adoption agencies bear primary responsibility for verifying the legitimacy of child origins and conducting rigorous background checks, and that adoptive parents also share a duty of due diligence.

    David and Ally reject this argument, saying they had no reason to suspect any wrongdoing as first-time adoptive parents who relied on government-approved vetting processes. “The officials are the experts on this, to see whether this is legitimate. They deal with so many adoptions, day in day out. Not us,” Ally told the BBC. The MSF has declined to answer questions about how it conducts vetting for foreign adoptions, but has confirmed it is providing support to affected families, processing of citizenship applications has been delayed, and it will launch a full review of Singapore’s international adoption procedures.

    The case also lays bare a growing child trafficking crisis across Indonesia, where official data shows the number of trafficked young children nearly tripled between 2021 and 2024, rising from 27 reported cases to 70. Child rights activists stress this is almost certainly an undercount, as many cases go unreported. The West Java ring is just one of at least seven large baby trafficking syndicates dismantled by Indonesian authorities in recent years; another syndicate based in Yogyakarta was found to have handled at least 66 infants.

    Traffickers exploit systemic gaps and deep-rooted social challenges in Indonesia to operate, activists say. Many biological parents who give up their infants do so out of extreme poverty, while others are coerced by traffickers. Cultural stigma around children born out of wedlock, limited access to social safety nets, and a lack of formal, safe facilities for parents to surrender unwanted children — such as the “baby boxes” common in many other countries — have created a vacuum that unregulated black market trafficking fills. Traffickers often frame their operations as a form of altruism helping struggling families, and many defendants, including Lie, claim they did not know their actions were illegal.

    “It’s not just a matter of finding out who’s selling the babies and then punishing them,” explained Eko Kriswanto, a West Java-based child rights activist. “The main problem is that children end up being treated as commodities. So what must be explored is the cause.” While Indonesia has strong legal protections for children against trafficking, inconsistent enforcement remains a major barrier, he added. Ai Rahmayanti, head of the independent Indonesian Commission for Child Protection, noted that the absence of formal safe surrender services has allowed traffickers to operate openly on social media, offering expecting parents cash and free medical care in exchange for their infants.

    As the West Java trial progresses, the most pressing unanswered question remains: what will become of the 12 children already believed to be in Singapore, including Marcus, all of whom have now spent most of their lives with their adoptive Singaporean families? Indonesian officials and activists have argued as a matter of principle that the children should be returned to their biological families in Indonesia, with one police official calling the issue a matter of “Indonesia’s national pride.” But child development experts warn that removing children from the only stable home they have ever known would cause severe, long-term harm.

    “The stress of multiple disruptions early in a child’s life could negatively affect brain development, emotional regulation, learning and attachment security,” explained Jeremy Heng, a senior clinical psychologist with the Singapore Children’s Society, adding that uprooting the children would increase their risk of lifelong trauma and mental health challenges. Indonesian foreign ministry spokesperson Yvonne Mewengkang told the BBC the country would prioritize “child protection based on the principle of the best interests of the child,” but neither Indonesian nor Singaporean authorities have publicly confirmed what final decision will be made about the children’s futures.

    For David and Ally, the months of waiting have been agonizing, with constant anxiety hanging over their family. “There’s always the thought that Marcus might be taken away,” David said. The couple have vowed to exhaust every legal option to keep Marcus, and if he is ordered to return to Indonesia, David says he will pursue a full, legal adoption from there. “I will not give up on him,” he said. “Any parent would fight till the end.”

  • Wealthy AI workers send San Francisco house prices soaring

    Wealthy AI workers send San Francisco house prices soaring

    In the tree-lined, upscale residential neighborhood of Duboce Triangle in San Francisco, a luxuriously renovated three-bedroom apartment carved from the top half of a historic Edwardian detached home has captured the attention of prospective homebuyers – not just for its nearly $3 million asking price, but for an unconventional payment term that encapsulates the city’s 2026 economic moment: the seller is open to accepting equity in leading AI firms OpenAI or Anthropic instead of full cash payment.

    A young OpenAI engineer, who relocated to San Francisco two years ago for his role at the AI giant and currently rents, left the viewing already planning to inquire with company leadership about the logistics of transferring his company stock to close the deal. “The price feels inflated, but I still want to buy it,” he explained after touring the property with his partner. This anecdote is far from an isolated case in today’s San Francisco, the global epicenter of the ongoing artificial intelligence revolution that has sent the city’s real estate market soaring to unprecedented heights.

    By March 2026, San Francisco reclaimed its decades-long title as the most expensive housing market in the United States, outstripping San Jose – the traditional heart of Silicon Valley located 50 miles to the south. Data from real estate analytics firm Redfin confirms that the city’s median home price rose 19% year-over-year in March, followed by consecutive monthly gains of 14.5% in April and 14.1% in May. As of May 2026, the city’s median sale price hit a record $1.76 million – a staggering contrast to the U.S. national median of just under $400,000, where national home prices grew by a modest 1.4% in March and 2% in both April and May.

    “Prices are just astronomical right now,” notes Daryl Fairweather, Redfin’s chief economist. “AI workers are sitting on massive new liquidity and they’re jumping straight into the housing market.” Industry analysts and economists broadly agree that the flood of new AI-generated wealth is the primary driver of the market’s red-hot growth, a conclusion backed by both market data and on-the-ground reports from local real estate agents. Fairweather points out that luxury zip codes across the Bay Area, including Duboce Triangle, have seen explosive price growth since OpenAI launched ChatGPT in late 2022 – a trend completely absent in U.S. metro areas with limited exposure to the AI industry. This boom has completely reversed the downtown San Francisco experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, when population declined and home prices softened for the first time in years.

    The scale of new wealth flowing to AI employees in the city is extraordinary even by Silicon Valley’s high standards. Beyond generous six- and seven-figure base salaries and signing bonuses, top employees at leading AI firms have been permitted to cash out portions of their vested stock options via limited secondary share sales. Recent reports confirm that more than 600 current and former OpenAI employees sold a combined $6.6 billion in shares last October alone, working out to an average of $11 million per seller. At Anthropic, the creator of the leading AI chatbot Claude, employees were similarly allowed to sell $6 billion in aggregate stock earlier this year. With both firms targeting full initial public offerings in the next 12 to 18 months, which will create thousands more employee millionaires, many market observers see no immediate end to the upward price trajectory.

    “Buyers going into bidding wars today already see these prices as future bargains,” says Rachel Swann, the listing agent for the Duboce Triangle three-bedroom. The property ultimately closed for $3.2 million – $200,000 above the original asking price – though details about whether AI stock was included in the transaction remain confidential.

    While most analysts agree the boom is being driven by AI wealth, some experts note that countervailing forces could cool the market over the longer term. Enrico Moretti, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley and a San Francisco resident, points out that even with the current boom, the city’s total population and employment levels are still below pre-pandemic peaks. Large-scale layoffs at established big tech firms like Meta have also cut into demand from some segments of the market. Moretti adds that as the AI industry matures from its fast-paced innovation phase to a more stable established industry, wage growth for new specialized workers is likely to slow, and the vast majority of wealth from the coming IPOs will flow to global institutional investors rather than local employees.

    Even so, local agents with decades of experience describe the current market as unlike anything they have ever seen. Matthew Goulden, a San Francisco realtor with more than 20 years of industry experience, says he first noticed a sharp uptick in AI-linked buyers starting in late 2025. The growth is not limited to luxury properties, he explains: it extends across every segment of the market, from entry-level one-bedroom condos to single-family suburban-style homes, and it is being felt in nearly every neighborhood across the city. Bidding wars are now the norm, with final sale prices regularly coming in millions of dollars above asking. Homes are selling faster than ever, and the share of all-cash offers – a rarity for most middle-class buyers – has surged, particularly at the upper end of the market.

    Fellow veteran agent Danielle Lazier adds that long-standing structural constraints have amplified the impact of AI’s new wealth. San Francisco has struggled with chronic housing supply shortages for decades: the city’s geographic size is limited, a large share of residents are renters, and strict zoning laws have slowed new residential construction for years, even as the city’s new pro-development mayor has pushed to streamline permitting. “With fixed supply and this sudden flood of new AI money, the impact on prices is going to be outsized,” she explains.

    For San Francisco residents, the AI boom has created a stark divide between those who benefit from the industry’s growth and those who are being priced out of the city they call home. Two local families with school-aged children, both speaking on condition of anonymity to protect their privacy, illustrate this gap. One family, a long-term renter in a popular family-friendly neighborhood, was able to purchase a home in the same neighborhood with an all-cash offer after one parent – an OpenAI employee – sold shares last October. The couple says they feel “conflicted and self-conscious” about relying on AI wealth to secure their home, noting “we’re not flashy people, we just took the opportunity we got.”

    The second family, with no ties to the AI or broader tech industry, was forced to leave San Francisco entirely to find an affordable home. They moved to a suburban town north of the city, where they bought a larger home with a pool and more land on a mortgage. While the family has adjusted to their new life, the mother says the shift has been difficult: her husband still commutes more than an hour each way to his senior government job in San Francisco, and they frequently wonder what life would have been like if they could have stayed. “We wouldn’t have left if we could afford to stay,” she says. “It’s frustrating to see all this new AI money pushing everyone else out.”

    For many, that tension defines the new San Francisco: a city at the forefront of a global technological revolution that is generating unprecedented wealth, but one that is increasingly out of reach for all but the most affluent workers tied to the booming AI industry.

  • Trump ‘immediately’ asking US Supreme Court to reconsider birthright citizenship case

    Trump ‘immediately’ asking US Supreme Court to reconsider birthright citizenship case

    A week after the U.S. Supreme Court delivered a major rebuke of his restrictive immigration policy by upholding the longstanding principle of birthright citizenship, former President Donald Trump has announced he will move forward immediately with a formal request for the high court to rehear the contentious case. The Supreme Court’s recent ruling rejected Trump’s executive order that aimed to roll back the 150-year-old citizenship guarantee established by the 14th Amendment.

    Under Supreme Court procedural rules, a party that loses a decision is permitted to submit a request for rehearing within 25 days of the ruling being issued. For such a request to be approved, a majority of the court’s nine sitting justices must vote in favor of granting a second hearing. While this procedural avenue is technically available, legal experts note that rehearings of already decided cases are extraordinarily rare in the court’s modern practice: the last time the high court agreed to revisit a concluded ruling was roughly six decades ago.

    Taking to social media on Wednesday to lay out his next move, Trump issued a stark and uncompromising criticism of the court’s decision. “This miscarriage of justice will destroy America if they don’t change their absolutely insane decision,” he wrote in his post.

    The 30 June ruling, which upheld birthright citizenship by a 6-3 vote, represented a significant setback to Trump’s longstanding immigration agenda, but it was widely celebrated by civil rights and immigrant advocacy organizations across the country. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts clarified that the 14th Amendment’s text guarantees citizenship at birth to all children born on U.S. soil, even those born to parents who are in the country unlawfully or only on a temporary, non-immigrant basis.

    Trump had argued in his executive order that the children of undocumented immigrants and temporary visa holders did not meet the 14th Amendment’s requirement of being “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” of the United States, and were therefore not eligible for birthright citizenship. Five justices, including Chief Justice Roberts, concluded that Trump’s executive order directly violated the 14th Amendment’s protections. Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued a separate concurring opinion, stating that he also found the order unlawful, but grounded his conclusion in violations of federal statute rather than the Constitution.

    In the immediate aftermath of the ruling, Trump already pledged to continue his campaign to end birthright citizenship through an alternative legislative route, which would require approval by both chambers of the U.S. Congress to move forward. Birthright citizenship has been a cornerstone of U.S. nationality law since 1868, when the 14th Amendment was ratified following the Civil War, and its legality has been repeatedly affirmed by Supreme Court rulings in the decades since.

  • Trump lavishes praise on ‘fantastic’ and ‘highly respected’ Sharaa

    Trump lavishes praise on ‘fantastic’ and ‘highly respected’ Sharaa

    On the sidelines of the NATO summit held in Ankara, Turkey, Wednesday marked a historic milestone in U.S.-Syria relations: former U.S. President Donald Trump offered unusually glowing public praise to Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, branding him a fantastic and highly respected global leader following their closed-door meeting.

    This high-profile encounter represents another major breakthrough for al-Sharaa, whose rapid political ascent on the international stage has unfolded at breakneck speed over the past 18 months. Just over a year ago, he was first introduced to Trump during a gathering in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. By November of that same year, he had stepped into the Oval Office to exchange diplomatic gifts with the U.S. president — a moment no Syrian leader, particularly one once labeled a terrorist by Washington, had achieved in decades.

    Turkey has been the primary architect of al-Sharaa’s rise to power since December 2024, with Ankara pursuing a clear geopolitical goal: establishing a friendly Syrian government in its neighboring country that falls firmly within Turkey’s regional sphere of influence. Trump’s quick diplomatic embrace of al-Sharaa has already emerged as one of the most consequential and eye-catching foreign policy shifts of his current term.

    Speaking directly to reporters while seated beside al-Sharaa, Trump doubled down on his positive assessment of the Syrian leader. “He’s done a really fantastic job as president. He’s unified the country in a very short period of time, I’d say like a year and a half, about a year and a half, and right from the beginning it was a real mess, very disjointed place, and he’s brought it together,” Trump said. He added, “He’s a strong person. He’s a great leader. He’s respected by everybody, including me, and we’re proud to have him.”

    Notably, Trump’s warm remarks toward al-Sharaa stand in sharp contrast to his consistently harsh rhetoric toward many of America’s long-standing traditional allies, most of whom are core members of the NATO alliance hosting this very summit. Trump has repeatedly scolded the leaders of major European powers including the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Spain, accusing them of weak leadership on defense policy and immigration. He has also launched public attacks on Denmark over the country’s claim of sovereignty over Greenland, and is currently engaged in a very public, escalating feud with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni. Since March, he has further ramped up critical rhetoric targeting any nations that have refused to join his hardline campaign against Iran.

    Just 14 months ago, al-Sharaa — who once had a $10 million U.S. bounty placed on his head over his former extremist ties — saw Trump announce the historic lifting of crippling economic sanctions on Syria. That landmark policy shift was largely orchestrated by Saudi Arabia, with Gulf states now committing the bulk of funding needed to rebuild Syria’s war-ravaged infrastructure and institutions.

    For al-Sharaa, the top remaining diplomatic priority is securing two key wins: removing Syria from the U.S. State Sponsors of Terrorism (SST) blacklist and opening the door to broad international investment in the country. When asked about this goal Wednesday, Trump turned to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio before signaling his clear support for the move, saying “I think we should. Yeah. We’re proud of the job he’s doing. Syria has become very stable.”

    The meeting also touched on Trump’s controversial proposal from last month that suggested Syria could take the lead on disarming the Iran-aligned militant group Hezbollah in neighboring Lebanon. Asked about the plan Wednesday, Trump told reporters, “They could help. We’ll find out. I think we’re making a lot of progress.”

    While al-Sharaa had previously publicly stated that the proposal was not a feasible option, his foreign minister Asaad al-Shaibani made a high-profile visit to Lebanon last week to meet with Nabih Berri, parliament speaker and leader of the Amal Movement — Hezbollah’s closest political ally. A senior Lebanese official who participated in talks during al-Shaibani’s visit told Middle East Eye that the trip was coordinated with Lebanese authorities to send a deliberate, calming message about Syria’s regional intentions. The official noted, “The visit was very much needed to reassure Lebanon and ease concerns about the possibility of a military intervention pushed by the United States.”

  • Iran to bury Khamenei in hometown as US ramps up strikes

    Iran to bury Khamenei in hometown as US ramps up strikes

    As Iran enters the final phase of national mourning for its long-serving supreme leader Ali Khamenei, the country is bracing for a historic burial ceremony in his northeastern hometown of Mashhad on Thursday, even as new U.S. military strikes have sent regional tensions soaring and reignited fears of a full-scale escalation of the ongoing Middle East conflict.

    Khamenei, who led the Islamic Republic of Iran for 34 years starting in 1989, was killed on February 28, the opening day of coordinated U.S.-Israeli strikes that launched the current war. The 86-year-old leader died alongside multiple family members and senior government officials in an Israeli airstrike, and his remains have traveled a multi-city, multi-day funeral route that has drawn millions of mourners across Iran and neighboring Iraq.

    After three days of public lying-in-state in the capital Tehran, Khamenei’s casket was moved first to the holy clerical city of Qom on Tuesday, then to the Iraqi Shia holy sites of Najaf and Karbala for a mass procession on Wednesday. Delays from the Iraq ceremony forced organizers to push back the start of Thursday’s burial events from 6:00 a.m. local time to 2:00 p.m., according to local Iranian media. By Thursday evening, Khamenei will be laid to rest in the Shrine of Imam Reza, Iran’s most sacred Shia religious site, where the 8th Shia Imam— the only one of the 12 principal Shia imams buried in modern Iran— is entombed. He will be buried alongside four family members killed in the same February 28 strike: his infant granddaughter, daughter, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law Zahra Haddad Adel, wife of Khamenei’s son and designated successor Mojtaba Khamenei.

    Per the late leader’s own pre-stated wishes, conveyed to state media by his chief of staff Mohammad Mohammadi-Golpaygani, Mashhad was selected as his final resting place. The Shrine of Imam Reza has hosted the burials of dozens of prominent Iranian figures across centuries, including former monarchs and ex-president Ebrahim Raisi. Mashhad governor Hassan Hosseini told state television that authorities expect up to 15 million mourners to gather for the burial, a turnout that the ruling Islamic Republic hopes will project national unity and domestic strength just six months after a harsh government crackdown on widespread anti-government protests, and weeks after the outbreak of war.

    All eyes remain on Mojtaba Khamenei, the late leader’s confirmed successor, who has not yet made any public appearance since the strike that killed his father. Multiple reports indicate he was injured in the same attack that killed Khamenei and his family members, leaving a period of political uncertainty hanging over the country even as the funeral proceeds.

    The somber occasion of the national burial has been overshadowed by a sharp new escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States. Just as the funeral entered its final day, the U.S. launched new strikes on Iranian coastal targets, in retaliation for recent Iranian attacks on commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic global oil chokepoint that has been a core point of contention between Tehran and Washington for decades.

    U.S. Central Command confirmed the strikes, stating they were intended to degrade Iranian military capabilities to threaten commercial navigation in the strait. U.S. President Donald Trump, who earlier declared the fragile U.S.-Iran ceasefire that paused five weeks of intense hostilities was over, issued a stark warning Thursday: if Iran continues targeting vessels in the waterway, he promised “much worse” consequences to come. Tehran has already responded to the new U.S. strikes by saying it launched attacks on U.S. military bases stationed in Bahrain and Kuwait, raising the stakes of a rapid return to full-scale conflict. Global leaders have issued widespread calls for restraint from both sides, as the region teeters on the edge of a wider war that could disrupt global energy supplies and destabilize the entire Middle East.

  • Trump orders new strikes on Iran over attacks on shipping in Hormuz

    Trump orders new strikes on Iran over attacks on shipping in Hormuz

    Escalating tensions around the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz have erupted into open conflict after US President Donald Trump ordered a new wave of military strikes against Iran on Wednesday, marking a major breakdown of a recently agreed ceasefire between the two nations.

    The retaliatory action came in response to a series of attacks launched by Iranian forces on commercial shipping vessels passing through the strait, a chokepoint that carries roughly one-fifth of the world’s total oil and liquefied natural gas supplies. In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump made clear the strikes were punishment for Tehran’s recent actions, warning that further aggression would draw even harsher retaliation.

    “This is in retribution for yesterday’s bombing of ships by Iran. If it happens again, it will get much worse!” Trump wrote. Speaking later to reporters at a NATO summit held in Ankara, the president reinforced the message, saying, “We’re gonna hit ’em hard tonight. They violate the agreement every day.”

    Despite the aggressive military posture, Trump struck a more conciliatory tone early Wednesday, stating that he expected the latest flare-up of hostilities to conclude rapidly and leaving open the possibility of future diplomatic negotiations with Iran.

    Within hours of the strike order, Iran’s official state news agency IRNA reported multiple explosions across coastal areas in the country’s southern region. Warplane activity was detected over Kish Island, with blasts hitting the major port cities of Bandar Abbas, Konarak and Chabahar. Partial power outages were reported in parts of Chabahar following the strikes.

    US Central Command (CENTCOM), which oversees American military operations in the Middle East, confirmed the new wave of strikes in a post on X, noting that the action was designed to weaken Iran’s capacity to disrupt global shipping through the strait. “The United States is holding Iran accountable for recent unjustified aggression against commercial shipping,” CENTCOM said.

    The current crisis traces its roots to late February, when a joint US-Israeli strike killed Iran’s long-time supreme leader Ali Khamenei, whose funeral is scheduled for Thursday in his hometown of Mashhad. In the aftermath of that attack, Iran moved to assert full control over the Strait of Hormuz, announcing it would impose transit fees on commercial vessels and threatening to target any shipping that did not follow Iran’s authorized routes.

    Over the past week, Iranian forces have attacked at least three commercial ships near the strait, triggering large-scale US strikes on dozens of Iranian targets on Tuesday. Iran responded with retaliatory missile and drone attacks on American military facilities hosted by US allies Kuwait and Bahrain. A US military official confirmed to AFP on Wednesday that no American personnel were killed and no major infrastructure damage was sustained in the Iranian counterattacks, adding that most incoming projectiles were intercepted before reaching their targets.

    Initial casualty reports from the first wave of strikes indicate eight Iranian military personnel were killed, according to Iranian state television. CENTCOM reported that its strikes hit more than 80 targets, including Iranian air defense systems, coastal radar installations and 60 small boats operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). The IRGC in turn claims it hit dozens of US military sites in Kuwait and Bahrain. Kuwait confirmed it intercepted two ballistic missiles and 13 incoming drones, while Iran says its forces also targeted the US-run Sheikh Isa Air Base in Bahrain.

    News of the collapsed ceasefire and new strikes sent global energy markets into turmoil, with oil prices jumping 8% in immediate trading following Trump’s announcement that the truce was over.

    The outbreak of renewed hostilities has drawn urgent calls for de-escalation from global leaders and international bodies. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres was among the first to issue a public appeal, urging all sides to “exercise maximum restraint.” Pakistan, one of the key mediators that helped broker the earlier ceasefire between Washington and Tehran, echoed Guterres’ call for calm. Qatari mediators, who also played a central role in earlier talks, have reaffirmed their commitment to finding a diplomatic solution, with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Qatar’s prime minister emphasizing the importance of diplomatic channels in a phone call Wednesday.

    The escalating conflict has taken a heavy human toll on civilians and commercial mariners alike. Nawal Saad, a civil servant based in Bahrain, summed up widespread regional anxiety, saying, “the spectre of war is looming once more, and I do not want to go through that experience of fear and anxiety again.”

    Oman, which has long maintained neutrality as a mediator in the conflict and borders the strait opposite Iran, condemned the targeting of both shipping vessels and Gulf states, though it stopped short of directly blaming Iran. The Omani government previously proposed a temporary transit corridor hugging its coastline to avoid the most high-risk areas near Iranian waters, but Iran has refused to allow vessels to use that route. Washington has repeatedly insisted on unfettered free passage for all commercial shipping through the strait, a position that directly clashes with Tehran’s demand for transit fees and route controls.

    Even before the latest collapse of the ceasefire, the ongoing crisis had left thousands of seafarers stranded in the area. International Maritime Organization Secretary-General Arsenio Dominguez confirmed Wednesday that nearly 6,000 commercial seafarers remain stuck on vessels stuck in the region, months after hostilities first broke out. While maritime traffic had tentatively resumed after the ceasefire was signed last month, the latest escalation has thrown any return to normal shipping into serious doubt.

  • India is adding biofuels to petrol – but many drivers are unhappy

    India is adding biofuels to petrol – but many drivers are unhappy

    India’s ambitious push to roll out a 20% ethanol-blended petrol standard, E20, across all national fuel stations has sparked sharp public pushback, igniting a heated debate over the rapidity of the energy transition, vehicle compatibility, and consumer rights. As the world’s third-largest car market and the biggest global market for two-wheelers, India launched the policy to cut reliance on costly crude oil imports, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and support domestic agricultural sectors that produce the sugarcane and maize used to make ethanol. The accelerated transition, however, has left millions of vehicle owners grappling with unanticipated costs and uncertainty.

    India first began integrating ethanol into petrol supplies in the mid-2000s, gradually increasing the blend ratio to 10% over nearly two decades. In April 2025, the government moved forward five years on its original timeline to mandate E20 as the default petrol available at all pumps, replacing the 10% blend that 75% of the country’s on-road vehicles were engineered to accommodate. While unblended petrol remains an option for consumers, it is priced 40% to 50% higher than E20 depending on the state, and many drivers remain unaware they can request the non-blended alternative.

    In recent months, consumer frustration has boiled over into public protest and a flood of complaints on social media. Thousands of drivers have reported issues including increased engine wear, reduced vehicle performance, and noticeably lower fuel efficiency. Last week, a mass protest organized by an entrepreneur aligned with the opposition Congress party drew dozens of motorists in central Delhi, where demonstrators accused the national government of unilaterally imposing the new fuel standard without giving consumers a viable choice or sufficient preparation time.

    The administration of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has rejected these complaints, framing them as misleading misinformation spread across social platforms. In an official statement released last month, the government asserted that E20 was rolled out only after years of extensive testing and poses no risk of engine damage. Officials have also launched a public outreach campaign to debunk popular myths about the blend and highlight its long-term environmental and economic benefits, and enlisted major domestic and international automakers to back their claims.

    In an unusual display of coordinated support for the policy, six leading automakers appeared alongside government officials at a recent press conference to defend E20’s safety. Rahul Bharti, senior corporate affairs executive at Maruti Suzuki, India’s largest car manufacturer, noted that the company had serviced more than 15 million older, non-E20-compliant vehicles and found no evidence of widespread fuel-related mechanical faults. Automakers did acknowledge that E20 delivers a 3% to 3.5% drop in fuel efficiency compared to 10% blended petrol, a consequence of ethanol’s lower energy density. Independent analysts, however, estimate the actual reduction in fuel economy ranges much higher, between 4% and 12%.

    From a policy perspective, the E20 mandate aligns with India’s broader strategic goals: cutting a $100 billion-plus annual crude oil import bill, boosting farm incomes by creating new demand for food crops, and reducing carbon emissions to meet the country’s net-zero climate targets. Government data indicates the policy has already delivered measurable progress on these targets, and recent global oil market volatility sparked by the Iran conflict has only strengthened the government’s case for domestic fuel production. India is not alone in this shift: other major oil-importing Asian nations including Indonesia and Vietnam are also moving quickly to expand ethanol blending and flex-fuel vehicle programs.

    Critics point to Brazil, the global gold standard for ethanol integration that Indian officials frequently cite as a model, to argue that New Delhi has skipped a critical step in the transition. Brazil built its ethanol-compatible vehicle fleet gradually over four decades before mandating higher blend ratios, and gives consumers a clear choice between multiple fuel options at competitive prices. By contrast, India compressed its shift from a 10% to 20% mandatory blend into just three years, moving to the new standard five years ahead of its original 2030 target.

    Industry analysts confirm that the vast majority of India’s active vehicle fleet is not engineered to handle the higher ethanol content. Puneet Gupta, director of automotive research firm Mobility Global, estimates that more than 75% of on-road vehicles are not E20-compliant. A 2024 analysis by the Thomson Reuters Foundation reached the same conclusion, finding that only 20% of petrol vehicles sold in India over the past 15 years were designed to accommodate a 20% ethanol blend.

    Interviews with mechanics and service centre operators across major Indian cities paint a mixed picture of on-the-ground impacts. While some service technicians report no unusual increase in fuel-related issues, others have documented a rise in problems they link directly to higher ethanol levels. Mohammed Arif, a Mumbai-based motorcycle mechanic, told reporters he has seen a steady increase in older bikes brought in for carburettor cleaning to remove sticky fuel residue buildup, a problem he attributes to E20. The extra maintenance adds recurring costs for vehicle owners, he noted. Basil Jacob, who runs a car service centre in Mumbai, added that customers consistently report lower fuel mileage, forcing them to refuel more often even as E20 is priced the same as the previous 10% blend at the pump. “They’re paying the same per litre but getting fewer kilometres,” Jacob explained.

    Some industry experts warn that the most significant impacts may be slow to emerge, developing gradually over thousands of kilometres of use. Hormazd Sorabjee, editor of *Autocar India*, explained that ethanol naturally absorbs moisture, which can separate from fuel over time and cause corrosion in fuel delivery systems after 10,000 to 20,000 kilometres of use. Ethanol can also loosen built-up carbon deposits in older engines, which can clog fuel pumps and injectors and lead to accelerated component wear. Sorabjee noted that well-maintained vehicles may avoid major issues, and that some social media concerns are overstated, but acknowledged that long-term incremental costs are likely for owners of non-compliant vehicles.

    A 2025 survey of more than 44,000 owners of pre-2023 petrol vehicles conducted by community platform LocalCircles found a sharp increase in drivers reporting unusual wear and tear and unexpected repair needs. To date, however, no independent public scientific study has confirmed either consumer claims of widespread damage or government and automaker assertions that extensive testing proves E20 is safe for all vehicles. This evidence gap has only deepened public confusion and distrust.

    “If you’re going to force this on the public, you should be able to prove it’s safe,” a senior anonymous industry expert told reporters, adding that given the confirmed drop in fuel efficiency, E20 should be priced lower than standard petrol and remain optional rather than mandatory.

    The debate is further complicated by widespread uncertainty over vehicle warranty and insurance coverage for fuel-related damage. It remains unclear whether automakers will honour warranty claims for fuel system failures in non-compliant vehicles that use E20, and insurance coverage rules remain equally muddled. Last month, private insurer ICICI Lombard sparked public outcry after a blog post suggested that using E20 in a non-compliant vehicle could be considered driver negligence and lead to claim denial. The insurer quickly reversed its position, confirming that motor policies remain valid for E20 use, but experts note that most policies only cover accidental damage, not gradual wear and tear caused by fuel use.

    For India’s cost-conscious consumer market, where vehicle ownership represents a major long-term financial investment for most households, the uncertainty surrounding E20 has become a top everyday concern.

  • Children keep dying in a country that made huge progress on measles

    Children keep dying in a country that made huge progress on measles

    A preventable public health catastrophe has unfolded across Bangladesh over the past four months, leaving nearly 750 people – the vast majority of them young children – dead from measles, a highly contagious viral disease that was once nearly eliminated in the country. Frontline clinicians who have spent decades treating pediatric illnesses say they have never witnessed an outbreak of this scale, as overwhelmed hospitals stretch far beyond their capacity to care for the sick.

    Just a few months ago, Bangladesh stood as a public health success story. Before March 2026, the World Health Organization confirmed the country had made substantial progress toward full measles elimination, with national vaccination rates holding steady above 90% for years. That hard-won progress has dissolved almost overnight, following a cascade of political and public health disruptions that created what UNICEF officials describe as a “perfect storm” for a major outbreak.

    Official government data records nearly 750 confirmed and suspected measles deaths since mid-March, but UNICEF warns the true mortality toll is almost certainly higher. Systemic strains on the country’s overburdened health system, limited access to rural communities, and challenges with rapid data collection during a sudden surge have left many cases uncounted. On the ground at Mymensingh’s Medical College Hospital, the crisis is impossible to miss: the facility’s 32-room measles ward is holding nearly 130 patients, more than double its intended capacity. Dozens of families are forced to rest on blankets spread across hallways, with only the most critically ill patients able to secure a scarce hospital bed.

    Four-month-old Arafat was one of those severe cases. The infant required oxygen support, but his small frame could not hold the tubes securely, forcing clinicians to bandage and tape them in place. His parents traveled 10 hours across the country to reach the specialized hospital, after Arafat developed pneumonia and heart failure – common life-threatening complications of measles. By the time they arrived, Arafat was unresponsive, and his father vomited and fainted from stress during the grueling ambulance journey. The family had already exhausted their small savings on care, and were forced to borrow money from neighbors to cover treatment costs. Days after reporters visited the ward, Arafat died, becoming one of hundreds of children claimed by the outbreak. “I spent all my money, took loans, and tried my best to save my son. But everything is gone now,” his father Mohammad Alam Mia told reporters through tears.

    Arafat is far from alone. Official counts put total confirmed and suspected measles cases across Bangladesh at more than 120,000 since the surge began in mid-March, with the country still recording roughly 1,000 new suspected cases each day. For clinicians like pediatrician Dr Mohammed Golam Mawla, the crisis is deeply confusing: measles is easily prevented by highly effective vaccines, and the disease was fully under control in Bangladesh for years. “Why did this suddenly happen?” he asks.

    Miguel Mateos Muñoz, UNICEF’s Bangladesh spokesperson, says the outbreak stems from a confluence of overlapping factors. Political upheaval in 2024, when widespread student-led protests ousted long-time authoritarian Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, led to a major restructuring of public health procurement under the interim government led by Muhammad Yunus. UNICEF alleges the interim administration delayed routine measles vaccine orders while it explored new vendors and restructured how vaccine purchases were financed, despite repeated warnings from the agency that gaps could emerge. The current government, led by Prime Minister Tarique Rahman, confirms it inherited a significant vaccine shortage when it took office. Yunus declined interview requests, but his former top health ministry official denies any shortage, arguing that while UNICEF raised general concerns, there was no specific warning of an imminent large-scale measles outbreak. He added that UN and other international experts supported the competitive procurement process as a way to generate long-term cost savings for the country.

    Beyond procurement delays, Muñoz points to lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, which disrupted routine childhood vaccination schedules globally. Bangladesh has also not held a national mass measles-rubella vaccination campaign since 2020, and widespread population overcrowding combined with mass travel during the Eid holiday created ideal conditions for the airborne virus to spread rapidly.

    Bangladesh is not an isolated case. This year, the United Kingdom lost its official measles elimination status after a steady rise in cases, and the United States has also seen consistent growth in infections over recent years. In both countries, vaccination rates for children under five fall below the 95% threshold required to maintain herd immunity, allowing the virus to gain a foothold.

    The human cost of vaccine gaps is devastating for families across Bangladesh. Three hours outside the capital Dhaka, Mosammat Nila Akhter and her husband tried to get a measles vaccine for their 10-month-old daughter Maliha in February, but were told the clinic had no doses left. By late March, as the outbreak spread, Maliha developed pneumonia. When she was readmitted to hospital after a rash developed, there were no beds available. The family waited three hours at a second facility for a bed to open up, where Akhter says children with and without measles were forced to share overcrowded wards. Maliha’s fever would not break despite constant care, and when she needed an ICU bed, none could be found. The family traveled for hours in an ambulance looking for an available bed, as their daughter struggled to breathe. Three days after being admitted, Maliha died. “Who to blame?” Akhter asks through tears. “Should I blame the government because my child did not get the vaccine?”

    In response to the crisis, the Bangladeshi government and UNICEF launched an emergency mass vaccination campaign in high-risk regions in April, and have already inoculated more than 18.4 million children. Officials say reported cases and deaths have slowed from their peak, but the outbreak remains far from over. Health Minister Sardar Sakhawat Hossain acknowledges the strain on the health system, but argues that the current pressures are manageable given Bangladesh’s population of more than 170 million. “The accommodation facilities are comparatively low, but we have managed,” he says.

    Public health experts disagree. Mushtuq Husain, a leading Bangladeshi public health specialist, says the government has refused to acknowledge that the event is not a contained outbreak but a full-blown epidemic. He calls the official figures “the tip of the iceberg,” warning that many uncounted cases and deaths remain undetected in rural communities. UNICEF’s Muñoz echoes that assessment, noting that the work to contain the outbreak is far from finished. “It is still a grave situation,” Husain says. “It is unacceptable that every day children are dying, and thousands of people are being infected.” Public health experts globally warn that Bangladesh’s outbreak serves as a stark warning of how quickly years of progress in eliminating vaccine-preventable diseases can unravel when routine immunization coverage is interrupted.

  • Preacher launches legal challenge against UK government over IHRA antisemitism definition

    Preacher launches legal challenge against UK government over IHRA antisemitism definition

    A 76-year-old Methodist preacher and community organiser from Burnley, Lancashire, is preparing to make legal history as she launches the first ever formal legal challenge to the UK government’s deployment of the controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. The action comes after government officials pressured her longstanding interfaith charity to remove her from her trustee position over a 2023 Facebook post that labelled Israel an apartheid state.

    Bea Foster, a veteran Palestine solidarity activist who co-founded the anti-racist organisation Building Bridges Burnley (BBB) more than two decades ago, will argue in court that the UK government unlawfully penalised her for exercising her right to peaceful political expression on the Israel-Palestine conflict. Her legal team contends that the action against her violates three core fundamental rights: freedom of expression, freedom of association, and protection from unlawful discrimination.

    In an exclusive interview with Middle East Eye, Foster explained that her decision to pursue the legal battle stems from growing concerns that public and private institutions across the UK are misusing the IHRA definition to silence legitimate criticism of Israeli government policies toward Palestinians. “The IHRA definition is proved to be used to undermine our ability to hold Israel accountable for its actions against the Palestinian people,” Foster said. “Criticising the Israeli government is not saying you are antisemitic.”

    Adopted by the UK government and dozens of other national governments and global public bodies since its release in 2016, the IHRA definition includes 11 illustrative examples designed to guide authorities in identifying antisemitic speech and conduct. While supporters frame it as a critical practical tool to combat rising antisemitism, critics have long warned that its vague wording risks conflating legitimate critique of Israeli state policy with antisemitic hatred.

    Foster’s case is rooted in the fallout after BBB received the King’s Award for Voluntary Service (KAVS) – the UK’s highest honour for local community groups, equivalent to an MBE for voluntary organisations – in November 2024. Just four months later, the UK Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) issued an ultimatum: BBB would lose its award unless Foster and a second trustee stepped down, following antisemitism allegations published in the *Jewish Chronicle* in February 2025.

    The newspaper’s report linked BBB to antisemitism by highlighting Foster’s participation in pro-ceasefire protests during the 2023-2025 Gaza war and referencing her viral Facebook post, which read: “APARTHEID – IT WASN’T OKAY IN SOUTH AFRICA. IT WASN’T OKAY IN NAZI GERMANY. WHY IS IT OKAY IN PALESTINE?” Following the publication, DCMS ordered a formal investigation through the Lancashire Lieutenancy, the body responsible for administering the KAVS in the county. Foster says she was never notified of the investigation or given any opportunity to respond to the claims against her.

    Foster ultimately stepped down reluctantly in 2025 to protect BBB’s award and the work of hundreds of volunteers who had built the organisation over decades. In her resignation letter, she rejected the antisemitism allegations outright. In March 2025, DCMS went a step further, barring Foster from any involvement with BBB for a three-year period, a decision that was formally approved on 10 March. In response to pre-litigation correspondence from Foster’s legal team in September 2025, DCMS confirmed it had classified Foster’s post as antisemitic under one of IHRA’s illustrative examples – specifically, the example that prohibits comparing contemporary Israeli policy to that of Nazi Germany.

    Foster’s legal team, led by the European Legal Support Centre with backing from the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), argues that the post constitutes protected political speech under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, incorporated into UK law via the Human Rights Act 1998. The claim, which will name current Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy as the defendant, asserts that describing Israel’s treatment of Palestinians as apartheid is not inherently antisemitic, and that DCMS’s use of the IHRA definition to penalise Foster was unlawful.

    PSC Deputy Director Ryvka Barnard said the government’s action against Foster is a clear demonstration of the dangers posed by the IHRA definition. “The government’s discriminatory action against Bea Foster is a clear example of how the IHRA definition is used to try to punish people who stand up for Palestinian rights,” Barnard said. “Opposing the use of the IHRA definition is essential to protecting our fundamental human rights and to ensuring that solidarity with the Palestinian people cannot be silenced. If Bea wins her case, it could set a positive precedent to show that the IHRA [definition of antisemitism] in and of itself is not fit for purpose and should not be used again.”

    A lifelong community organiser and Methodist preacher, Foster’s commitment to Palestinian justice began after her retirement, when she took a religious pilgrimage to the Holy Land expecting to walk in the footsteps of Jesus. Instead, she witnessed first-hand what she describes as systemic injustice and oppression against Palestinian civilians, and has returned repeatedly to the region ever since, most recently joining a Christian delegation to support Palestinian olive harvest farmers.

    Reflecting on the impact of losing her role at the organisation she helped build, Foster told Middle East Eye: “I’m not trying to make a drama out of it, but I was heartbroken. Absolutely heartbroken. Twenty years of my life. The work is part of me. It’s in my DNA. It’s about justice, equality, dignity and treating people fairly.”

    She added that her viral Facebook post reflected only what she had observed during her travels. “When I shared that post about apartheid, it reflected what I have seen with my own eyes at every level of Palestinian society,” she said. “Their lives are restricted in every way. They face injustice at every level. I shared it because, to me, it was the truth as I had witnessed it.”

    While Foster says she deeply regrets losing her position at BBB, she stands by her decision to speak out. “I regret losing Building Bridges very much. It was a huge part of my life and I miss it deeply. But I don’t regret standing up for the Palestinian people, because whatever has happened to me is nothing compared to what they have to live through every day,” she said.

    Foster has two core goals for the legal challenge: first, to clear her name of the antisemitism label, which she says has caused profound personal distress, and second, to spark a broader national conversation about justice and equal rights in Israel-Palestine. “Living with the label of antisemitism has been incredibly difficult. I know it isn’t true, but knowing that’s what people may think of me is very hard,” she said. Ultimately, she added, her goal is to advance a future of equal rights and peace for all people in the region. “Palestinians simply want what you and I have: the freedom to move, to make decisions, to study, to work, to build lives and have opportunities without restrictions. Ultimately, I want peace in that land where everyone has equal rights and is treated with dignity and respect. But before peace can come, there has to be justice.”

    As of publication, neither DCMS nor BBB had responded to Middle East Eye’s request for comment.