标签: Asia

亚洲

  • China’s internet got so mad about a celebrity’s ‘bad’ singing, her concert was cancelled

    China’s internet got so mad about a celebrity’s ‘bad’ singing, her concert was cancelled

    For celebrities working in China’s fast-paced entertainment industry, fame can be a double-edged sword that elevates careers one moment and brings them crashing down the next. Veteran Chinese television host Xie Na learned this harsh lesson recently, when her highly anticipated first nationwide singing tour was derailed by widespread public backlash and official criticism, resulting in the abrupt cancellation of its opening Beijing show.

    Xie Na has been a household name in Chinese entertainment for more than 20 years, best known for her two-decade run as a core cast member of *Happy Camp*, one of China’s most beloved long-running variety shows. After starting her career with small acting roles, her outgoing, energetic personality and sharp comedic timing turned her into one of the country’s most recognizable media personalities. But for years, she held an unfulfilled personal goal: to build a career as a professional singer.

    In April, she made that dream public in a post on Chinese social platform Weibo, announcing her first run of solo concerts would kick off in Chengdu, the booming cultural hub of southwest China. “This year, I finally get the chance to chase this dream seriously,” she wrote. When tickets went on sale shortly after the announcement, thousands of seats sold out within minutes, a result that even caught Xie by surprise. Eight minutes after sales opened, she shared on Weibo: “My hands are still trembling, the tickets are all gone.”

    The two Chengdu shows, held in May, drew enthusiastic support from her loyal fanbase, with special nostalgic guest appearances from Xie’s celebrity friends that boosted her confidence. After the performances ended, a giddy Xie shared her surprise at her own vocal performance during a livestream with fans. “By the final song, I wasn’t even out of breath,” she joked, adding that she could have been a “pop queen” before asking her audience: “Do you think I can pull off a whole national tour?”

    Buoyed by the warm reception in Chengdu, Xie and her team quickly moved forward with plans for a multi-city national tour, opening with a stop in Beijing. Tickets were priced between 380 and 1,180 yuan (equivalent to $52 to $174 USD). But almost immediately after the tour announcement, public opinion began to shift dramatically against the project.

    Online critics questioned whether Xie had the vocal talent to justify a full concert tour, with many arguing she was leaning on the star power of her celebrity friends to draw crowds rather than standing on her own musical merit. Others went further, accusing her of launching the tour solely to cash in on her existing fame for quick profits. As discontent grew, some social media users claimed they had filed official complaints alleging the tour had not secured proper regulatory permits, and a viral screenshot showed an unsolicited message sent to Xie’s husband Zhang Jie, a well-known professional singer, urging him to “control your wife.”

    What might have stayed just online chatter gained new weight when Chinese state media and official outlets joined the criticism, issuing sharp public rebukes. An opinion piece published last month by a department of the Zhejiang Provincial Party Committee argued that Xie’s tour raised suspicions that she was chasing profits rather than fulfilling a personal artistic dream. The piece framed the controversy as a warning: “Shallow, superficial popularity cannot generate sustainable profit, and it will also lead to an overall loss of cultural refinement.”

    Shortly after that commentary ran, China’s official state newspaper *People’s Daily* published another editorial criticizing an unnamed “popular host with no well-known original musical works,” warning that while genuine excellence earns long-term public recognition, “those who gain fame without real skill will eventually run into trouble.”

    The mounting public and official pressure ultimately forced the tour’s cancellation. Over the weekend, Xie’s event organizer announced the opening Beijing show would be scrapped, and all purchased tickets would be fully refunded. It remains unclear whether the cancellation came as a direct government order; Xie herself has not issued any public comment on the controversy to date.

    Industry analysts note the backlash is not an isolated incident, but a reflection of growing shifts in public attitudes toward celebrity culture in China. Dr. Jian Xu, an associate professor specializing in Chinese internet and pop culture at Australia’s Deakin University, suggests the cancellation may have been a calculated risk management move by Xie’s team and event organizers, rather than a forced cancellation. He adds that the public anger toward Xie reflects widespread growing resentment toward celebrities seen as cashing in on their social media fame without delivering equivalent skill or value.

    Xie is far from the only celebrity to face this kind of backlash recently. Just weeks before her controversy, acclaimed Chinese singer Han Hong faced public anger after she promoted a new spy thriller film and urged fans to “give me some face” to support the movie, leading to accusations of emotional manipulation that forced her to issue a public apology.

    Xu also argues that the outrage over Xie’s tour has become an outlet for broader social and economic frustrations among young Chinese people. In the years following the COVID-19 pandemic, millions of young people in China have faced soaring youth unemployment, stagnant wage growth, and broader economic uncertainty. Against that backdrop, celebrities who appear to earn large sums of money easily through their fame have become a natural target for public anger.

    In recent years, Chinese social media has increasingly targeted public figures perceived to hold unfair privilege. Last year, a rising young actress had her name removed from the credits of an upcoming drama after online users accused her of using her mother’s industry connections to secure a spot at a top drama school. Just a month before that, another actress faced widespread online backlash after being photographed wearing luxury earrings reportedly worth more than the average Chinese worker’s annual salary.

    Zichen Wang, founder of the *Pekingnology* newsletter, notes that criticism of celebrities has become one of the safest outlets for public frustration in China. “It allows people to voice their anger over questions of competence, privilege, wealth and social fairness without directly addressing more sensitive political topics,” he explained in an interview with the BBC. “It lets people direct their anger at a target that is not in the seat of power.”

    But Wang also raises important questions about where the line between public criticism and public cancellation should lie. “A society is allowed to have strong opinions about personal taste, but taste should not be turned into administrative power, or an excuse to use it,” he said. “Personal dislike should not translate into the power to cancel someone entirely.”

    That debate has already emerged among Chinese social media users discussing Xie’s controversy. “If you don’t like it, just don’t buy a ticket and don’t follow it, why do you get to control what other people spend their money on?” one user wrote on Weibo. Another commented: “If her singing is bad and she holds a concert, she should face the consequences of the market, not public humiliation and a total cancellation.”

  • France weighs up resetting Turkey ties as Europe’s security landscape shifts

    France weighs up resetting Turkey ties as Europe’s security landscape shifts

    During a high-profile October press conference in Cairo focused on a Gaza ceasefire deal, a small but symbolic moment laid bare a quiet shift in geopolitics. As U.S. President Donald Trump gathered regional and European leaders to stand behind him for photos, French President Emmanuel Macron rejected the role of a backdrop prop. Instead, he invited Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to join him at a table in the audience – an arrangement the 72-year-old Turkish leader readily accepted.

    This quiet act of defiance against the U.S.-led event staging capped years of frosty relations between Paris and Ankara, and it may signal the start of a new chapter for the two NATO allies, multiple sources with knowledge of internal negotiations told Middle East Eye. For years, the pair have been locked in bitter disagreements over the Syrian civil war, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan, and competing territorial claims in the Eastern Mediterranean. Today, shifting global alignments and overlapping security interests have created unprecedented momentum for a full reset.

    “France is envisaging the future of European security with Turkey as one of its pillars,” one senior Western source close to diplomatic talks explained.

    This potential new partnership is not happening in isolation. It comes amid a noticeable cooling of relations between Turkey and Russia, a shift that has not gone unnoticed in Paris. There have been no bilateral presidential visits between Ankara and Moscow since 2023, and the frequency of high-level engagements between Erdoğan and Russian President Vladimir Putin has dropped sharply. Turkey has also increasingly aligned with Western sanctions regimes targeting Moscow, and it has declined to renew its long-term major natural gas purchase agreements with Russia.

    Gerard Araud, a former French ambassador, said many French policymakers have been impressed by Turkey’s deft navigation of the war in Ukraine. “Turkey has succeeded in antagonising almost no one while, at the same time, effectively siding with Kyiv,” he noted. Araud argued that as France prepares for long-term Russian pressure on the continent, Ankara has emerged as a critical geopolitical player. “We think that in Paris there is a strong feeling that, on one side, the Americans are gradually reducing their security commitments to Europe; that whoever is elected in the 2028 U.S. presidential election, we will not return to the close transatlantic security cooperation of the past,” he explained. “We will be facing Russian pressure. And in this equation, I think Turkey is obviously an important factor.”

    Overlapping regional priorities further underpin the push for closer ties. In Syria, both France and Turkey have thrown their support behind interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa’s new administration. In Lebanon, both countries back the creation of a strong central government and oppose aggressive Israeli military actions in the country. On the Iranian nuclear file and regional tensions surrounding Tehran, both Paris and Ankara favor a negotiated peaceful resolution. As Israel adopts an increasingly hardline stance toward Turkey, it has also sparked repeated diplomatic crises with France over Lebanon, reinforcing shared interests between the two countries.

    Beyond geopolitics, a major partnership in the defence and arms industry is emerging as a cornerstone of the reset. Last week, Turkish Defence Minister Yasar Guler confirmed Ankara is deeply interested in purchasing SAMP/T air defence systems, manufactured by a French-Italian defence consortium. For years, Paris blocked the sale over political tensions and disagreements over Ankara’s demand for joint production rights. But intelligence outlet Intelligence Online reported in May that Macron has ordered a full review of the SAMP/T deal to find ways to accommodate Turkish co-production demands, ahead of his planned visit to Ankara for next week’s NATO summit. Senior French diplomat Alice Rufo, a recent member of Macron’s inner circle, has already traveled to Ankara to hold talks with top Turkish defence officials, boosting expectations that an agreement could be announced during the summit.

    Private defence firms have already begun building ties. Leading French aerospace and defence group Safran recently signed a strategic partnership agreement with Turkey’s top drone manufacturer Baykar, focused on co-developing integrated systems combining optronic sensors, navigation technology, and guided weapon capabilities for unmanned aerial and air-to-ground missions. Under the deal, Baykar’s popular TB2 combat drones will be outfitted with Safran’s Euroflir electro-optical surveillance system. French government sources also confirm Paris is considering expanding defence dialogue to cover partnerships in drone and helicopter development.

    Turkey’s defence industry has grown into a global powerhouse in recent years, with national defence exports hitting $10 billion in 2024. Ankara now exports warships, combat drones, and ammunition to countries across the world, including many NATO allies. Araud noted that Europe’s own defence industrial sector has faced major setbacks, pointing to the recent collapse of the €114 billion Future Combat Air System programme earlier this month over intractable disagreements between French and German defence contractors. “Turks have been quite good in this field,” he said. “What the Turks are doing, first, is cheaper; second, it is more robust. While some Turkish weapons may not match the highest sophistication of Western systems, the war in Ukraine has proven that this affordability and durability is a major advantage. Tomorrow’s war will require the ability to produce large volumes of reliable, low-cost weaponry.”

    Still, not all analysts are optimistic about the pace of a Franco-Turkish reset. Dorothee Schmid, head of the Turkey and Middle East Department at French leading think tank IFRI, warned that deep structural divisions remain. “France considers that Turkey has embarked on an autocratic course and is pursuing a power-based policy centred on its own interests, which are not compatible with those of Europeans,” she said.

    Longstanding frictions continue to complicate negotiations. Macron has declined all invitations to visit Ankara from Erdoğan since 2022. Sources say a full state visit by Macron could only move forward if Turkey reopens its border with Armenia, a step that would be politically popular with France’s large Armenian diaspora community. Another persistent irritant is Ankara’s decision to bar Turkish citizens from attending French embassy-operated schools in Turkey. Turkish officials argue they need reciprocal legal arrangements approved by parliament to resolve the issue, while French officials say the policy has poisoned bilateral relations. The dispute has lingered in bureaucratic gridlock, and the schools have gradually lost students and fallen into decline.

    “In short, the two sides are continuing to negotiate, but against a backdrop of low levels of trust,” Schmid said. “The NATO summit in Ankara is expected to provide an opportunity for Turkey to showcase its power, which never fails to surprise the French: the two countries have entered into a sort of systemic symbolic rivalry.”

    The Eastern Mediterranean remains another core point of contention. France has a bilateral defence treaty with Greece, and during a visit to Athens earlier this year, Macron publicly reaffirmed the pact during an event at the Roman Agora, emphasizing Paris’ commitment to defending Greek sovereignty against any potential Turkish aggression. Araud argued that this strong show of support for Greece ran counter to Macron’s own signature foreign policy doctrine of *en meme temps* – “at the same time” – which holds that seemingly contradictory initiatives are used to maintain ties with competing regional actors.

    “Senior French officials agree with me that Paris should improve its ties with Turkey, and Macron went a bit overboard in his overtures to Greece. Macron is aware of it, and he wants to improve the relationship with Turkey,” Araud said. “Macron has a very good analysis of foreign policy, I think, but when implementing it, from time to time, he ends up reaching the opposite goal.” Turkish officials dismiss Macron’s rhetoric around defending Greek sovereignty as a sales tactic to boost French arms exports to Athens, noting that Turkey has no plans to attack Greek territory. “It is a nothing burger, really,” one senior Turkish official said.

    A final wildcard is French domestic politics: Macron is set to leave office in April 2025, and his potential successors could adopt a far different policy toward Turkey, particularly if right-wing National Rally leader Marine Le Pen or her protégé Jordan Bardella win the presidency. However, multiple sources confirmed that Turkish diplomats have already engaged in quiet outreach to Le Pen’s team for months, laying groundwork for continued cooperation regardless of the election outcome.

  • Andy Burnham to drop spy-tech firm Palantir from NHS, reports say

    Andy Burnham to drop spy-tech firm Palantir from NHS, reports say

    As Andy Burnham prepares to take office as Britain’s next prime minister and leader of the Labour Party, one of his first major policy shifts is set to target a controversial contract between the National Health Service and American technology and data surveillance firm Palantir, multiple sources confirm.

    Per reporting from The Telegraph, Burnham’s incoming administration is currently conducting a full review of the UK government’s existing artificial intelligence strategy, a process that is expected to result in Palantir being dropped from its NHS contract. The current £330 million seven-year deal between Palantir and the NHS has only been active for two years, leaving five years remaining on the original agreement if it is not terminated early.

    Palantir’s footprint across UK public institutions extends far beyond the health service. The firm already holds a £240 million contract with the UK Ministry of Defence, a £15 million agreement tied to Britain’s nuclear deterrent program, and at least 34 additional uncovered contracts across sectors including law enforcement, child social care, refugee support services and environmental regulation. Many of these agreements have been marked by a lack of public transparency around the scope of Palantir’s data access and work.

    The push to oust Palantir from the NHS comes amid growing global outrage over the firm’s documented ties to military operations in Gaza. In January 2024, Palantir publicly announced a partnership with the Israeli Ministry of Defense to deploy its technology to support so-called “war-related missions”, which include drone missile strikes targeting civilian areas in Gaza that have killed dozens of journalists and humanitarian aid workers. When confronted with accusations that Palantir’s technology enabled the deaths of Palestinian civilians in Gaza in April 2025, Palantir CEO Alex Karp responded by claiming the targets were “mostly terrorists, that’s true”.

    Francesca Albanese, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the occupied Palestinian territories, said Karp’s comment confirms the firm has “executive-level knowledge and purpose vis-a-vis the unlawful use of force by Israel” in occupied Palestinian territories. Additional scrutiny has emerged after reports that the U.S. Pentagon is investigating whether Palantir’s AI-powered target identification system Maven was involved in a February 2025 U.S. “double-tap” missile strike on an Iranian girls’ school that killed more than 170 people, the vast majority of whom were children.

    Founded by tech billionaire Peter Thiel, a controversial figure who once famously stated “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible”, Palantir received partial funding from the Central Intelligence Agency at its launch. Thiel has also drawn fierce criticism in the UK for his previous comments attacking the National Health Service, claiming the beloved public institution “makes people sick” and framing British public support for the NHS as a case of “Stockholm syndrome”.

    Burnham’s long-standing stance on Palantir predates his expected ascension to Downing Street: during his tenure as Mayor of Greater Manchester from 2017 to 2025, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority never awarded any public contracts to the firm.

    The proposal to terminate Palantir’s NHS contract has drawn immediate pushback from the Conservative opposition. Stuart Andrew, the Conservative shadow health secretary, argued that “if Andy Burnham tears up a programme that is improving patient care, he will have to explain why he chose politics over patients.” Andrew added that the NHS should leverage the best available technology to cut waiting lists, save lives and support frontline staff, and that barring leading global firms for political reasons would undermine confidence in NHS technology partnerships. “Patients should never pay the price for Labour’s political posturing. Lives are too important to be sacrificed for Andy Burnham’s political beliefs,” Andrew said.

    Despite Conservative opposition, discontent with Palantir runs deep even within the Labour Party, and public opposition to the firm’s UK public sector contracts has grown steadily over the past year. Last month, a cross-party group of MPs issued a formal call for the incumbent government to activate the 2027 break clause in Palantir’s NHS contract and pursue either an in-house UK-built alternative or a domestic provider. The cross-party Science, Innovation and Technology Committee’s report warned that growing reliance on Palantir across the UK public sector represents an “unacceptable point of weakness” that could leave critical public services “at the mercy” of foreign actors.

    Palantir’s UK CEO Louis Mosley has pushed back against critics, accusing opponents of the contract of prioritizing “ideology over patient safety”. However, multiple NHS hospital trusts have already rejected Palantir’s technology, reporting that adopting it would cause them to “lose functionality rather than gain it”.

    With the upcoming termination of Palantir’s NHS contract expected, scrutiny is now growing over the fate of the firm’s dozens of other public sector contracts across the UK. The debate over Palantir’s UK presence already made headlines in recent months, after London Mayor Sadiq Khan blocked a proposed £50 million contract between the Metropolitan Police and Palantir in May, citing a “clear and serious breach” of public procurement rules. Khan’s office noted that the deal would have left London police locked into a long-term relationship with Palantir without demonstrating value for taxpayer money, and Khan had previously stated he had “concerns about using public money to support firms who act contrary to London’s values”. Khan later reversed his veto after Palantir launched legal action against the decision, granting the firm a 12-month pilot project that could be extended.

    This reporting was originally published by Middle East Eye, an independent outlet providing dedicated coverage of the Middle East, North Africa and surrounding regions.

  • Exclusive: ICC prosecutors shelved RSF arrest warrant as Sudan atrocities mounted

    Exclusive: ICC prosecutors shelved RSF arrest warrant as Sudan atrocities mounted

    More than three years after launching an investigation into atrocities committed during Sudan’s ongoing civil conflict, the International Criminal Court’s Office of the Prosecutor has yet to submit a single new arrest warrant for crimes in Darfur dating to the war’s start in April 2023, an exclusive investigation by Middle East Eye has revealed. Multiple senior sources and internal court documents confirm the OTP has scrapped plans to file an arrest warrant application against a top Rapid Support Forces commander – a step that ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan publicly pledged to submit “imminently” to pretrial judges in January 2024. The shelved application focused on allegations of crimes against humanity and war crimes perpetrated in West Darfur in the months following the war’s outbreak.

    The issue of delayed accountability has erupted into open friction between the OTP and the court’s pretrial oversight panel. After more than 12 months of silence following Karim Khan’s May 2025 leave of absence, during which the prosecution failed to offer any explanation for the missed filing timeline to the three-judge pretrial chamber, the panel issued a formal rebuke last month. The judges ordered the OTP to disclose the root causes of the delay and submit a clear, public timeline for when warrant applications will be filed. In its order, the panel referenced recent briefings to the UN Security Council from current acting lead of the Darfur investigation, Deputy Prosecutor Nazhat Khan, where she acknowledged the rapidly deteriorating security and human rights situation in Darfur, and noted that arrest warrants would be a critical tool to deter additional atrocities. To date, MEE has confirmed Nazhat Khan has not shared any timeline for the filing of new warrants, beyond the one previously announced.

    When contacted for comment by Middle East Eye, the OTP declined to share any specific details on progress toward warrant applications, citing mandatory confidentiality requirements to the court, as well as protections for victims and witnesses who cooperate with investigations. Under the ICC’s amended operational regulations, all arrest warrant applications are classified as sealed or secret until court authorization for public release. In a written statement, an OTP spokesperson asserted that “the investigation has accelerated in recent months, with more focused investigative lines, increased evidence collection and witness interviews, and further analytical work. Priority has been given to the investigation of gender-based crimes, and crimes against and affecting children.”

    The ICC first opened its formal investigation into crimes committed during the current Sudan war in July 2023, when Karim Khan announced the office would examine allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity against all three major warring parties: the Sudanese Armed Forces, the RSF, and their respective allied militias. In every subsequent semi-annual briefing to the UN Security Council, OTP leadership has repeated assurances that progress toward arrest warrant applications was ongoing. Despite these repeated promises, no suspects have been charged in connection with the atrocities of the 2023–present war, including the RSF’s year-long siege and October 2025 capture of North Darfur’s capital el-Fasher.

    Independent UN investigations have corroborated widespread atrocities by the RSF in recent months: a UN fact-finding mission concluded in February 2026 that the paramilitary group carried out genocide against non-Arab communities in el-Fasher, and a separate UN report released last week found the RSF is responsible for more than 70% of all sexual violence perpetrated by warring parties across Sudan over the past three years. International bodies have already taken action against the group: the UN Security Council imposed targeted sanctions on four senior RSF commanders for Darfur atrocities, and the United States formally designated the RSF’s actions as genocide and sanctioned RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, widely known as Hemedti, in January 2025.

    Notably, all existing ICC arrest warrants connected to Darfur date back to the 2003–2007 wave of violence in the region. Four long-standing warrants remain unexecuted, targeting former Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir, former interior minister Ahmad Harun, former defense minister Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein, and rebel commander Abdallah Banda. The ICC’s only conviction related to Darfur, that of former Janjaweed leader Ali Muhammad Ali Abd-al-Rahman (known as Ali Kushayb), also relates to the 2003–2007 violence; he was sentenced to 20 years in prison in December 2025, though the conviction is currently under appeal.

    Nazhat Khan is scheduled to deliver the OTP’s mandatory semi-annual briefing on Darfur investigations to the UN Security Council later this month, where pressure will mount for her to address the delay and outline a clear path forward. The three-year war between the SAF and RSF, which has drawn backing from competing foreign powers for both sides, has left a catastrophic humanitarian toll: more than 12,000 people have been confirmed killed, with independent observers estimating the actual death toll is many times higher, more than 13 million people have been internally displaced or forced to flee across Sudan’s borders, and more than 19.5 million people are now on the brink of famine. The United Nations and European Union have labeled this crisis the world’s largest humanitarian and displacement emergency currently unfolding.

    Human rights organizations have also pressured the OTP to expand its investigation beyond Sudanese warring parties, submitting two formal communications requesting the office examine the role of foreign actors that have armed and supported the RSF. These communications specifically name senior government officials from the United Arab Emirates, who rights groups accuse of aiding and abetting RSF atrocities. The UAE has repeatedly denied all allegations of military or political support for the RSF.

  • NYT: Israel plotted to kill Iran peace negotiators to derail talks

    NYT: Israel plotted to kill Iran peace negotiators to derail talks

    Fragile diplomatic efforts to end a months-long joint US-Israeli military campaign against Iran have been thrown into turmoil by new reports revealing that senior Trump administration officials detected Israeli plans to assassinate Iran’s top negotiating leaders to sabotage any potential peace deal. Two leading US outlets, The New York Times and The Washington Post, have corroborated the claims, citing unnamed current and former American officials and on-the-record confirmation from a senior Iranian aide.

    According to the Times’ reporting published Thursday, US intelligence concerns over planned Israeli targeting of two senior Iranian figures—Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf—grew sharply amid sensitive ceasefire negotiations that launched in April. The alarm was so severe that US officials went so far as to coordinate with regional third countries to relay explicit warnings to Iran about the looming threat to the two negotiators.

    The timeline of the crisis dates back to late February, when the US and Israel launched a joint offensive campaign that has already killed dozens of high-ranking Iranian officials. By late March, both countries had temporarily removed Araghchi and Ghalibaf from their official target lists, a step that opened the door for high-level talks to end the ongoing conflict. But the Times reports that Israeli leadership remained determined to eliminate the negotiators, a finding later confirmed by independent reporting from The Washington Post.

    One dramatic April incident laid bare the severity of the threat. Ghalibaf had planned a trip to Islamabad, Pakistan, to meet with US Vice President JD Vance, and Pakistani fighter jets escorted the Iranian aircraft carrying the 70-member delegation from the Iran-Pakistan border to the capital and back after the meeting concluded. However, as the plane began its return trip to Tehran, Israeli security threats emerged. Two unnamed American officials confirmed that Iranian security intercepted intelligence indicating Israel planned to target the plane, and that two Israeli fighter jets had entered Iranian airspace through the western border near Iraq.

    Mahdi Mohammadi, a senior adviser to Ghalibaf who accompanied the delegation on the Islamabad trip, later confirmed the entire account on his public social media page. To avoid the imminent threat, the plane made an emergency landing in Mashhad, the closest major Iranian airport to the Pakistani border, and the entire delegation completed the remaining journey to Tehran over an eight-hour land trip.

    The revelations have further exposed growing rifts between US and Israeli strategic approaches to the conflict, rifts that first emerged after Israel assassinated top Iranian national security official Ali Larijani in March. Speaking to reporters in late March, former President Donald Trump himself acknowledged that Israel’s widespread assassination campaign had complicated efforts to find viable Iranian negotiating partners, noting “They’ve wiped out everybody.”

    Analysts say Israel’s efforts to derail peace talks align with long-standing strategic goals and the immediate political interests of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, argued that while Israel is formally classified as a US partner, its leadership is so committed to undermining US-led diplomacy that it is willing to assassinate the very Iranian officials Washington is negotiating with.

    “I can’t recall a government as terrified of peace as the one running Israel,” Parsi wrote in response to the new reporting.

    Netanyahu has already escalated tensions in the region through his ongoing military occupation and assault on southern Lebanon, a core issue that Iran has identified as a non-negotiable point in the ongoing ceasefire talks. During a visit to occupied southern Lebanon earlier this week, Netanyahu told Israeli troops that “our insistence is that we will not leave … until the threat is removed,” a statement that further weakened trust ahead of negotiations.

    Parsi added that beyond Netanyahu’s long-stated goal of leveraging US power to bring Iran under Israeli dominance and reshape the regional balance of power in Israel’s favor, the Israeli prime minister faces urgent personal and political incentives to disrupt any peace deal. The emerging US-Iran memorandum of understanding on a ceasefire has already come at a major political cost for Netanyahu, whose chances of winning re-election in October’s national vote are now weaker than they have been in months. Once positioned as the only Israeli leader capable of maintaining a strong alliance with the Trump administration, Netanyahu now faces the prospect that a successful peace deal will leave Israel in a strategically weaker position, undermining the core justification for his leadership.

    Most critically, if Netanyahu loses the October election, he will lose his legal immunity as prime minister and faces ongoing corruption trials that could result in years of prison time.

  • Outrage after Turkish stand-up comedian arrested for ‘insulting’ Erdogan

    Outrage after Turkish stand-up comedian arrested for ‘insulting’ Erdogan

    A high-profile arrest of one of Turkey’s most popular stand-up comics has reignited fierce debate over freedom of expression in the country, after authorities took Deniz Goktas into custody on charges of insulting President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and violating Islamic religious values.

    Goktas was detained upon his arrival at Istanbul’s main airport on Thursday, just after returning from an overseas vacation, according to an official statement released by the Istanbul public prosecution service. He was formally placed under pre-trial arrest following initial processing. The charges stem directly from a 1 June stand-up set he performed in Istanbul, which was later uploaded to YouTube and has accumulated nearly 9 million views to date.

    During the widely circulated performance, Goktas wove sharp satirical commentary on Turkish politics and society, targeting not just President Erdogan, but also imprisoned main opposition Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, and two of Erdogan’s sons-in-law: former finance minister Berat Albayrak and leading defense industry figure Selcuk Bayraktar. One of Goktas’s most talked-about quips described Erdogan’s political evolution as shifting from a “shy dictator” to a leader who is now “at peace with his own identity.” He also joked that he would like to work as Erdogan’s personal therapist, noting the role would come with generous pay, extensive job security, and substantial perks, calling it a “perfect fit” for him.

    The controversial jokes that triggered the religious value charges centered on a quip about the Quran, the central religious text of Islam. Goktas framed the Quran as the fourth and final holy text in the Abrahamic tradition, saying “The first three books were good, but the translation was weak in the fourth. I think it was the best of the four books.”

    Appearing before a court on Friday for his formal arraignment, Goktas pushed back against all allegations, emphasizing he has performed the same stand-up routine since 2023 without incident, and never held any intention to insult either religious communities or the Turkish presidency. “The word ‘dictator’ is a political characterization. It is also a subject that is frequently debated in public,” Goktas told prosecutors. “I had no intention of insulting or denigrating anyone.”

    According to prosecution records, the performance drew 185 separate formal complaints from members of the public. Turkey’s Information and Communication Technologies Authority (BTK), the country’s top digital regulator, has already moved to block public access to clips of the set shared across major social media platforms.

    News of Goktas’s arrest has quickly sparked widespread condemnation from Turkish opposition politicians and human rights organizations, who frame the arrest as a deliberate attack on artistic expression and the latest in a long string of government crackdowns on public criticism of Erdogan’s administration. Murat Emir, a Member of Parliament from the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), accused Turkish courts of acting in bad faith to “invent a crime to arrest someone.” “You folks gripe about comedians, but the real improv show in this country is happening in the courthouse hallways,” Emir wrote on the social platform X, formerly Twitter.

    The Turkish Human Rights Association called Goktas’s arrest a “severe blow to freedom of expression.” In an official post on X, the group stated “We demand that this judicial harassment against Goktas be immediately ended and that he be released.”

    Goktas’s case is far from an anomaly in modern Turkey: thousands of people are arrested and prosecuted annually across the country under charges of insulting the presidency, outlined in Article 299 of the Turkish penal code. Convictions under the statute can carry prison sentences of up to four years.

  • Egypt and Australia head to extra time at the World Cup after playing to a 1-1 draw in regulation

    Egypt and Australia head to extra time at the World Cup after playing to a 1-1 draw in regulation

    ARLINGTON, Texas — After 90 minutes of intense, back-and-forth competition on Friday, Egypt and Australia remain deadlocked at 1-1 in their 2025 FIFA World Cup round of 32 matchup, forcing the contest into an additional 30 minutes of extra time to determine a winner.

    The extra period will be split into two 15-minute halves, giving both sides extra opportunity to break the tie and punch their ticket to the tournament’s round of 16. If neither team can claim a lead after the full 120 minutes of play, the decision will come down to a high-stakes penalty shootout on the Arlington pitch.

    One of the most notable milestones of the match came from Egypt’s own backline: defender Mohamed Hany made World Cup history as the first player ever to record two own goals in a single tournament. It was Hany’s second own goal that leveled the score for Australia, bringing the Socceroos level at 1-1 late in regulation.

    Egypt struck first in the match, with midfielder Emam Ashour finding the back of the net in the 13th minute to open the scoring. This tournament marks the first time Egypt has ever reached the knockout round of the World Cup, making every minute of Friday’s contest a historic moment for the North African side. For Australia, the match marks their third attempt to secure a knockout stage victory at a World Cup, with the Socceroos yet to claim a win this deep in the tournament.

    As players head into the locker room for a brief break before extra time, both sides are gearing up for a final push to advance in the global competition.

  • Wimbledon 2026: Zeynep Sonmez sports watermelon shock absorber for Palestine

    Wimbledon 2026: Zeynep Sonmez sports watermelon shock absorber for Palestine

    A controversial ban on pro-Palestinian political symbols at the 2026 Wimbledon Championships has ignited widespread public criticism, after top-ranked Turkish tennis player Zeynep Sonmez revealed tournament organizers barred her from wearing a Palestine solidarity pin — even as a Ukrainian competitor was permitted to display a national flag pin.

    In an interview with Anadolu Agency on Thursday, the 24-year-old Turkish number one explained that she had regularly worn the Palestine pin at previous events, but was notified ahead of her Wimbledon appearance that the accessory would not be allowed on court. Sonmez and her team pushed back on the restriction, pointing out that Ukrainian player Daria Snigur had already been approved to compete while wearing a Ukrainian flag pin, yet organizers refused to reverse their decision.

    “They ultimately told us they definitely would not allow it,” Sonmez recounted.

    Unwilling to abandon her show of solidarity, Sonmez devised a subtle, rule-compliant alternative: she attached a watermelon-shaped vibration dampener to her racket. The watermelon has carried deep symbolic meaning for Palestinian resistance since the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israeli authorities banned public displays of the Palestinian flag in occupied Palestinian territories. Since the Palestinian national flag is colored red, green, black, and white — the same hues as a sliced watermelon — Palestinians adopted the fruit as a covert symbol of national identity and solidarity, a convention that remains widely recognized today. “They can’t object to that,” Sonmez said of her choice.

    Wimbledon tournament director Jamie Baker defended the policy in comments to reporters, stating that the All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC) maintains a long-standing rule prohibiting any form of political messaging from competing players on court. When pressed about the apparent inconsistency between Sonmez’s ban and Snigur’s approval, Baker claimed the Ukrainian situation was “quite unique,” explaining that the tournament had followed UK government guidance and broader international consensus to allow the display of the Ukrainian flag amid the ongoing Russian invasion.

    The incident quickly spread across social media platforms, drawing hundreds of reactions from users who praised Sonmez’s creative, unyielding stance while accusing Wimbledon organizers of blatant hypocrisy and double standards. Many public figures and ordinary users alike voiced frustration with the tournament’s decision. “This is so demoralizing. Props to zeynep for fighting for what she believes in,” one user posted on X. Another commenter wrote, “Ukraine flag allowed but not Palestine flag. Bitterly disappointed that even Wimbledon stooped to this level of hypocrisy.”

    Other commentators highlighted the ingenuity of Sonmez’s workaround. “It’s a small act but the ingenuity and undeterred commitment to somehow doing the display of solidarity is so beautiful,” one user noted. A third user added, “Huge respect to Zeynep Sonmez for not being silenced on the genocide Israel is committing.”

    As of the report, Middle East Eye has reached out to both the All England Lawn Tennis Club and Sonmez for additional comment, and has not yet received a response.

  • Citizen Vigilante: Complaint written to UK regulator over anti-migrant film

    Citizen Vigilante: Complaint written to UK regulator over anti-migrant film

    A leading British non-governmental organization focused on combating Islamophobia has launched a formal regulatory complaint against X, the social media platform owned by billionaire Elon Musk, over Musk’s decision to host and promote a full-length feature film widely condemned for spreading anti-muslim and anti-migrant hate speech. The complaint, submitted by Muslim Engagement and Development (Mend), targets the controversial production *Citizen Vigilante*, directed by Uwe Boll and starring Armie Hammer – an actor who faces multiple sexual assault allegations from different women.

    The film’s plot centers on a wealthy American landlord living in an unnamed European nation, who takes up vigilante violence to target people he labels as criminals, rapists and corrupt public officials, eventually being celebrated as a folk hero by the public. Throughout most of the runtime, Hammer’s brooding protagonist repeatedly berates immigrants and working-class people for minor offenses, from evading public transit fares to falling behind on rent payments to him. In one particularly extreme sequence, the main character breaks into a Muslim family’s home and kills every member, including unarmed civilians. Dialogue in the film falsely ties the abuse of women to the teachings of the Qur’an and core Islamic values.

    Film critics have widely panned the production, with industry publication Variety’s critic Todd Gilchrist describing it as “a violent, incoherent, morally bankrupt slice of exploitation.” Other reviewers have echoed this criticism, noting that the movie relies on overused, harmful stereotypes to build a false narrative about European communities, leaning into anti-migrant tropes that have gained traction in far-right spaces internationally. Already, the film has been blocked from formal distribution in Germany, where regulators declined to issue an age rating – a move that bans it from theatrical screenings and most retail sales over evidence it incites violence against immigrant groups. Despite this ban, U.S. producers Berry Meyerowitz and Jeff Sackman acquired distribution rights through their company Quiver, and the film gained unprecedented visibility when Musk posted the entire feature for free to his personal X account, where it remained accessible for two full days.

    In the complaint filed with UK media regulator Ofcom, Mend’s Chief Executive Abdullah Saif emphasized that the film’s bigotry is specifically targeted at Muslim communities, rather than being a generic take on crime. Since Musk’s original posting, the content has continued to spread across X, including via reposts from accounts based in the United Kingdom, bringing unregulated, age-unverified hate content directly to a mass British audience. Saif wrote that the film’s core narrative “endorses, incites and valorises the killing of Muslim families.”

    Mend argues that Ofcom has clear authority to intervene under the 2023 UK Online Safety Act, which grants the regulator power to act against content that stirs up racial and religious hatred. The complaint raises particular red flags over the fact that the content was amplified not by an anonymous user evading platform moderation, but by the platform’s owner himself. This situation, Mend notes, forces urgent questions about whether X’s content safety systems operate fairly, consistently, and without granting preferential treatment to high-profile users – including the platform’s own owner.

    The risk posed by the film’s distribution is amplified by current social context, the complaint adds. Just weeks before Musk posted the film, the United Kingdom saw a wave of anti-migrant rioting across Belfast and multiple regions of Scotland. Mend also references separate research from the Centre for Countering Digital Hate, which found that Musk’s own posts about the Belfast unrest reached extremely large audiences and amplified harmful narratives that carry a clear risk of inciting real-world violence.

    Against this tense backdrop, the mass distribution of a film that celebrates the murder of Muslim people is far more than a distasteful creative choice, the organization argues: it carries a foreseeable risk of normalizing and encouraging offline hostility and violence against a clearly identifiable protected community. Mend is calling on Ofcom to open a formal investigation into whether X violated the Online Safety Act, and to compel the platform to explain whether it conducted required risk assessments for content targeting Muslim and migrant communities. The group has requested a formal response from the regulator within a 28-day window.

  • UK Islamic finance sector worth £6bn and drives Gulf investment, report says

    UK Islamic finance sector worth £6bn and drives Gulf investment, report says

    Amid the United Kingdom’s ongoing search for pathways to sustainable, inclusive economic expansion, a new analysis from leading British think tank Equi has uncovered under-tapped potential in the country’s fast-growing Islamic finance sector, which the research values at an estimated £6 billion and projects could deliver up to £2.5 billion in annual economic benefits for the UK if supported by targeted policy action.

    Islamic finance, a framework of financial activities aligned with Islamic moral and legal principles, centers on two core rules: a total ban on interest-based transactions, and prohibitions on investment in sectors deemed unethical, including gambling, alcohol, adult entertainment, and arms manufacturing. Beyond its faith-based foundations, the new report highlights that the sector already occupies a dominant position in Europe, controlling no less than 85% of all regional Islamic finance assets — a standing built largely on longstanding investment ties with Gulf nations.

    The research notes that Islamic finance channels have already facilitated billions in Gulf investment into high-profile UK infrastructure and real estate projects, including iconic London landmarks such as the Shard and the redeveloped Battersea Power Station. Islamic banks have also played a key role in directing foreign capital from Gulf investors into UK residential construction, as London remains one of the most attractive global destinations for cross-border real estate investment. Currently, all five fully licensed Islamic banks operating in the UK count Gulf-based shareholders and primarily serve high-net-worth clients from the region, but emerging data shows a rapidly expanding domestic market that is shifting this dynamic.

    Between 2020 and 2025, the number of retail Islamic banking customers in the UK grew at an annual rate of 20%, signaling strong untapped domestic demand that extends far beyond Britain’s Muslim community. The report’s consumer surveys bear this out: 64% of British Muslims report preferring Islamic finance products to conventional alternatives, and just over half currently hold an active Islamic bank account. More surprisingly, 30% of non-Muslim consumers said they would be willing to switch to Shariah-compliant financial products if services matched the quality and accessibility of conventional offerings. This trend is not new: in 2013, 87% of customers who opened fixed-term deposit accounts at Al Rayan, one of the UK’s largest Islamic banks, were non-Muslim.

    The report also finds that demand from British Muslim consumers is a major driver of growth in ethical and green finance across the UK. Seventy-two percent of British Muslims report awareness of green finance products, compared to just 42% of non-Muslims, and Muslim consumers are 20% more likely to actively use green financial instruments than their non-Muslim counterparts.

    Despite these promising metrics, the research identifies key structural barriers that are holding the sector back from reaching its full potential. The current focus on serving wealthy Gulf clients means banks are not leveraging the sector’s full capacity to drive broad-based economic growth across the UK, the report argues. Additionally, British Muslim communities and organizations face widespread financial exclusion: an alarming 42% of British Muslim charitable organizations have reported having their bank accounts abruptly withdrawn without explanation, a practice known as debanking. The report also points out that faith-related financial access is not mentioned at all in the UK’s national Financial Inclusion Strategy, a gap the authors call a “significant oversight.”

    To unlock the sector’s full economic value, Equi’s report makes two key policy recommendations to the UK government. First, it calls for the establishment of a dedicated, bespoke Islamic Finance Unit, which would coordinate cross-government efforts to support sector growth, expand access to Shariah-compliant products, and ensure the industry contributes to national goals of broad-based economic growth and improved financial inclusion. Second, the report advocates for launching a sovereign Sukuk (Shariah-compliant bond) program, with specific issuances earmarked for sustainable infrastructure projects to strengthen the UK’s global standing in Islamic finance and help the country meet its legally binding net-zero carbon commitments.

    Naz Shah, Labour Member of Parliament and chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Islamic and Ethical Finance, backed the report’s findings, noting that as policymakers prioritize driving sustainable growth, raising productivity, and expanding economic opportunity, the research makes a strong case for re-framing Islamic finance. Instead of being treated as a niche, marginal offering, Shah said, it should be recognized as a significant, underutilized asset for the UK’s long-term economic future.

    Javed Khan, managing director of Equi, emphasized that Islamic finance represents a major, overlooked economic opportunity for the UK at a time of sluggish growth. “At a time when the UK is searching for sustainable growth, this is about unlocking billions in investment, supporting innovation and ensuring our financial system works for everyone,” Khan said. He added that with the right policy support, the UK has the opportunity to solidify its position as the global capital of Islamic finance, driving economic growth, boosting productivity, and reinforcing the country’s standing as a world-leading international financial center.