Global Pulse

标签： Asia

亚洲

  • Birmingham University weakens restrictions on investing in arms companies

    Birmingham University weakens restrictions on investing in arms companies

    In a move that has ignited widespread criticism across UK higher education, the University of Birmingham has become the first major British university to roll back ethical restrictions on weapons industry investments, amid growing global scrutiny of commercial ties to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, Middle East Eye can exclusively reveal.

    The West Midlands-based institution has abandoned its 2022 responsible investment framework, which included formal exclusion criteria for arms firms and other high-polluting or harmful industries. Under the old policy, any company deriving more than 10% of its revenue from weapons system development, as well as all manufacturers of entire weapon systems, cluster munitions and anti-personnel landmines, were barred from the university’s investment portfolio. Tobacco, oil and mining companies were also excluded, with the university committing to minimize indirect investments in firms that failed to meet its ESG standards.

    That policy has now been replaced with a softer set of so-called “investment principles”, adopted in June and obtained by Middle East Eye, that removes all formal exclusion lists. The new framework only requires that “financially material” environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors be integrated into investment selection, monitoring and stewardship processes. As part of the policy update, the university has also tapped global banking giant JP Morgan to serve as its outsourced chief investment officer (OCIO), handling day-to-day investment decision-making.

    The new rules only mandate compliance with existing UK legal restrictions: bans on anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions, and UK obligations prohibiting trade in chemical and biological weapons, alongside general adherence to international sanctions regimes. Beyond that legal baseline, the policy states that for any investment with material exposure to high-risk activities, the OCIO simply needs to provide a rationale for the holding, outline existing risk controls, and explain its approach to managing ESG risks. No automatic exclusion applies to arms firms, tobacco, or fossil fuel companies that were previously barred.

    University administrators have pushed back against criticism, arguing the policy update does not represent a weakening of responsible investment standards. In a statement, a university spokesperson said no changes have been made to the institution’s actual investment portfolio following the rule change, and that the university still sets all core objectives and constraints for its holdings, with the OCIO only managing routine day-to-day decisions within those boundaries.

    The spokesperson added that the revised framework strengthens oversight and transparency, shifting from a rigid fixed exclusion list to clear, principle-based expectations that cover legal compliance, ESG integration, stewardship, voting, climate action, human rights and governance. They noted the university has been a signatory to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI) since 2019, and the update merely aligns policy with the practical operation of its current delegated, pooled-fund investment model.

    That explanation has done little to appease student leaders, who have condemned the rollback as a betrayal of institutional commitments to human rights. Antonia Listrat, president of the university’s official Guild of Students, called the decision a devastating signal to the campus community. “This sends a devastating message to students and staff who believe our university should uphold human rights and invest in education, not the arms trade,” Listrat said. “Students voted for their university to strengthen its ethical standards, not make it easier to profit from companies connected to armed conflict.”

    The rollback is not the first time the University of Birmingham has faced backlash over its ties to the arms trade linked to Israel’s campaign in Gaza. Even under the previous stricter investment rules, the institution maintained a formal partnership with Rolls-Royce, a manufacturing giant that produces primarily civilian goods but also supplies military equipment to the Israeli army. In 2019, Birmingham also joined four other UK universities to launch a strategic partnership with BAE Systems, the UK’s largest arms manufacturer, which produces components for F-35 fighter jets that the Israeli military has deployed extensively in its Gaza operations.

    Across the UK higher education sector, the University of Birmingham’s move runs counter to a growing trend of institutions tightening arms investment restrictions in response to mass student protests calling for divestment from firms linked to Israeli human rights violations in Gaza. Most recently, Queen’s University Belfast announced it would divest all holdings tied to Israel in June 2025, joining a growing list of institutions adopting stricter ethical rules.

    Instead of loosening restrictions, Birmingham has taken a hardline approach to pro-divestment and pro-Gaza student activism on campus: the university launched legal action against student protesters occupying campus ground to demand divestment in July 2024. That hardline stance mirrors actions taken by the London School of Economics, which evicted its own pro-Gaza encampment of protesters the same year.

    Investigations by Middle East Eye in recent months have exposed extensive hidden investments in arms and firms linked to Israeli human rights violations across other top UK institutions. In October 2024, MEE revealed that the University of Oxford held indirect investments in at least 49 companies flagged by the United Nations and leading human rights organizations for their role in illegal Israeli activities in occupied Palestinian territories. A February 2025 investigation further found that the University of Cambridge’s endowment fund had more than £140 million ($189 million) invested in a fund that held shares in firms linked to Israeli human rights abuses, including tech firm Palantir Technologies, construction giant Caterpillar and aerospace manufacturer GE Aerospace.

    The policy shift at Birmingham also comes amid conflicting actions by the UK national government, which imposed a partial arms embargo on Israel in September 2024, but simultaneously approved $169 million in new military exports to the country, including more than 8,600 separate munitions categorized as “bombs, grenades, torpedoes, mines, missiles and other similar munitions.”

    Since the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack that killed 1,200 people in southern Israel, Israeli military operations in Gaza and the West Bank have killed more than 73,000 Palestinians and wounded an additional 170,000, according to latest health authorities in the region, triggering a widespread humanitarian crisis and global calls for a ceasefire and an end to arms sales to Israel.

  • Plaza Accord 2.0 talk won’t fix anybody’s China problem

    Plaza Accord 2.0 talk won’t fix anybody’s China problem

    In a recent call for coordinated global action on trade imbalances, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has emerged as the most high-profile advocate for a second Plaza Accord, a scheme designed to deliberately push up the value of China’s yuan to erode what he frames as the country’s unfair export advantage. Merz claims the Chinese currency is undervalued by roughly 30%, alleging Beijing deliberately keeps it cheap to flood global markets with artificially low-priced goods. He warns that state-subsidized overcapacity in key Chinese manufacturing sectors is destabilizing a global economy still recovering from years of successive shocks. Merz’s grievances are far from isolated in European leadership: European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde has previously estimated the yuan’s undervaluation at around 16%, while European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has publicly described China’s current export competitive edge as fundamentally unsustainable for the global trading system.

    Despite this broad European criticism of China’s currency and trade practices, economic analysts broadly agree that a 1985-style currency pact modeled after the original Plaza Accord – which forced a sharp appreciation of Japan’s yen to correct US trade imbalances – is deeply unlikely to resolve the grievances European leaders have raised, and carries major risks of unintended consequences. There are two core structural flaws in the proposal from the outset: first, China is not a member of the Group of Seven, the bloc that orchestrated the original 1985 agreement among major advanced economies. Second, the 2026 global financial system is unrecognizable from the mid-1980s landscape, making a four-decade-old framework a poor fit for modern challenges.

    Attempting to force a sharp, rapid appreciation of the yuan would carry significant downside risks for the global economy, experts warn. A sudden revaluation would exacerbate China’s already persistent deflationary pressures, deepen long-running structural imbalances in the country’s economy, and worsen the ongoing crisis in its struggling property sector. Many analysts argue that the economic damage from a forced yuan revaluation would ultimately outweigh any perceived benefits from reducing China’s export competitiveness, for both China and its global trading partners.

    History also directly undermines the case for Merz’s proposal, as the original Plaza Accord failed to deliver long-term benefits and triggered severe economic harm for Japan. Bill Mitchell, a leading currency expert at Australia’s University of Newcastle, points out that the United States is highly unlikely to succeed in bullying China into accepting a currency deal on the terms it forced on Japan in the 1980s. Mitchell notes the original accord was extremely economically disruptive, directly contributing to Japan’s massive 1980s asset bubble and the decades of stagnation that followed, with little to no lasting economic gain for the United States.

    Another major complication is that Merz’s proposal puts it on a potential collision course with US President Donald Trump’s own competing trade plan, the self-named “Mar-a-Lago Accord”, which attempts to revive a global trade framework that no longer exists in modern markets. Neither leader’s political track record suggests a coordinated US-Eurozone effort to pressure China on currency would proceed smoothly. Trump has long favored unilateral transactional pressure over multilateral coordinated diplomacy, making joint action unlikely.

    For its part, Beijing has closely studied the economic fallout of the 1985 Plaza Accord, which it views as the starting point of Japan’s decades-long stagnation. Chinese leaders have repeatedly made clear they have no interest in repeating Japan’s experience, a position that shapes the country’s ongoing tight management of the yuan via daily central bank fixings and strict capital controls. Chinese officials have also stressed that meaningful, externally forced revaluation is completely off the table until the yuan becomes fully convertible under Beijing’s policy timeline.

    Merz and Trump also underestimate the significant political and economic leverage Chinese President Xi Jinping holds to resist external pressure, a stark contrast to the position of Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone in the 1980s. Xi also has a factually defensible argument: Chinese authorities have actively intervened to prop up the yuan’s value in recent months, even as domestic deflationary pressures would normally drive the currency lower.

    Today’s global power dynamics also make the original Plaza Accord playbook unworkable. The 1985 agreement succeeded because the US held overwhelming dominance over the then-Group of Five, and Japan relied heavily on access to American consumers to fuel its export-led growth. Today, US global economic influence has eroded significantly: years of Trump-era tariffs and ongoing geopolitical tensions over Iran have left the US more isolated internationally and its domestic economy more exposed to global shocks. By contrast, China is now the world’s largest trading nation, while the European Union’s 27 member states remain deeply divided on China policy and are still grappling with post-pandemic economic fragility. Germany alone runs a roughly 90 billion euro ($102 billion) annual trade deficit with China, leaving Berlin with very little bargaining leverage to force concessions from Beijing.

    Beyond currency dynamics, Merz faces far more pressing structural challenges to European industrial competitiveness. The real “China Shock 2.0” is not driven by exchange rates, but by the rapid rise of Chinese technology leaders in cutting-edge strategic sectors, from electric vehicle giant BYD to artificial intelligence innovator DeepSeek. These companies’ growing global market share is already reshaping Europe’s industrial landscape: German automaker Volkswagen is reportedly considering closing four domestic factories and cutting 100,000 jobs as Chinese brands expand their global footprint.

    Analysts stress that European industrial weakness cannot be blamed solely on Chinese competitiveness. Europe’s own weak domestic demand and longstanding industrial complacency are major contributing factors. As Volkswagen shareholder Ingo Speich noted in comments to Reuters, “The high costs are merely a symptom, not the cause… the root cause is weak sales.” His point underscores a core reality: unless European manufacturers develop products that global consumers actually want, debates about currency valuation and cost-cutting will do little to reverse declining market share. Volkswagen’s predicament is a microcosm of Europe’s broader challenge in an era of rising Chinese industrial power. While a stronger yuan might have boosted European manufacturers decades ago, China’s rapid ascent up the global value chain has completely altered this calculation. Today, China’s competitive advantage in electric vehicles, batteries, solar energy and advanced manufacturing stems from industrial policy, economies of scale and technological innovation, not cheap labor or undervalued exchange rates. Even a 10 to 20% yuan appreciation would not erase these competitive advantages, though targeted higher trade barriers might alter market dynamics at the margin.

    China is now accelerating structural shifts that are reshaping the entire global economy. When China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, it unleashed a wave of low-cost, subsidized exports of basic goods like textiles, furniture and entry-level electronics. Today’s phase of Chinese export growth is far more consequential: China is now targeting high-value growth sectors including electric vehicles, clean energy and advanced manufacturing, reshaping competitive dynamics in the industries that will define the 21st century global economy.

    Addressing this new wave of Chinese industrial competition requires far more than symbolic currency diplomacy, analysts argue. Chris Bradley, an analyst at the McKinsey Global Institute, notes that advanced economies need to pursue a deep transformation of domestic productivity, invest in innovation, specialize in less cost-sensitive high-value sectors, and implement policies that create a more level global playing field. Bradley’s analysis finds that a 30% boost to domestic productivity, combined with cost convergence in equipment, energy and raw materials, and faster execution of industrial projects modeled on China’s “speed to market” could close between 30 and 80% of the current cost gap between Western and Chinese manufacturers. Bradley adds that achieving a sustainable new global trade equilibrium requires advanced economies to specialize in future-defining industries, revive domestic innovation, and overhaul outdated industrial policy frameworks to address modern competitive distortions. In short, Europe’s core challenge is not just China’s economic rise – it is Europe’s own need to adapt to a new global economic order.

    For the euro area, China’s current deflationary pressures and manufacturing glut create unique spillover risks. Valentina Aprigliano, an economist at the Bank of Italy, explains that “For the euro area, the most immediate transmission channel operates through import prices.” Weak domestic price growth in China, combined with robust manufacturing output, is exported abroad via lower-priced imported goods. This channel is particularly impactful for the euro area, which imported more than 430 billion euros in manufactured goods from China in 2025. Import volumes from China grew across most product categories in 2024 and 2025, while per-unit import values declined sharply, especially in 2025.

    This dynamic has led many analysts to warn that Europe is at risk of misdiagnosing its trade problems with China. Focusing on currency valuation only addresses surface-level symptoms, not the underlying competitiveness gap between European and Chinese manufacturers. Given China’s ongoing industrial policy momentum, it is no longer credible to argue that yuan appreciation would halt China’s ascent up the global value chain, nor would exchange rate shifts suddenly restore Western Europe’s industrial dominance. A currency agreement alone cannot rebalance EU-China trade, or US-China trade for that matter.

    Scott Kennedy, an economist at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, notes that China’s high-tech industrial drive has made enormous, uneven progress across key sectors over the past few decades. “These advances have directly translated into enhanced international power and influence for China. The United States and like-minded countries need to respond pragmatically to maximize the opportunities and minimize the risks resulting from these developments,” Kennedy said.

    Exchange rate shifts will not slow the momentum behind China’s Made in China 2025 industrial strategy. Chinese firms like BYD, which now outsells Tesla globally, and AI firm DeepSeek, which has upended competitive dynamics among Silicon Valley’s leading technology giants, demonstrate that Beijing’s top-down industrial strategy is delivering tangible results. These successes stem not from an undervalued currency, but from coordinated long-term investment to dominate strategic growth sectors.

    Beijing’s latest Five-Year Plan pledges to accelerate China’s technological development and its ongoing structural pivot toward a consumption-led growth model. Keyu Jin, an economist at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, explains that this shift is “not only about rebalancing growth, but also about anchoring it more firmly at home. Domestic demand offers insulation from external shocks, and along with developed capital markets, it can go a long way toward strengthening autonomy.”

    Jin notes that China currently faces a striking paradox: it is among the world’s most dynamic technological powers, delivering accelerating breakthroughs in artificial intelligence, electric vehicles and advanced manufacturing, yet overall economic growth continues to slow. The reason is no mystery: as China’s latest Five-Year Plan recognizes, the country is undergoing a broad structural transition, not a temporary cyclical slowdown. The old investment and export-led growth model is giving way to a new consumption and innovation-led model that has not yet fully taken hold, and the transition is proceeding more slowly than many global investors would like. Economists broadly agree that Xi must accelerate the transition to convince global markets that technological self-sufficiency and ambitious industrial policy are not just core priorities, but achievable long-term goals.

    The yuan’s value plays a complex role in Xi’s current strategic priorities. A stable or gradually appreciating yuan serves three key Beijing policy goals: it reduces the risk of offshore defaults among heavily indebted Chinese property developers, supports the long-term goal of yuan internationalization to establish it as a major global reserve currency, and helps manage trade tensions with Washington, where the Trump administration remains highly sensitive to any hint of competitive devaluation. A firm yuan also helps China avoid importing additional inflation from global commodity markets: in May, Chinese producer prices rose 3.9% year-on-year, a “bad inflation” dynamic also being felt in Japan as Middle East geopolitical conflict drives up global commodity prices.

    Still, Beijing is increasingly sensitive to global perceptions that it is boosting American living standards at the expense of Chinese domestic growth. Premier Li Qiang’s recent “China Opportunity 2.0” branding at the Summer Davos forum reflects this sensitivity, a narrative that would be far harder to sell if Beijing allowed the yuan to weaken significantly while pursuing its 4.5 to 5% annual economic growth target.

    The yen’s recent dramatic slide to a 40-year low against the dollar adds another layer of complexity to the situation. With the Trump administration taking a largely hands-off approach to the yen’s decline, Beijing may feel it has greater political cover to allow the yuan to drift lower gradually. The yen’s 3.1% drop against the dollar has created broader regional currency ripples, and could tempt Chinese policymakers to test the limits of their currency management just as Merz and other European leaders push for a new Plaza Accord.

  • A local’s guide to Ankara ahead of the Nato summit

    A local’s guide to Ankara ahead of the Nato summit

    Long maligned as a dull, lifeless hub by many Turks—particularly Istanbul residents who dismiss the Anatolian capital as a “gray, soulless desert”—Ankara is stepping onto the global stage next month, when it plays host to the 2024 NATO Summit scheduled for July 7-8. For delegates, journalists, and visitors descending on the city for the high-stakes gathering, this will be their first chance to see whether Ankara really lives up to its unflattering reputation. As a long-time resident who has called Ankara home since 2019, I have a deeply biased take: this underappreciated capital is full of hidden surprises, with thousands of years of history and a booming culinary scene waiting to be explored beyond the summit conference rooms.

    Ankara’s roots stretch all the way back to the ancient Hittite civilization, and centuries later it grew into a vital Roman trade hub, renowned across the Mediterranean for its luxurious goat wool. For centuries, the trade sustained the city, but legend holds that 19th-century European smugglers managed to transport Ankara’s prized goats to South Africa and North America, collapsing the local wool industry and leaving the city overlooked by the Ottoman Empire for generations. That changed when Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of modern Turkey, selected Ankara as the new republic’s capital in the 1920s. Over the following two decades, Atatürk oversaw the construction of a purpose-built capital: grand tree-lined boulevards, world-class schools, grand theaters, government ministries, and sprawling public parks, most of which still stand and shape the city’s character today.

    For visitors with free time to explore the city ahead of or after summit events, here is my curated guide to the best of Ankara, from traditional Turkish fare to modern cultural hotspots.

    ### Culinary Highlights by Neighborhood
    If you are staying near the Cukurambar district, home to the JW Marriott and other major summit hotels, you will find no shortage of standout dining options:
    – **Muslum Kebap**: A favorite gathering spot for Ankara’s conservative politicians and senior bureaucrats, this spot is slightly higher-priced than local kebab chains, but its exceptional Adana kebab and melt-in-your-mouth kusleme (tender slow-cooked lamb cut) are well worth the cost. For dessert, walk next door to Sitki Usta to try the signature moist “islak baklava.”
    – **Bayram Usta Yaprak Kebap**: For a unique grilled meat experience, travel a short distance to this restaurant, famous for its yaprak kebab—thinly sliced marinated meat cooked slowly over open flame.
    – **Taka**: This Black Sea-region themed restaurant, located just steps from the ruling AKP party headquarters and popular with top government officials, serves stellar doner kebab, traditional bean stew, and fluffy Black Sea pide flatbread, but its standout dish is rich sea bass stew. For even more authentic Black Sea cuisine, don’t miss Niyazi Kesim, a beloved local hidden gem.
    – **1071 Manti Cukurambar**: Just a 10-minute walk from the Marriott, this spot serves solid Kayseri-style Turkish dumplings (manti), making it a great stop if you want to sample this iconic dish without traveling across the city.

    If your accommodation is near Tunali, where the Grand Ankara Hotel, Sheraton, and Hilton are located, you will have even more diverse options to explore:
    Turkey’s famous meze—small shareable plates of vegetables, seafood, and cured meat—are the centerpiece of the traditional meyhane (Turkish tavern), and pair perfectly with either anise-flavored raki (what many Turks consider the national drink, a label President Recep Erdogan famously argues belongs to yogurt-based ayran). For one of the best meyhane experiences in the city, visit Afitap Tunus, which serves more than 50 different meze using everything from cured pastirma to eggplant, yogurt, and fresh shrimp. Incir is another excellent option, while Ege Restaurant offers a more budget-friendly, laid-back experience with outdoor evening seating.

    Contrary to what many first-time visitors assume, Ankara boasts some of the best fish restaurants in all of Turkey, thanks to daily fresh shipments from the Black, Marmara, and Aegean Seas—all within easy driving distance of the landlocked capital. Trilye, located on a scenic uphill spot, is widely considered the city’s top fish restaurant, serving delicious Black Sea kalkan turbot and a range of standout hot appetizers. Chef Bros, Yelken Balik, and Deli Yengec are all great alternatives if Trilye is fully booked.

    For other local favorites near Tunali and Cankaya:
    – Masa Başı Kebapcisi serves reliably delicious traditional kebab
    – Mutlu Lokantası on Guvenlik Street offers what many locals call the best doner kebab in the entire city
    – Cankaya Lokantasi, located near Ankara’s iconic Atakule observation tower, was founded by a former personal chef for Turkish President Ismet Inonu, and serves a classic presidential-style feast
    – For pizza, try Studyo Pizza, where renowned local chef Murat Artukmac creates pies with fresh Anatolian ingredients. Unica on Simsek Street also serves exceptional crispy pizza, and its creamy hummus is a must-order.
    – Kokorec—grilled lamb intestines, a classic Turkish hangover cure and staple street food dating back to Byzantine times—can be enjoyed at Kitir, near Kugulu Park, one of the only spots in the country that serves the hearty dish alongside cold beer.
    – For a leisurely Turkish breakfast, don’t miss Vina Bakery on Cinnah Street and Kakule Bakery on Buklum Street, both long-favored by locals.

    ### Trendy New Hotspots and Cultural Attractions
    Beyond traditional dining, Ankara has a fast-growing modern scene, and one of the most popular new hubs is the recently renovated Esat Hal market district near Tunali. This trendy space hosts boutique shops, cafes, community projects, and some of the city’s best modern dining:
    – Poche, a modern sandwich shop inspired by the flavors of northeastern Kars, serves rich cheesy and meaty sandwiches, but its signature sutlac (Turkish rice pudding) is the real star
    – The Log Burger is widely agreed to serve the best burger in Ankara, no competition
    – Celebrity chef Tolgar Mireli recently opened Halden, a restaurant highlighting innovative modern Turkish cuisine; don’t miss the sea bass ceviche, half-baked chicken, Cafe de Paris burger, and silky chocolate mousse
    – After a meal, grab a coffee at the sleek, modern Kakule Coffee, or walk next door to the lush Amelie’s Garden
    – Soul Kitchen combines an independent apparel and gift boutique with a casual cafe, serving great pizza and tiramisu for shoppers stopping for a break.

    For visitors looking to stretch their legs during the summit—including a certain French president who has sparked local speculation about where he will go for his daily morning run—Ankara has no shortage of green space. Botanik Park, Portakal Cicegi Parki, and Segmenler Park offer shaded, hilly trails perfect for running or hiking, while Dikmen Vadisi, a man-made urban valley, offers sweeping scenic views, and Kurtulus Park is ideal for runners who prefer flat terrain. The best option for a casual walk or run, though, is the sprawling Genclik Parki, which was commissioned by Ataturk himself in the 1920s.

    No trip to Ankara is complete without a trip to Atakule, the iconic observation tower that offers unrivaled panoramic views of the entire city center. History and culture buffs will also want to add these spots to their itinerary:
    – The Museum of Anatolian Civilizations, an award-winning museum housing thousands of priceless ancient artifacts from across Anatolia, is an absolute must-visit
    – The Ankara Art and Sculpture Museum, Rahmi M Koc Museum, and CerModern (one of Turkey’s top modern art spaces) are all worth a stop
    – To learn about the early years of the Turkish Republic, visit the Is Bankasi Museum, housed in a stunningly preserved early republican-era building
    – In the historic Ulus district, don’t miss the ancient ruins of the Temple of Augustus, the nearby Haci Bayram Veli Islamic shrine, and the Column of Julian, a Roman monument erected in 362 CE to mark the visit of Emperor Julian to the city.

    As NATO’s summit draws thousands of global visitors to this often-overlooked capital, there has never been a better time to discover everything Ankara has to offer beyond its unfair reputation as a boring government town.

  • Israel’s largest oil refineries to undergo years of repairs after Iranian strikes, report says

    Israel’s largest oil refineries to undergo years of repairs after Iranian strikes, report says

    For months, Israeli officials and the operator of the country’s largest oil refining complex downplayed the impact of Iranian missile attacks on the strategic Haifa Bay facility. But new reports from multiple Israeli media outlets have pulled back the curtain on far more extensive destruction than was originally disclosed to the public, revealing a years-long reconstruction timeline that will reshape the site’s operational capacity for the foreseeable future.

    The revelation comes amid longstanding Israeli military censorship that has restricted the flow of information about damage from Iranian strikes during ongoing US-Israeli military conflict with Iran, raising new questions about government transparency around the economic and security costs of regional hostilities.

    Israeli Channel 12 News first broke the revised account of the damage on Monday, confirming that two separate Iranian strikes carried out earlier this year inflicted critical harm to the refinery complex, directly contradicting prior statements from Energy Minister Eli Cohen and Bazan, the private company that manages the site. Just months ago, in a formal filing to the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange in March, Bazan sought to downplay the incident, acknowledging only “localised damage” to the roof of a single distillate storage tank, and insisting all production infrastructure remained fully operational. “The company estimates that the damage is not significant. As of the time of this announcement, all the company’s facilities remain operational,” the company stated at the time.

    But an unreleased official internal report from Israel’s Ministry of Interior, cited by Israeli outlet Yeshiva World, documents harm to critical infrastructure that was never made public: gas turbines, steam boilers, and central electrical rooms all sustained heavy damage that was hidden from public view. The Interior Ministry has now approved a massive reconstruction project that is not scheduled to reach full completion until 2028, a timeline that would have been unthinkable based on the original, minimal damage assessment.

    Worse still, one large oil derivatives storage tank hit in the March 2025 strike is completely beyond repair, and cannot be salvaged or returned to service. The damage did not begin this year, either: Channel 12 confirmed the refinery also sustained significant damage during the 12-day 2024 Israel-Iran war. In that June 2025 strike, three Bazan employees were killed after Iranian missiles successfully penetrated the US-backed Iron Dome mobile air defense system, a defensive barrier that Israeli officials have long claimed provides near-total protection against incoming projectile attacks. After that earlier strike, Bazan publicly pegged losses at only $150 million to $200 million, and officials insisted domestic fuel supplies would remain completely unaffected, a claim that can now be reexamined in light of the new disclosures.

    The Haifa Bay refineries are far more than a standard industrial site: they are one of Israel’s most strategically critical energy assets, meeting the majority of domestic demand for refined oil products that power manufacturing, agriculture, national infrastructure, and household consumption across the country. Per Bazan’s own public data, the complex processes roughly 26,000 tonnes of crude oil per day, and has an annual throughput capacity of 9.8 million tonnes of crude oil.

    The facility also carries deep historical significance: it was originally constructed during the British Mandate for Palestine, when British authorities built the complex to receive crude oil transported from Iraq via the historic Kirkuk-Haifa pipeline. When Israeli forces seized control of Haifa during the 1948 Arab-Israeli war and established the State of Israel, the new government nationalized and took full control of the refineries, and the site’s iconic Bazan cooling towers have since become one of the most recognizable landmarks of the northern port city.

    The underreporting of damage to the refinery is not an isolated incident: for years, Israel has enforced strict military censorship to conceal the full extent of damage caused by Iranian missile attacks across the country. Data collected by independent Israeli outlet +972 Magazine, which has tracked military censorship trends since 2011, shows that censorship reached a 13-year peak in 2024, when roughly 8,000 articles were either fully banned from publication or partially redacted. While the total number of censored articles declined slightly in 2025 to around 5,000, that still marks the second-highest annual censorship total recorded since +972 began its tracking.

    Iran has targeted a wide range of high-value strategic sites across Israel during the ongoing conflict, beyond the Haifa Bay refineries: reported targets have included the Kirya, Israel’s central military headquarters in Tel Aviv, the prestigious Weizmann Institute of Science, the Nevatim Airbase in southern Israel, and the commercial port of Haifa. Earlier this month, the Times of Israel published confirmation of additional damage at the Ramat David airbase, based on analysis of low-resolution satellite imagery of the site.

    This story was originally published by Middle East Eye, an independent outlet specializing in original, on-the-ground coverage of the Middle East and North Africa region.

  • Gaza genocide and arms company profits underpin anti-Nato protests in Turkey

    Gaza genocide and arms company profits underpin anti-Nato protests in Turkey

    When U.S. President Donald Trump touched down in Ankara for the 2026 NATO Summit this week, long-simmering domestic anger over Turkey’s 74-year membership in the transatlantic military alliance reached a fever pitch, fueled by the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza and sweeping government restrictions on dissent ahead of the high-stakes gathering.

    While left-wing groups in Turkey have opposed NATO membership for decades, the alliance’s failure to condemn Israel’s military campaign in Gaza – paired with the Turkish government’s decision to ban all protests across Ankara for the full duration of the summit – has galvanized unprecedented cross-ideological opposition to the conference. In a challenge to NATO’s official narrative of collective European defense, the Workers’ Party of Turkey (TIP), a left-wing opposition party holding three seats in the Turkish parliament, organized a parallel Anti-Imperialist Peace Summit in Istanbul this past weekend, bringing together hundreds of anti-war activists and international socialist figures from across the globe.

    The counter-summit’s founding manifesto, titled *No to NATO*, directly pushes back against the landmark commitment all NATO member states agreed to in 2025: a mandate to raise annual defense spending to 5% of national GDP by 2035. “The 2026 Ankara Summit opens a new era where working people across all NATO member states face greater vulnerability to exploitation and war, even as they are forced to bear the burden of rising defense budgets,” the pamphlet reads. “This policy diverts hard-earned working-class wealth to fund U.S. and Israeli-led wars around the world, and line the pockets of giant arms industry monopolies that profit from global conflict.”

    Despite the counter-summit being a legally registered political event, Turkish authorities blocked dozens of international delegates from entering the country. A TIP spokesperson, speaking to Middle East Eye on condition of anonymity, confirmed that multiple scheduled attendees were turned away at border crossings, while delegates from organizations including the International Peace Bureau and the youth wing of Germany’s left-wing Die Linke party were detained overnight at Istanbul’s airport, had their personal devices confiscated, and deported shortly after. “These are peaceful activists and political representatives who came to participate in a public, legal meeting,” the spokesperson said. “Their treatment proves exactly what we have long argued: the security framework built around NATO summits is not directed at external threats – it is aimed at silencing people who oppose war.”

    In the weeks leading up to the main summit, Turkish security forces have carried out a widespread crackdown on opposition voices, arresting at least 225 people. While authorities claim most detainees are supporters of the armed leftist DHKP/C group or the Islamic State, the detainee list also includes prominent non-violent dissidents: academic Emel Memis, LGBTQ rights activist and journalist Yildiz Tar, Nevzat Ozer of the environmental NGO Tema Foundation, Burcu Arikan, spokesperson for the independent labor union Umut-Sen, and Semra Demir and Kursat Bafra, lawyers from the Progressive Lawyers Association. The TIP spokesperson added that 17 additional party members have been detained since the summit opened.

    Turkey’s complicated history with NATO stretches back to 1952, when the country joined the alliance in exchange for Western support, after committing troops to the Korean War. At the height of the Cold War, Turkey’s geographic location along the Soviet Union’s southern border made it one of NATO’s most strategically valuable members, a role that nearly triggered global nuclear catastrophe during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. The deployment of U.S. nuclear weapons in Turkey targeting the Soviet Union was a core driver of the crisis, and their secret removal was the key concession that prevented open nuclear war. Today, Turkey hosts the critical Incirlik and Konya air bases that have been central to Western military operations across the Middle East for decades, and boasts the second-largest standing military in the alliance, outranked only by the United States.

    For successive Turkish governments, NATO membership has long been seen as a critical security guarantee, protecting the country from threats ranging from the Soviet Union to armed separatist groups and hostile neighboring states in the Middle East. But for Turkish leftists and pro-democracy campaigners, NATO has played a far more insidious role at home: it has backed the training of far-right death squads, supported the creation of clandestine anti-communist Counter-Guerrilla groups, and propped up a Turkish military establishment that has repeatedly intervened to curtail democratic governance.

    Outside analysts echo many of these criticisms. Khem Rogaly, a senior research fellow at the Common Wealth think tank, argues that NATO’s new 5% GDP defense spending mandate functions first and foremost as a mechanism of economic extraction, funneling public funds from European governments straight into the U.S.-dominated military industrial complex. “Mandatory military spending targets reshape entire economies around the arms industry,” Rogaly explained to Middle East Eye. “This leaves deep, long-lasting economic damage: military spending generates far less economic growth and far fewer jobs than equivalent investments in other public priorities. By forcing members to massively ramp up military spending, the new target means underfunding social programs that would deliver far broader shared economic benefits.”

    The alliance’s response to the ongoing Gaza crisis has done more than any other recent issue to inflame anti-NATO sentiment in Turkey, even uniting normally opposed leftist and Islamist factions in opposition. TIP’s spokesperson points out that no NATO mechanism has ever been activated to restrain Israel’s military campaign, and that the most consequential item on the 2026 summit agenda is a plan to fully integrate Israel’s security apparatus into NATO’s regional strategy. The spokesperson added that the Turkish government’s high-profile public criticism of Israel amounts to little more than “crocodile tears,” as bilateral trade between the two countries continues uninterrupted. Recent high-profile disputes between Turkey and other NATO allies are also largely political theater, the spokesperson argued: “Politically, NATO membership gives the government bargaining power with Washington and a seat at the imperialist table. Economically, Turkey’s growing domestic arms industry is fully integrated into the alliance’s supply chains, so rising military budgets mean rising profits for the corporations closest to the ruling regime. Occasional anti-Western rhetoric is just for domestic consumption – the core institutions of imperialism operate without disruption on Turkish soil.”

    Controversy has also extended to press access for the summit: multiple Turkish reporters from prominent independent outlets including *Cumhuriyet*, *Sozcu*, *Anka*, *T24*, and *Medyascope* were denied press accreditation. When Middle East Eye reached out to NATO for comment, a spokesperson referred the outlet to a social media post stating that the alliance relies on the host nation to manage all accreditation decisions.

    This year’s summit has been marked by unusual behind-the-scenes tensions, with two core sources of anxiety for alliance organizers: first, ongoing uncertainty over Donald Trump’s commitment to the alliance, even with less than three years remaining in his current term. Trump’s repeated public criticisms of NATO have pressured member states to make concessions to keep the U.S. engaged. Second, many NATO members and key allies including Israel have repeatedly questioned Turkey’s alignment in recent years, due to Ankara’s continued diplomatic and economic engagement with NATO rivals Iran and Russia.

    These anxieties have driven the Turkish government’s harsh crackdown on dissent, according to Selim Koru, founder of the *Kulturkampf* Substack. Koru argues that the protest ban and mass arrests are a deliberate move by an intensely geopolitically focused government to prevent domestic unrest from embarrassing Turkey on the global stage. “Turkey is the only NATO member whose value to the alliance is constantly being questioned by fellow members, and that is in large part due to the ruling government’s own bombastic rhetoric,” Koru explained. “Over the past decade, Turkish policy has swung wildly between strident opposition to NATO orthodoxy from 2013 to 2023 and staunchly pro-U.S., pro-NATO diplomacy today. It also seems alliance leaders have figured out that Turkey’s ruling class responds well to public praise, so they have been very generous with compliments.”

    So far, that approach appears to have paid off for both sides. Ahead of the summit, Trump announced he was considering lifting the F-35 fighter jet sale ban he imposed on Turkey during his first presidential term, and plans to roll back additional sanctions imposed on Ankara. Trump called Turkey an “extraordinary” NATO ally, offering far warmer praise for the country than he extended to many other alliance members – including Spain, which Trump threatened to cut off from all U.S. trade.

    For TIP and the anti-NATO movement, the 2026 Ankara summit exposes the lie at the heart of NATO’s branding as a defender of Western liberal values. “Today, the 5% GDP spending target agreed last year means every dollar cut from healthcare, education, and housing across Europe is redirected to the arms industry,” the TIP spokesperson said. “Militarization does not make European people safer. It fuels escalation, strengthens far-right movements, deepens economic inequality, and pulls the continent closer to war. Genuine security for Europe comes from disarmament, diplomacy, and robust social welfare – not an arms race that only weapons monopolies win.”

  • Pakistan ends sales tax on sanitary products in fight against period poverty

    Pakistan ends sales tax on sanitary products in fight against period poverty

    For millions of women and girls across Pakistan, access to basic menstrual hygiene has long been a privilege, not a right. Growing up in Punjab’s Attock district, 26-year-old Bushra Mahnoor knows this reality all too well. In a household with six menstruating people, commercial sanitary pads were treated as a precious, rationed commodity. Supplies ran out constantly, and steep costs – driven by government taxes that labeled the products non-essential luxury goods – forced the family to stretch every purchase as far as it could go.

    “We felt like we were competing with each other for the supplies,” Mahnoor recalled, adding that constant anxiety about leaks haunted her school days, where she would sneak and hide spare bits of supplies whenever she could. Like generations of women in Pakistan, she grew up surrounded by harmful misinformation: that bathing during menstruation causes illness and weight gain, that periods are a mark of impurity. Teachers refused to discuss the topic in class, leaving families too shamed to address it at home.

    This deeply unfair experience is not an isolated case. Latest 2025 World Bank data underscores the scale of the crisis: women make up 49.3% of Pakistan’s total population, yet only 12% can access and afford commercial menstrual products. Just 27% of Pakistani women understand menstruation is a normal, natural biological process. Campaigners trace this public health crisis to decades of government neglect and a pervasive cultural culture of silence and stigma that has pushed menstrual health out of public discourse.

    That silence began to crack earlier this month, when Pakistan’s Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb announced the elimination of the 18% sales tax on menstrual products and contraceptives as part of the 2026–27 national budget. The long-contested levy, widely known as the “period tax,” has been a core target for gender equality advocates across the country for years.

    UNICEF Pakistan has already hailed the policy change as a meaningful milestone, framing it as a critical step toward tackling widespread period poverty by officially recognizing menstrual products as essential health and hygiene items rather than unnecessary luxury goods. The reform comes after a year-long legal battle led by two young activists: 25-year-old women’s rights advocate and human rights lawyer Mahnoor Omer, and 29-year-old tax lawyer Ahsan Jahangir Khan.

    Under Pakistan’s 1990 Sales Tax Act, menstrual products were classified as standard consumer goods, with imported products facing an extra 25% customs duty. Combined, these taxes inflated product prices by as much as 40%, putting basic sanitary care out of reach for the majority of low-income girls and women. The injustice was made starker by the fact that items like flavored yogurt and cottage cheese were granted essential goods status, while menstrual products were excluded.

    Omer, who began working with non-profits serving low-income communities at a young age, had seen firsthand the human cost of this policy. She documented countless cases where women relied on rinsed, reused scraps of old cloth for days at a time, leading to recurrent urinary tract infections, skin rashes, and other preventable health complications. It was this experience that pushed her to act after she learned of a successful campaign by two Nepali law students who had overturned their country’s 13% VAT on sanitary pads in 2024, prompting the government to cut product prices by nearly 20%.

    While working at the Supreme Court of Pakistan early last year, Omer connected with Khan, and the pair began drafting a legal challenge to Pakistan’s period tax. In January 2025, they filed a constitutional petition arguing that the discriminatory tax violated the principles of gender equality and human dignity enshrined in Pakistan’s constitution. A parallel online advocacy campaign quickly gathered tens of thousands of signatures from supporters across the country.

    Though the Federal Board of Revenue initially defended the tax, claiming it was legally sound and non-discriminatory, the government reversed its position by early July, confirming the sales tax would be fully eliminated. Omer called the moment historic, noting that “In a province large enough to fit 20 European countries, menstruation has never been discussed this openly in the Punjab Assembly.” She added that women’s issues remain chronically underrepresented in Pakistani politics: most male lawmakers have no lived experience of menstrual injustice, while many privileged women in office are far removed from the struggles of low-income communities that bear the brunt of the crisis. Currently, women hold just 66 of 371 total seats in the Punjab provincial assembly, and deep-seated stigma has long blocked open debate of menstrual health policy.

    The legal campaign received critical grassroots support from Mahwari Justice, an organization founded by Bushra Mahnoor in 2022 amid Pakistan’s worst modern flooding, which displaced 33 million people and submerged a third of the country. During the crisis, Mahnoor witnessed acute shortages of sanitary supplies in displacement camps, where women were already facing extreme vulnerabilities. She traveled across affected regions distributing hygiene kits with reusable pads, washing supplies and drying cloths, treating infections that developed after women were forced to use unhygienic cloth substitutes.

    Even with the sales tax eliminated, campaigners emphasize that the fight for full menstrual justice is far from over. Imported menstrual products still carry a 25% customs duty that keeps retail prices artificially high. Advocates are now pushing for full reclassification of menstrual products as zero-rated essential goods, which would eliminate all remaining consumption-related taxes and make affordable products accessible to millions more.

    A growing number of countries have already implemented this progressive policy: the United Kingdom, Ireland, Kenya, South Africa and Canada all impose no taxes on menstrual products, while 18 U.S. states still maintain sales taxes on the products as of March 2026. Despite the remaining barriers, activists in Pakistan say they are growing increasingly confident of securing full tax exemption.

    “Our fight didn’t end with the government saying they will abolish the sales tax; it continues until the court declares this product tax-free,” Khan explained. Beyond tax reform, Omer is already planning her next campaign: pushing for education reform that would mandate comprehensive sexual and reproductive health education in all Pakistani schools. “You can flood the market with the healthiest food, but if children don’t understand why they should eat healthily, no one will buy it,” she said, framing education as a core long-term solution to end stigma.

    In recognition of their groundbreaking work, Omer was named to Time Magazine’s Women of the Year list, while Mahnoor received the 2026 Commonwealth Youth Award, becoming only the fourth Pakistani to earn the honor. Both activists say that while recognition is welcome, it does not resolve the underlying crisis. Still, they point to Aurangzeb’s speech on the floor of the National Assembly – where he publicly described menstrual products as essential to women’s health – as a transformative shift. For decades, the word “menstruation” was rarely uttered in official Pakistani parliamentary spaces, so having the issue acknowledged on the official record is a victory in itself.

    “I think menstruation products were never included on the list of essential goods because menstruation is a term refused to be uttered on the Punjab assembly floor. But it has now, and that’s a significant step forward,” Omer said.

  • Iranian press review: Calls grow to maintain military pressure on Gulf states

    Iranian press review: Calls grow to maintain military pressure on Gulf states

    Against the backdrop of a turbulent year marked by the U.S.-Israeli military campaign that eliminated dozens of Iran’s top political and military leaders, four distinct but interconnected developments have emerged to reshape the country’s geopolitical strategy, internal dissent, institutional power struggles, and national sports landscape. A rising cohort of hardline Iranian analysts affiliated with the country’s ruling establishment has carved out greater influence in policy discourse, advancing a controversial stance that unwavering military pressure on southern Gulf Arab states is the only viable path to securing meaningful economic and trade agreements with the bloc. Majid Shakeri, an analyst closely aligned with Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, laid out this position during a recent televised roundtable discussion, arguing that decades of diplomatic outreach to neighboring Gulf monarchies have produced nothing but empty promises. Shakeri emphasized that this hardline approach should apply equally to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, noting that regional leaders have repeatedly pledged large-scale investment during high-level official meetings only to backtrack on commitments once Iranian policy shifts are pursued. He went a step further, arguing that Iran should sustain targeted strikes on U.S. military bases located across the region — particularly installations in the UAE — to force American forces to withdraw from the Persian Gulf and strengthen Tehran’s leverage in future economic negotiations. “Having a trade agreement with the Persian Gulf countries is not incompatible with continuing military pressure on them because previous experiences have shown that pursuing a neighbourhood policy with them leads nowhere,” Shakeri stated. Parallel to this geopolitical debate, grieving Iranian mothers have leveraged the sacred Shia Muslim mourning period of Ashura to openly commemorate their children killed during the January nationwide crackdown on anti-government protests, turning a religious observance of resistance against injustice into a public rebuke of state authorities. Ashura, which marks the 7th-century martyrdom of Imam Hussein, the Prophet Muhammad’s grandson, at the Battle of Karbala, has long carried dual meaning for Shia communities as both a time of collective mourning and a symbol of resistance against oppressive rule. In recent days, Persian-language media outlets have circulated widely shared videos showing these mothers publicly honoring their slain children, with informal mourning processions stopping outside victims’ homes to pay respects. One widely circulated clip captures the mother of 18-year-old Mani Safarpour, who was killed during unrest in southern Tehran, clutching her son’s portrait as mourners beat ceremonial drums, repeatedly crying out “My son, my dear son” while striking her head and chest in ritual grief. Another video records the mother of 22-year-old university student Matin Parvizi, who was shot dead in the northwestern city of Zanjan, speaking at her son’s graveside, drawing a direct parallel between modern Iranian authorities and the historical tyrant Yazid who ordered Imam Hussein’s killing. “The Yazids of our time shot my son in the back while his hands were in his pockets,” she said. “He had nothing with which to defend himself.” Official Iranian government figures put the total death toll from the January unrest at 3,117 people, but independent human rights organizations have challenged that count, documenting far higher casualties. The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (Hrana) reports it has confirmed the identities of 6,488 killed protesters. Meanwhile, internal tensions have erupted within Iran’s legislative branch over the four-month-long suspension of parliament, with sitting lawmakers accusing Speaker Ghalibaf of an illegal power grab that sidelines the legislature and concentrates wartime decision-making exclusively in his own hands. Parliament has not held a public plenary session since February 28, the date the U.S. and Israel launched their current military campaign against Iranian targets. In recent weeks, criticism of the continued suspension has grown into open dissent among sitting lawmakers. Ghalibaf has justified the closure by claiming the decision was mandated by Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, but multiple lawmakers have directly refuted this claim, labeling it a falsehood. Conservative lawmaker Kamran Ghazanfari was among the most outspoken critics, noting: “We have repeatedly said that Mr Ghalibaf has been illegally keeping the parliament’s public sessions closed for the past four months.” Fellow lawmaker Ali Akbar Alizadeh echoed that skepticism, confirming that after official inquiries, neither the Supreme National Security Council nor its executive secretariat issued any formal order to shutter the legislature. Turning to the 2026 FIFA World Cup, Iran’s national football team has found itself at the center of a sharp divide in public assessment: eliminated from the knockout stage after drawing all three of its group matches, the team has won widespread praise from international fans and analysts for its performance under extraordinary external pressure, while domestic experts have lambasted its tactical shortcomings and the corrupt, government-aligned management that they blame for the early exit. As one of the tournament’s co-hosts, the United States imposed unprecedented barriers on the Iranian delegation: it barred the team from establishing a domestic training camp, denied visas to multiple technical and coaching staff members, and required the entire squad to cross the border into Tijuana, Mexico, for overnight stays after each match played on U.S. soil. International observers have largely framed the team’s ability to earn three draws against these odds as a remarkable achievement. Back inside Iran, however, leading football figures have dismissed these off-field challenges as a distraction, arguing that the elimination stems from deep structural flaws in Iranian football, including what they describe as a “mafia-like” governing structure controlled by government-backed interests. Former national player and veteran coach Mohammad Kalhor placed the blame squarely on the Iranian Football Federation, arguing that the shadowy network of interests has shaped both the selection of an over-age playing squad and the appointment of the current head coach. Assessing the team’s on-pitch performance, Kalhor told the Etemad newspaper: “In terms of tactics and style of play, our team did not perform well. The reason is that our national team had no plan to build attacks from the beginning to the end of the matches, except when we received a goal and had to attack. We had the ability to attack before that, but I do not know why it did not happen.” This report is compiled from an Iranian press review, and its content has not been independently verified by Middle East Eye.

  • Trump’s Board of Peace says Unrwa has ‘no place’ in Gaza

    Trump’s Board of Peace says Unrwa has ‘no place’ in Gaza

    A controversial proposal from former U.S. President Donald Trump’s Gaza-focused Board of Peace has thrown the future of humanitarian aid in the embattled enclave into question, with the group publicly asserting that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) has no place in a restructured Gaza.

    In a social media post published on platform X, the Board framed its call for UNRWA’s ouster as a long-overdue break from decades of failed policy. “We are turning a page on the complex of perpetual aid dependency and conflict. The people of Gaza deserve better,” the post read. The statement shared and amplified a speech delivered Tuesday by U.S. envoy Jeff Bartos at the annual UN pledging conference for UNRWA, where Bartos urged donor nations to halt all direct funding to the agency and redirect their financial support to the Board of Peace instead.

    “You can choose to fund incitement, terrorism, and stagnation, or you can choose to fund the Board of Peace, giving Gazans a path to peace, prosperity and real, durable change,” Bartos told attendees.

    For over seven decades, UNRWA has stood as the backbone of Palestinian humanitarian support, serving roughly 5.9 million registered Palestinian refugees across Gaza, the Israeli-occupied West Bank, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. It is the lead UN agency operating in the occupied Palestinian territories, managing the vast majority of aid distribution across the blockaded Gaza Strip. Today, 2.2 million Gazans—nearly the entire population of the enclave—rely on UNRWA for basic needs including food, emergency shelter, primary healthcare, and primary education. Local and international aid groups alike depend on UNRWA’s extensive on-the-ground distribution networks to deliver their own assistance to vulnerable communities.

    But since March 2025, an Israeli government ban on UNRWA operations within Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories has severely limited the agency’s ability to function, blocking UNRWA staff and direct aid shipments from entering Gaza and crippling its activities in the besieged enclave. UNRWA officials have confirmed that thousands of tons of aid, including enough food parcels, flour, and emergency shelter supplies to support hundreds of thousands of displaced people, are currently stuck in warehouses outside Gaza, unable to reach those in need due to the restrictions.

    The Palestinian Authority has flatly rejected the Board of Peace’s calls, reaffirming that UNRWA remains “an indispensable lifeline” for all Palestinians and fulfills an “essential role” in delivering education, healthcare, and emergency assistance across the occupied territories.

    The latest debate over UNRWA’s future unfolds against a backdrop of a rapidly deteriorating humanitarian crisis that has already drawn widespread international condemnation. In February, Israel’s High Court issued a temporary stay on a planned ban targeting 36 major international aid organizations, including Medecins Sans Frontieres, Oxfam, Save the Children, ActionAid, and the Norwegian Refugee Council. Those groups had received orders in December requiring them to comply with strict new regulatory requirements—including the full disclosure of all staff personal details—to continue operating in Gaza, a mandate many organizations have said is unworkable and puts their teams at severe risk.

    A June 2025 report from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) painted a grim picture of conditions inside Gaza, describing the overall situation as “volatile and insecure.” The report noted that the vast majority of Gaza’s population is now confined to shrinking, massively overcrowded displacement camps and residential areas, where core public services are stretched far beyond capacity. Most residents lack consistent access to safe drinking water, and mountains of uncollected solid waste are piling up in residential neighborhoods, creating major public health risks.

    The crisis has been deepened by progressively tighter Israeli restrictions on aid entry into the enclave. Currently, the Kerem Shalom crossing remains the only official entry point for approved humanitarian and commercial cargo bound for Gaza. Starting June 1, Israeli forces began redirecting all incoming humanitarian convoys through a newly built checkpoint, where deliveries have been consistently held up by long delays, heavy congestion, technical malfunctions, and extremely slow screening processes.

    On Tuesday, Israeli media shed new light on the Board of Peace’s broader plans for Gaza, revealing that the group intends to launch so-called “Hamas-free humanitarian zones” in the enclave. Under the proposal, Palestinian civilians would be relocated to these designated zones while the Israeli military expands its full military control over the rest of the Gaza Strip. Israeli national newspaper Israel Hayom reported that the first such zone will open in Tel Sultan, near the southern Gazan city of Rafah, within the next several weeks, and will only house civilians confirmed to have no weapons and no affiliation with Hamas.

    According to the report, the zone will be policed by a newly formed multinational contingent called the International Stabilisation Force (ISF), which will be equipped solely with non-lethal weapons and based at Israel’s Amitai Camp near the Gaza border, operating under the command of the Board of Peace. While the plan states that humanitarian aid will be delivered to the zones, no details have been released about how aid will be distributed, who will manage distribution, or whether existing international aid groups will be allowed to operate inside the sites.

  • Papuan rebels say they shot dead US pilot and burned his plane

    Papuan rebels say they shot dead US pilot and burned his plane

    Decades-long separatist unrest in Indonesia’s resource-rich Papua region has taken a new violent turn, with the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) claiming responsibility for the fatal shooting of an American pilot and the subsequent burning of his aircraft in Highland Papua province.

    According to TPNPB spokesman Sebby Sambom, the attack unfolded shortly after pilot Nicholas F. Gosselin landed the plane in Yahukimo region on Thursday. Sambom said the strike was carried out in fulfillment of the group’s pre-established ban on all civilian flights in the disputed area, a restriction imposed over allegations that civilian pilots have been actively ferrying Indonesian troops and military logistics to support government counterinsurgency operations.

    “We immediately fired upon and burned the plane because it had violated the TPNPB ultimatum,” Sambom stated in a formal declaration from the group. He added that the killing was intended to send a clear message to all parties operating in the region: “We are prepared to fire upon any civilian aircraft across the Land of Papua that assists Indonesian military forces in transporting troops or military logistics.”

    Sambom also laid out terms for the recovery of Gosselin’s body, requiring Indonesian authorities to enter the area without accompanying military or police personnel. In line with the group’s long-standing position, he called on the Indonesian government to enter into direct negotiations to resolve the decades-long sovereignty conflict that has defined the region since 1969, when Papua was formally incorporated into Indonesia. Separatist estimates claim the ongoing conflict has resulted in thousands of civilian deaths and widespread mass displacement of indigenous Papuan communities.

    Indonesian official accounts have so far left key details of the incident unconfirmed. Authorities have verified that Gosselin’s plane was found burned at the Yahukimo airport, but have not independently confirmed Gosselin’s death nor the status of the seven passengers who were on board the aircraft at the time of the incident.

    Indonesia’s Directorate General of Civil Aviation noted that no security threats were reported as the flight approached for landing, but all communication with the plane was lost immediately after it touched down. “Initial reports, from the director of the airport where the flight took off, state that pilot has died,” the agency’s official statement read. “The suspected cause of the incident is still awaiting further confirmation from the relevant authorities.”

    Yusuf Sutejo, a spokesperson for Indonesia’s combined police-military counterinsurgency operation in the region, also said authorities could not yet confirm whether the aircraft was targeted in a rebel attack, nor provide any update on the condition of those on board. The U.S. Embassy in Jakarta and the U.S. State Department have been contacted for comment on the incident, but have not yet released an official statement as of press time.

    This latest attack aligns with a pattern of targeting of foreign civilian pilots by the TPNPB in recent years. In 2024, a New Zealand pilot held hostage by the group for 19 months was released following extended negotiations between Indonesian and New Zealand officials. Just one month before that release, TPNPB gunmen killed another New Zealand helicopter pilot, Glen Malcolm Conning, who was shot dead shortly after landing in a remote Papuan village.

  • Beijing says China-EU trade talks set in the fall, to be held regularly each year

    Beijing says China-EU trade talks set in the fall, to be held regularly each year

    Against a backdrop of a ballooning bilateral trade deficit and shifting global trade dynamics, China and the European Union have formalized a new framework for regular high-level trade engagement, agreeing to hold ministerial-level trade negotiations one to two times annually to grow and rebalance their commercial relationship, China’s Ministry of Commerce confirmed Thursday.

    The announcement follows a Monday meeting in Brussels between EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič and Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao, where Beijing extended a formal invitation for Šefčovič to visit China in autumn 2024, confirmed ministry spokesperson He Yadong to reporters. Under the newly launched China-EU Trade and Investment Consultation Mechanism, the two partners have also outlined plans to deepen collaborative work in two high-priority global sectors: artificial intelligence development and the global transition to renewable energy.

    The new consultation structure comes as the EU faces mounting domestic and international pressure to address its growing trade imbalance with China. Last year alone, the EU’s trade deficit with China expanded to roughly €360 billion ($410 billion), averaging nearly €1 billion per day. The surge in Chinese exports of electric vehicles and energy storage batteries to European markets has been a key driver of this widening gap, prompting increasing calls from European industry leaders for policy intervention.

    In remarks after his Brussels meeting, Šefčovič emphasized that as the trade gap grows, the bloc is committed to protecting its domestic industrial base and advancing a fair global competitive landscape, setting an October deadline for achieving tangible progress on trade rebalancing. Tensions have already escalated in recent weeks: new EU trade rules targeting Chinese imports took effect Wednesday, designed to shield the European steel sector and impose stricter controls on low-value small parcels shipped via cross-border e-commerce.

    Chinese stakeholders have pushed back on European trade restrictions, framing the imbalance as a product of EU policy choices. A post last week from Yuyuantantian, a social media account linked to Chinese state media, noted that China has signaled openness to increasing imports from the EU, but argued the bloc must ease its existing export controls on high-tech goods bound for China and stop framing trade and economic issues as geopolitical weapons.

    The current standoff also unfolds against a broader global backdrop of shifting supply chain strategy. In June 2024, G7 leaders issued a joint communique committing to building resilient alternative supply chains for critical minerals — inputs central to high-tech manufacturing and national defense production — with the explicit goal of reducing collective reliance on Chinese supplies.