Global Pulse

标签： Asia

亚洲

  • Vance tells Israel Trump is ‘your only ally’ left as Iran talks postponed

    Vance tells Israel Trump is ‘your only ally’ left as Iran talks postponed

    Tensions between the U.S. government and Israeli leadership have escalated sharply this week, after Vice President JD Vance delivered a blunt public warning to Israeli officials: President Donald Trump is the only major world leader still sympathetic to their cause, and they risk damaging their most critical security partnership by attacking the newly signed U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding (MoU).

    Speaking at a White House press briefing Thursday, Vance pushed back against fierce Israeli criticism of the draft agreement, which includes a reported $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran and paves the way for 60 days of formal negotiations on Tehran’s nuclear program and relief from international economic sanctions. The MoU, which aims to end months of open conflict between the two nations, has sparked widespread outrage across Israel’s political spectrum, with many leaders arguing the deal effectively grants Tehran a major strategic victory.

    Vance laid out a clear two-part message for Israeli cabinet members considering continued public opposition. “Number 1: Donald J. Trump is the only head of state in the entire world who is sympathetic to the nation of Israel at this moment in time,” he told reporters. “If I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world.”

    Israeli officials have also voiced particular anger over provisions in the MoU that require an immediate end to Israel’s ongoing war in Lebanon, with multiple senior figures saying they will refuse to comply with the terms. Itamar Ben Gvir, Israel’s far-right national security minister, has been one of the deal’s most vocal opponents, insisting Israeli forces will maintain their presence in occupied southern Lebanese territory indefinitely. In an interview with *The New York Times*, Vance pushed back against hardline positions from Ben Gvir and fellow far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, questioning their alternative approach to long-term security. “What is your exact proposal? You’re a country of 9 million people. You can’t just kill your way out of solving every single national security problem that you have,” Vance said.

    The political confrontation comes as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu navigates a challenging path ahead of scheduled October national elections, as he works to shore up sagging approval ratings for his ruling coalition. During a press conference Monday, Netanyahu claimed Israel had secured decisive victories in all recent conflicts across Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and Iran. He also doubled down on his government’s 2025 and 2022 pre-emptive strikes against Iranian nuclear targets, arguing that inaction would have allowed Tehran to develop a functional nuclear weapon.

    Vance reminded Israeli leaders of the depth of U.S. security support that has sustained their country for decades, noting that roughly two-thirds of the defensive military equipment Israel relies on for national protection are manufactured in the United States and funded by American taxpayer dollars. “The problem for Israel is not Donald Trump, and anybody in Israel who thinks their biggest problem is the president of the United States needs to wake up and smell the reality of the situation that country is in,” he added.

    Uncertainty already hangs over the next phase of negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. The first formal negotiating session, scheduled for Friday in Switzerland, has been postponed indefinitely, with the White House announcing late Thursday that Vice President Vance would not attend the upcoming round of direct talks, citing unresolvable “logistical complications” that made the trip unfeasible.

    Fresh violence on Friday has further complicated prospects for a peaceful resolution, as Israel launched new air strikes across southern and eastern Lebanon. Lebanese official counts confirm 18 civilians and combatants were killed in the strikes, while Hezbollah carried out one of its deadliest attacks of the entire conflict, killing four Israeli soldiers including a senior battalion commander. The sudden escalation has reinforced fears that the ceasefire called for in the U.S.-Iran MoU could collapse before formal negotiations even get underway.

  • Palestine Action ban: Court ruling risks ‘slide into authoritarianism’, warn rights advocates

    Palestine Action ban: Court ruling risks ‘slide into authoritarianism’, warn rights advocates

    A controversial UK Court of Appeal ruling that upheld the government’s ban on the pro-Palestinian protest group Palestine Action has drawn fierce criticism from legal experts and civil society campaigners, who warn the decision dangerously expands the country’s already broad terrorism definition and undermines long-protected rights to peaceful protest.

    The ruling, delivered Monday by a five-judge appellate panel, overturned an earlier February 2025 High Court judgment that had struck down the proscription of Palestine Action as unlawful on three key grounds. The lower court had found that then-Home Secretary Yvette Cooper violated her own government’s proscription policies when she designated the group a terrorist organization, that the ban created an unacceptable chilling effect on freedom of speech and peaceful assembly, and that the measure was fundamentally disproportionate: only three of the 385 direct actions carried out by the group were deemed to meet the UK’s legal threshold for terrorist activity, and existing criminal law was already sufficient to prosecute any illegal activity linked to those actions.

    In overturning that decision, the Court of Appeal rejected the finding that Cooper had violated official proscription policy. The appellate judges ruled that policy guidelines did not limit the home secretary’s ability to consider external factors such as the ban’s potential to disrupt the group’s overall operations, arguing Cooper was owed “appropriate latitude” in her national security decision-making, and that her role granted her both institutional authority and democratic accountability to make such a designation. On the question of proportionality, the court held that Cooper had struck a fair balance between individual civil liberties and the UK’s stated national security interests.

    Critics argue the ruling grants unprecedented and undue deference to executive branch decision-making, creating a template that concentrates near-unchecked power in the hands of government ministers at the expense of judicial oversight. Former government lawyer Tim Crosland told Middle East Eye that the decision creates a pattern where courts are reluctant to challenge executive assessments of what counts as terrorism, clearing the way for unfettered executive authority that he argued is already misaligned with public interest, captured by corporate lobbying from the fossil fuel and arms industries.

    The ruling’s foundation rests in part on the interpretation of the UK’s unusually broad terrorism legislation, which includes “serious damage to property” carried out to influence government or intimidate the public for an ideological cause as a terrorist act. Critically, UK law provides no clear legal standard to define what qualifies as “serious damage”, leaving the determination to executive assessment that can be based on financial cost, potential risk to human life, or ties to national security. While government intelligence confirmed only three Palestine Action actions met the threshold for serious damage, the Court of Appeal took a holistic approach to the group’s activities, concluding the organization as a whole “overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism”. The court cited Cooper’s estimate that the three high-profile actions — targeting defence contractor Thales in Glasgow in 2022, Instro Precision in Kent in June 2024, and an Elbit Systems UK facility near Bristol in August 2024 — caused millions of pounds in damage.

    That damage calculation has itself been contested. When sentencing activists for the August 2024 Elbit Systems raid, presiding Justice Johnson relied on an insurance report that underpinned a £1 million payout, which defence lawyers have challenged as being full of hearsay and inaccurate, noting it included damage to areas of the factory activists never entered and was prepared after the insurer had already approved the payout.

    Leading human rights lawyer Michael Mansfield KC argued that even if the damage claims are accepted, they do not justify a terrorist designation. He told Middle East Eye that the ruling overemphasizes the undefined standard of serious damage, a metric that is inherently subjective. Mansfield also rejected the government’s claim that the group’s actions were intended to influence government policy, noting Palestine Action turned to direct action after conventional advocacy failed to shift UK policy on the Israel-Gaza war, with activists acting out of frustration over ongoing civilian harm in Gaza.

    Civil rights organization Liberty warned that the ruling fails to draw any clear line between protected protest activity and terrorism, noting even the appellate court acknowledged it is unusual to designate an organization whose core activity is property-focused direct action as terrorist. The Court of Appeal also justified its overturning of the High Court ruling by arguing the lower court failed to account for an escalation in Palestine Action’s activity in the months leading up to the proscription order in June 2024. The judgment noted that Cooper paused the proscription process in May 2024 to request updated intelligence from Counter Terrorism Policing, which reported 158 additional direct actions, 28 of which caused what was defined as “significant damage” (either costing more than £50,000 in repairs or requiring a large police deployment), including tactics such as lock-ons, occupations, blockades, and vandalism.

    The court also cited an action at Brize Norton air base as evidence of escalation, despite acknowledging the action took place on the same day proscription was announced and that there was significant legal debate over whether it qualified as a terrorist act. Even so, judges ruled the action posed a threat to national security, and that this threat justified granting the home secretary a wide margin of appreciation in her decision to ban the group.

    Mansfield pushed back on the argument that elected politicians deserve automatic judicial deference, arguing that politicians have lost widespread public trust and that the close ties between UK ministers and the Israeli arms industry raise questions about the true motivation for the ban. “I don’t trust ministers to be telling me the absolute truth,” he said. Clive Dolphin, spokesperson for campaign group Defend our Juries, echoed these concerns, noting that the broad deference granted to the home secretary effectively undermines the entire purpose of judicial review, which exists to check executive overreach. “The slide into authoritarianism is not a single step, it’s not that somebody takes over on day one,” Dolphin said. “This is a really, really dangerous ruling.”

  • How Andy Burnham stood up to Starmer over Israel and could now reshape UK foreign policy

    How Andy Burnham stood up to Starmer over Israel and could now reshape UK foreign policy

    Less than two years after securing a landslide general election win, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer finds his grip on the premiership slipping, following a resounding by-election victory that has cleared the path for a major leadership challenge from popular former Manchester mayor Andy Burnham.

    Starmer’s position has been precarious for months. Earlier this year, the Peter Mandelson scandal rocked his administration: sordid connections between the ex-US ambassador, a close Starmer ally, and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein prompted widespread calls for the prime minister to step down. That controversy was followed by devastating losses in May’s local elections, where Labour hemorrhaged support in its traditional northern English and London strongholds. Still, Starmer managed to hold on, with internal Labour sources confirming no party figure was willing to force a leadership change ahead of the local votes.

    The current crisis began in mid-May, when former Health Secretary Wes Streeting resigned from Starmer’s cabinet, citing a loss of confidence in the prime minister’s leadership, warning that “where we need vision, we have a vacuum. Where we need direction, we have drift.” Hours after Streeting’s departure, Labour MP Josh Simons resigned his safe Makerfield seat in northern England, triggering a by-election designed to return Burnham to parliament. Under Labour Party rules, only sitting Members of Parliament can stand for the party leadership, so the by-election was a critical first step for any would-be challenger.

    On Thursday, Burnham secured a decisive win, capturing 55% of the vote in a seat that had seen major defections to Nigel Farage’s far-right Reform UK in recent years. With his return to the Commons confirmed, Burnham now joins Streeting as one of two formal challengers set to oust Starmer.

    The outcome of this looming leadership contest is poised to reshape British foreign policy, most notably on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – an issue that has roiled UK politics for more than two years amid Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Polling expert John Curtice has confirmed that the Green Party, the most prominent major political voice opposing UK support for Israel, inflicted far greater damage on Labour’s local election vote share than Reform UK, as left-wing and pro-Palestinian voters abandoned the party in droves over its position. To win back these voters and counter the Green insurgency, any new Labour leader will be forced to adopt a harder line on Israel.

    Both challengers have laid out different positions on the conflict, with Burnham boasting a long track record of breaking with Starmer’s approach. Burnham, a popular soft-left figure within the party, has a nuanced political history on the issue: he voted for the 2003 UK invasion of Iraq, joined the pro-Israel group Labour Friends of Israel in 2015, and during his 2015 Labour leadership run described the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement as “spiteful” and called Israel a “democracy that has a long history of protecting minorities.”

    But beyond his pro-Israel credentials, Burnham has a lengthy record of criticizing the Israeli government and advocating for Palestinian statehood. He visited the occupied West Bank in 2012 with the pro-Palestine group Labour Friends of Palestine and the Middle East, called Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2015 re-election “depressing” over his pledge to expand illegal settlements, and publicly backed recognition of Palestinian statehood as a right, not a gift, as early as 2015. He has also called for an end to Israeli occupation and illegal settlement expansion, while condemning Hamas terrorist attacks.

    Burnham’s most significant break from Starmer came in the weeks after the 7 October 2023 Hamas attacks, when Starmer controversially backed Israel’s total blockade of Gaza – a move widely categorized as a war crime. Just two days after Starmer’s statement, Burnham released a statement that carefully distanced himself from the party leader, conditioning Israel’s right to self-defense on compliance with international law and calling for unimpeded humanitarian access to Gaza. By late October 2023, as the Gaza death toll surged, Burnham broke ranks entirely to join London mayor Sadiq Khan and Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar in calling for an immediate ceasefire, directly challenging Starmer’s refusal to back that position. He also publicly criticized Starmer for branding pro-ceasefire MPs disloyal, and used the moment to apologize for his own past vote for the Iraq War, acknowledging that the 2003 invasion had caused massive civilian harm and fueled global terrorism.

    This positioning paid off electorally: while Starmer’s Labour lost a third of its vote share in majority-Muslim areas during the 2024 local elections, Burnham comfortably retained his post as Greater Manchester mayor, where a large Muslim electorate resides. In the years since, he has repeatedly pushed the Labour government to take bolder action, joining a cross-party group in 2025 to urge immediate recognition of Palestinian statehood – a demand the Starmer government ultimately conceded to in September of that year.

    For his part, Streeting has sought to position himself as a secret critic of Starmer’s policy since resignating from cabinet, releasing leaked 2025 text messages in which he claimed Israel was “committing war crimes before our eyes” and engaging in “ethnic cleansing.” However, many voters have not forgotten that Streeting publicly backed Starmer’s line for months after 7 October, and opposed ceasefire calls through that period. Unlike Burnham, Streeting has largely stayed aligned with the party’s official position for most of the conflict, and only recently softened his public stance, under pressure from challengers. In the 2024 general election, Streeting nearly lost his seat to a young British Palestinian independent candidate, who came within 528 votes of unseating him.

    Under the current Starmer administration, London has already taken small steps to distance itself from Israel, imposing a partial arms embargo amid growing public anger, but it has maintained deep military and political cooperation with Israel throughout its campaign in Gaza. Regardless of which challenger prevails, analysts agree that the next Labour leader will almost certainly ramp up criticism of Israel and could take far more concrete action, such as imposing full sanctions on illegal West Bank settlement goods to win back disillusioned left-wing and pro-Palestinian voters.

    For Burnham, the path to the premiership remains littered with obstacles. But if he can overcome them, insiders say he is the most likely candidate to return the Labour Party to its traditional centre-left roots. One thing is certain: all leadership contenders will be forced to take a clear stance on Starmer’s handling of the Gaza crisis, and a fundamental shift in Britain’s approach to the Middle East is likely in the coming months.

  • World Cup 2026: Why Sahrawis are rallying behind Algeria and not Morocco

    World Cup 2026: Why Sahrawis are rallying behind Algeria and not Morocco

    On a baked-earthen football pitch cut into the arid desert of southwestern Algeria’s Smara refugee camp, fine orange dust hangs thick in the still late-afternoon air, billowing in choking clouds every time a player sprints after a loose ball. Despite the unrelenting desert heat, a group of young men and teenage boys has gathered for their weekly match—one of the few steady rituals in a life defined by displacement. For the fans leaning on makeshift barriers watching the game, conversation drifts quickly from the local play to the World Cup unfolding thousands of miles across North America, and the deep, history-bound loyalty that draws nearly every Sahrawi refugee in Algeria’s camps to cheer for one team: Algeria.

    According to United Nations data, more than 173,000 Sahrawi refugees currently reside in a network of camps near Tindouf, Algeria. Their displacement stretches back 50 years, rooted in a decades-long dispute over their indigenous homeland of Western Sahara, a 266,000-square-kilometer desert expanse in Northwest Africa bordered by the Atlantic Ocean, Morocco, Mauritania and Algeria.

    The conflict’s origins trace to the late 19th century, when Spain colonized the region, then called Spanish Sahara. After Morocco gained independence from colonial rule in 1956, it staked a long-standing territorial claim to Western Sahara. By 1973, the Polisario Front formed to advocate for Sahrawi independence, launching an armed movement after Spain agreed to cede the territory to Morocco and Mauritania in the 1975 Madrid Accords—an agreement negotiated without any input from Sahrawi representatives, following Morocco’s mass Green March of 350,000 civilian supporters into the territory. The resulting war forced thousands of Sahrawis to flee across the border into Algeria, where they established the refugee camps that remain home to generations of displaced people today.

    A 1991 UN-brokered ceasefire established the MINURSO peacekeeping mission to oversee a planned independence referendum for Western Sahara, but the vote has never been held due to disputes over voter eligibility. The ceasefire collapsed entirely in 2020, after Morocco launched military operations in a UN buffer zone, and sporadic fighting has resumed in the years since. Today, Morocco controls most of Western Sahara, incentivizing Moroccan settlers to move to the region, while the Polisario Front holds a smaller eastern stretch of desert and continues to campaign for full Sahrawi independence—with Algeria as its most prominent regional backer.

    That decades-long political and humanitarian partnership has woven deep ties between Sahrawi refugees and their host nation. For generations, Sahrawi refugees have attended Algerian schools and universities, received medical care in Algerian hospitals, and built interwoven family, cultural and political bonds across the border. To many, Algeria is far more than a place of refuge—it is a steadfast ally in their struggle for self-determination.

    “My support for Algeria is unconditional,” Brahim Salem, a long-term camp resident, told Middle East Eye. “For us, Algeria is not just a neighbour. It’s a country that stood against oppression and gave us safety when we needed it most.”

    That loyalty translates directly to the football pitch. Because the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic remains unrecognized by FIFA, Sahrawi players cannot compete as an independent national team in major international tournaments. For displaced Sahrawis, supporting Algeria becomes a way to channel collective pride and national aspiration that cannot be expressed through their own team.

    Algalya, a 60-something refugee who fled Western Sahara as a war refugee decades ago, is among the millions of Sahrawi fans ready to cheer on Algeria. She still vividly remembers the joy of Algeria’s 2019 Africa Cup of Nations victory, when the entire camp erupted in celebration with traditional zaghareet ululations that lasted long into the night. “I remember having nowhere to go, and Algeria welcomed us with open arms,” she said. “I pray Algeria make us happy again.”

    Across the camps, football is woven into the fabric of daily life: children chase balls across dusty dirt streets between tents, families huddle around bulky secondhand televisions to watch major tournaments, and local weekly matches like the one in Smara draw crowds of enthusiastic spectators. For local players Hafdala Mohamed and Khalil, their World Cup plan is already set: they will gather to watch every single one of Algeria’s matches together, no matter how late kickoff falls.

    For Hafdala, like many other Sahrawi refugees, football is far more than just entertainment. It is one of the only unchanging certainties in a life shaped by decades of exile. Even as the conflict over their homeland remains unresolved, and the dream of self-determination stays unfulfilled, the shared joy of supporting Algeria on the world’s biggest football stage offers a rare moment of collective connection and hope.

  • Australia beats Bangladesh by 7 runs in high-scoring 2nd T20 to win series

    Australia beats Bangladesh by 7 runs in high-scoring 2nd T20 to win series

    CHATTOGRAM, Bangladesh – Australia has locked in an unbeatable 2-0 lead in its three-match Twenty20 series against Bangladesh, clinching a nail-biting seven-run win in the second fixture on Friday thanks to a standout all-round performance from Matt Renshaw, who notched a personal best 89 not out.

    Renshaw’s masterclass with the bat propelled Australia to a commanding total of 196 runs for the loss of five wickets – the highest T20 score Australia has ever recorded against Bangladesh. The left-hander, who faced 52 deliveries and hammered four fours and five maximums, combined with Tim David for a 97-run fourth-wicket stand off just 50 balls to set up the visitors’ big total. David chipped in with a quickfire 45 off 26 balls, including two boundaries and four sixes, before he was cleanly deceived by Abdul Gaffar’s slower delivery.

    Australia’s innings got off to a steady start after captain Mitchell Marsh won the toss and opted to bat first, with Marsh and wicketkeeper-batter Josh Inglis putting on early runs. Left-arm spinner Nasum Ahmed broke the opening partnership when he trapped Inglis (11) leg before wicket. Debut-tier fast bowler Nahid Rana, playing just his second career T20, then removed Marsh for 20, leaving Australia reeling at 44 runs for three wickets in the sixth over. Renshaw’s steady batting then anchored the rest of the innings, guiding the lower order to push Australia close to the 200-run mark. The all-rounder also delivered when given the ball, finishing with impressive figures of one wicket for just 13 runs.

    In their chase, Bangladesh made a flying start, reaching 72 runs for the loss of one wicket in the mandatory six-over power play – their highest power play total against Australia in T20 history. Opener Tanzid Hasan led the early charge, but Renshaw claimed his key wicket with a sharp return catch, removing Hasan for 31 runs off 15 balls to grab the crucial breakthrough. Saif Hassan followed with a solid 42 off 33 deliveries, but Australia’s spin attack choked Bangladesh’s run rate through the middle overs, slowing the hosts’ momentum.

    Bangladesh finished their innings at 189 runs for six wickets, falling just seven runs short of the target. All-rounder Aaron Hardie was another standout for Australia, finishing with two wickets for 40 runs from his four overs. Bangladesh, which suffered a four-wicket defeat in the series opener, will look to avoid a whitewash in the third and final T20, scheduled to be played this Sunday at the same Chattogram venue.

  • Police in Bali foil an attempt to trade protected 21 live green sea turtles and arrest a suspect

    Police in Bali foil an attempt to trade protected 21 live green sea turtles and arrest a suspect

    On Indonesia’s world-famous tourist island of Bali, law enforcement officials have successfully disrupted a large-scale illegal wildlife trafficking operation, seizing 21 live, protected green sea turtles and arresting one suspected ring member last week, Bali police announced publicly this Friday.

    The operation was launched after local residents tipped off authorities about suspicious activity linked to wildlife trade along the island’s remote Pegametan coast. Acting on the tip, law enforcement teams carried out a targeted raid on the area on June 10, recovering all 21 live turtles before they could enter the illegal market, explained Nanang Pri Hasmojo, chief of law enforcement for Bali’s police force.

    Officers took 67-year-old suspect—identified publicly only by his initials KS—into custody at the scene. Investigators say the man is accused of functioning as a storage point for the trafficked reptiles, holding them until they could be moved to other sellers for distribution to end buyers. During initial interrogation, the suspect allegedly told officials that the shipment of turtles was sent by a criminal associate who collected the animals from waters off Madura, an island off the coast of East Java province. Under the suspected trafficking chain, KS received the contraband directly on Pegametan Beach, where another co-conspirator was scheduled to pick the turtles up for resale.

    Hasmojo confirmed that the investigation is still actively ongoing. “We are continuing to map out the full network and pursue all other co-conspirators connected to this smuggling ring,” he stated. The arrested suspect has already been formally charged under Indonesia’s strict national wildlife protection legislation. If convicted on all counts, he faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison plus substantial financial penalties.

    All sea turtle species found in Indonesian waters have held formal protected status under the country’s conservation and fisheries laws since 1990. A 2018 regulation issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry further strengthened these protections, explicitly outlining prohibitions on harming or trading in six native sea turtle species, and additional government rules have fully banned all commercial trade of the animals nationwide.

    The global crisis facing sea turtles has been well-documented by conservation researchers. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), targeted poaching of both turtles and their eggs—carried out by both local community actors and large transnational criminal networks—is one of the leading driving forces pushing six of the world’s seven recognized sea turtle species into threatened or endangered conservation status.

    A 2022 study conducted by researchers at Arizona State University, published in the peer-reviewed journal *Global Change Biology*, estimated that more than 1.1 million sea turtles were illegally killed across the globe between 1990 and 2020. Most of this killing is driven by demand for turtle meat, unproven claims that turtle products act as aphrodisiacs, and use of turtle parts in traditional cultural and spiritual practices. The study found that green sea turtles (scientific name *Chelonia mydas*), the same species rescued in the Bali raid, made up 56% of all sea turtles killed illegally during that 30-year period.

    Historically, Bali emerged as a major trafficking hub for green sea turtles, a trend shaped in part by long-standing local cultural practices: for generations, Balinese Hinduism—the dominant religion on the 4.5 million-person island—has used turtle meat in religious offerings. In recent years, however, conservation outreach and stricter enforcement have significantly reduced illegal turtle trade on the island, though smuggling rings continue to operate to meet remaining demand.

  • Nicholls and Ravindra steady New Zealand and extend lead over England to 194 at The Oval

    Nicholls and Ravindra steady New Zealand and extend lead over England to 194 at The Oval

    On the third day of the second Test match between England and New Zealand at London’s iconic Oval ground, the Black Caps moved firmly into a commanding position against the host nation, thanks to a resilient, match-defining stand between batters Henry Nicholls and Rachin Ravindra on Friday.

    England entered the day’s play with a glimmer of momentum, sparked by a gritty 53-run last-wicket partnership between tailenders Matthew Fisher and Sonny Baker that carried the hosts to their first innings total before the lunch break. Buoyed by that late-run lift to team morale, England quickly got off to a promising start with the ball, dismissing both of New Zealand’s opening batters within the first seven overs.

    New Zealand captain Tom Latham fell for just 4 runs, edging a 140 kph (87 mph) delivery from pace bowler Jofra Archer behind to the wicketkeeper. That same over brought close calls for Henry Nicholls: Archer’s 147 kph delivery popped up into the outfield but fell safely between fielders, before a 145 kph fast yorker beat Nicholls’ inside edge and just missed the stumps.

    Devon Conway, New Zealand’s second opening batter, survived six more overs before he drove at a delivery from Josh Tongue and nicked a thick edge to second slip, out for 11 runs that left the Black Caps at 28 for 2. A dropped chance soon after could have turned the tide further in England’s favor: when Ravindra was on just 7, Tongue produced a good edge that wicketkeeper James Rew failed to hold on to a tough low chance diving to his left.

    After that missed opportunity, England failed to convert any further chances before the tea interval. Nicholls and Ravindra dug in, deflating England’s bowling attack and quieting the sun-bathed home crowd as they built a steady unbroken partnership. While the Oval pitch still offered purchase for bowlers—one Tongue delivery skidded along the ground barely above Ravindra’s shoelaces and slipped under his bat—the two batters kept their discipline and picked off scoring opportunities when they arose.

    Ravindra, an aggressive batter by nature who often takes risks to score, showed controlled aggression, clipping Baker off his toes for a boundary, one of seven boundaries he hit on his way to an unbeaten 35. As tea approached, Nicholls—who had been carefully building his innings across 64 deliveries—struck consecutive driven fours off part-time spinner Joe Root, England’s current leading wicket-taker with 73 career Test wickets, in a rare attacking outburst.

    By the tea break on day three, New Zealand had reached 94 for 2 after 25 overs, a cumulative lead of 194 runs that extended the Black Caps’ already substantial first innings advantage of 100 runs over England. The steady partnership restored New Zealand’s momentum after England’s morning recovery, which saw the hosts bat through the entire final session of day two after being 9 wickets down for 238 to close their first innings at 222.

  • Dragon Boat Festival links modern China to traditions more than 2,000 years old

    Dragon Boat Festival links modern China to traditions more than 2,000 years old

    Across mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, millions of people gathered Friday to mark the annual Dragon Boat Festival, a millennia-old cultural celebration that blends historic legend, ancient philosophical beliefs, and lively communal competition. What began more than 2,000 years ago as a festival tied to summer solstice rhythms and traditional concepts of health and cosmic balance has grown into one of China’s most vibrant and widely observed cultural holidays, centered on its iconic signature event: competitive dragon boat racing.

    Unlike many modern holidays that have shed much of their original cultural context, the Dragon Boat Festival retains deep roots in Chinese history and folk tradition. Historians note the celebration’s origins stretch back to ancient beliefs surrounding the summer solstice, when shifting seasonal energy created imbalance between yin and yang. Communities developed rituals aimed at restoring harmony, protecting public health, and aligning human activity with the natural world.

    “Of all traditional Chinese festivals, the Dragon Boat Festival stands out as the richest and most diverse in its customs,” explained Liu Xiaofeng, a history professor at Tsinghua University. “Across China’s different regions, local communities built out a wide range of unique traditions, all rooted in core ideas connected to the summer solstice and balancing yin and yang energies.”

    For most around the world, the festival is most closely linked to the legendary story of Qu Yuan, an ancient Chinese poet and scholar who, according to centuries-old lore, drowned himself in a river over political injustice more than 2,000 years ago. Out of respect and grief, local residents rushed out onto the water in long boats to search for his body, and threw packets of rice into the river to prevent fish from feeding on his remains. These acts of mourning eventually evolved into the two most iconic Dragon Boat traditions: dragon boat racing and zongzi, the savory sticky rice dumplings still enjoyed by families across the country today.

    This year’s celebrations kicked off with a three-day competitive racing event hosted in Beijing, running through June 21 along the capital’s historic Grand Canal. The tournament features separate men’s, women’s, and mixed-team divisions, with races contested over 100-meter, 200-meter, and 500-meter courses. Dozens of teams from five regions across China — including Beijing, Tianjin, Hebei, Shanxi, and Guangdong — have traveled to the capital to compete over the holiday weekend.

    On the opening day of the competition, rowers kept perfectly synchronized strokes to the thunderous rhythm of on-board drummers, each long, colorful dragon boat surging forward through the water as crowds of spectators along the banks cheered for their favorite teams. For those who could not attend in person, many gathered at home with family, eating zongzi and watching broadcast coverage of the races.

    “The competition didn’t just help our team build stronger teamwork and spirit,” said Li Maoshan, a competitor who took part in Friday’s opening races. “It also gave all of us a chance to show the values of perseverance and dedication that this tradition has carried for centuries.”

    In Hong Kong, Friday’s races added an extra touch of playful creativity, with some competitors dressing in themed costumes, including a playful cartoon iteration of Ne Zha, a beloved deity from Chinese Taoist tradition.

    This report included contributions from AP video producer Liu Zheng in Beijing and AP reporter Kanis Leung in Hong Kong. Associated Press religion and cultural coverage receives support through a collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The Associated Press is solely responsible for all content in this report.

  • Billionaire Ambani’s Jio announces what could be India’s biggest share sale

    Billionaire Ambani’s Jio announces what could be India’s biggest share sale

    One of India’s most transformative technology and telecom ventures is finally set to hit public markets, in a move that analysts are hailing as one of the most significant initial public offerings in the nation’s modern history. Jio Platforms, the digital telecommunications subsidiary of Reliance Industries helmed by Indian billionaire Mukesh Ambani — ranked among the world’s wealthiest people with an estimated net worth of $90.6 billion by Forbes — has received board approval for its IPO draft prospectus. Ambani made the official announcement during Reliance’s annual general shareholder meeting held Friday.

    As India’s largest mobile network operator, Jio currently boasts a user base of more than 500 million subscribers across the country. Multiple media reports project the offering will raise approximately $4 billion, making it one of the biggest share sales India has seen in recent years. The listing is being closely watched by global and domestic investors alike, as it will serve as a key barometer of market appetite for new offerings after months of heightened volatility in India’s equity markets.

    In his address to shareholders, Ambani framed the IPO as a watershed moment for India’s technology ecosystem, stating: “The proposed listing of Jio will demonstrate to the world that India can build technology companies of global scale, global capability, and global value.”

    Since its launch in 2016, Jio has reshaped India’s digital landscape. The firm upended the country’s stagnant telecom sector by introducing ultra-low-cost mobile data plans, attracting hundreds of millions of subscribers in just a few years and pushing outdated, high-priced competitors out of the market. In the years following its disruptive entry, Jio has expanded its footprint far beyond consumer mobile services, branching into fast-growing new verticals including cloud computing, enterprise digital solutions, and artificial intelligence.

    Just last year, Jio solidified its global partnerships by signing a deal with Elon Musk’s SpaceX to bring the company’s low-orbit Starlink satellite internet service to India, matching a similar agreement struck by rival Bharti Airtel. The upcoming IPO marks the end of a year-long planning process for the public listing; Ambani first announced plans for Jio to go public by the first half of 2025, pushing the launch to 2026 to align with market conditions.

    The Jio announcement comes just 24 hours after India’s National Stock Exchange (NSE) filed its own draft prospectus for its long-awaited IPO, creating a wave of momentum for India’s slowing IPO market. Media estimates project the NSE offering will raise more than $3 billion. Combined, the two back-to-back listings would rank among the largest IPOs in India in the last five years, matching the size of Hyundai Motor India’s $3.3 billion blockbuster offering two years ago.

    Market analysts and investors are particularly focused on Jio’s IPO as a potential catalyst for wider market sentiment. India’s new issuance market has seen a marked slowdown in activity over the past 18 months, and a successful, oversubscribed Jio offering is widely expected to revive confidence and encourage other high-quality private firms to pursue public listings.

    Jio’s expansion into AI and digital infrastructure has already attracted major global tech investment. Earlier this month, Meta Platforms announced it would lease capacity at a 168-megawatt AI-optimized data center that Reliance is constructing in the western Indian state of Gujarat. The deal builds on a longstanding partnership between the two firms that began in 2020, when Meta invested $5.7 billion in Jio. Since that initial investment, the two companies have expanded their collaboration to include initiatives that open up Meta’s open-source AI models to millions of Indian businesses and local developers.

    Investment banking firm Jefferies estimated in a November 2025 note that Jio carries an implied valuation of roughly $180 billion, which would position it as one of the most valuable telecommunications companies on the globe. For the Reliance Group, the Jio IPO represents a historic milestone: it is the first major public offering from one of the conglomerate’s core business units since Reliance Petroleum listed on Indian markets in 2006.

  • Police charge a third suspect in a Melbourne synagogue arson allegedly directed by Iran

    Police charge a third suspect in a Melbourne synagogue arson allegedly directed by Iran

    In a major development in an antisemitic terror investigation, Australian law enforcement announced Friday that a third suspect has been charged in connection with a devastating late 2024 arson attack on a prominent Melbourne synagogue, an attack Australian authorities allege was orchestrated by Iran.

    According to official statements from the Victorian Joint Counter Terrorism Team — a specialized unit combining resources from federal police, state law enforcement, and Australia’s primary domestic intelligence service — the 20-year-old suspect is accused of being one of three masked assailants who forced their way into the Adass Israel Synagogue in the early hours of December 6, 2024. The offenders allegedly doused the interior of the sacred space with flammable liquid before igniting the blaze, which left the building with widespread structural and interior damage. One worshipper who was at the site suffered minor physical injuries during the incident.

    The newly charged suspect was already in custody at a Melbourne correctional facility facing unrelated, undisclosed charges, and police have not released his name to the public. He joins two previously arrested co-accused: 21-year-old Giovanni Laulu, taken into custody in July 2024, and 20-year-old Younes Ali Younes, who was arrested one month later. He is scheduled to make his first court appearance on the new arson and terrorism-related charges next week.

    Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese publicly accused Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) of directing not just this synagogue attack, but a second arson that targeted a kosher restaurant, Lewis’ Continental Kitchen, in Sydney two months prior to the synagogue incident. Mike Burgess, director-general of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), confirmed that the IRGC leveraged an intricate network of proxies to conceal its direct role in both antisemitic attacks, which have shaken Australia’s Jewish community.

    In response to these allegations, the Australian government expelled Iran’s ambassador to Canberra and three additional Iranian diplomatic staff. The Iranian government has repeatedly and vehemently denied any involvement in the attacks.

    Australian Federal Police Assistant Commissioner Peter Crozier told reporters Friday that the investigation remains active, with investigators collaborating closely with international partner agencies to unpack the full scope of the plot. A key ongoing line of inquiry, Crozier noted, is determining whether the three accused arsonists knew the identities of the individuals who ordered the attack. “They may not actually be aware of the people who are directing or the principals of these operations. That remains a key line of inquiry for us,” Crozier said.

    Victoria Police Acting Assistant Commissioner Paul O’Halloran added that authorities prioritized notifying the local Jewish community of the third arrest before making the news public, to avoid causing unnecessary surprise or alarm. “Our heart goes out to them. Again, this brings back this terrible incident,” O’Halloran said. “People deserve the right to feel safe and be safe in their community and particularly at their place of worship. Today’s charges are a strong testament to this.”

    The arrest comes as Australia confronts a documented rise in antisemitic violence across the country. In response to the growing threat, the federal government has launched a public inquiry to examine the surge in hate crimes, which includes a deadly December shooting at a Sydney Hanukkah celebration that left 15 people dead.