A dangerous wildlife incident has disrupted operations at a Japanese steel manufacturing facility after a brown bear launched an unprovoked attack on site Tuesday, leaving one man with direct injuries and three additional people hurt in the chaos. As of the latest updates, the aggressive animal has not been captured and is still roaming within the secured boundaries of the factory compound, prompting urgent safety warnings for all workers at the location. Local emergency response teams have been dispatched to the site to conduct a systematic search for the bear, while factory management has implemented temporary restricted access to areas of the plant that are considered high-risk. The extent of the victims’ injuries has not yet been released to the public, but authorities have confirmed that all injured people have received emergency medical care following the attack. Wildlife experts note that such bear incursions into industrial spaces in Japan have become more frequent in recent years as habitat overlap between humans and wild animals increases, highlighting growing challenges for balancing industrial activity and wildlife conservation in rural and semi-rural industrial zones. Safety officials are urging all on-site personnel to remain vigilant and report any sightings of the animal immediately to response teams, who are working around the clock to apprehend the bear before another incident can occur.
标签： Asia
亚洲
-
A wall of nametags at a South Korean park testifies to adoptees’ longing for their birth mothers
Against a misty, rain-dampened backdrop in Paju, a South Korean city just miles from the North Korean border, dozens of Korean adoptees who grew up across North America and Europe recently gathered at a former U.S. military base to add their names to a quiet, powerful memorial. Their goal: after decades apart, to leave a trace that a birth mother still searching for them might find.
The site, Omma Poom Park — its name translates to “mother’s embrace” in Korean — is home to a growing cobblestone monument covered in mesh, where adoptees hang handcrafted ceramic name tags that carry their details. As of the recent gathering, more than 900 tags hang like unmailed, waiting letters, a quiet testament to the mass separation of children from their parents that created what experts call the world’s largest adoptee diaspora.
Each hand-painted tag includes the adoptee’s full name, year of birth, and place of birth in Korea. Color coding marks the decade an adoption was finalized: most tags are red or sky blue, matching the peak decades of foreign adoption from South Korea in the 1970s and 1980s. White tags are reserved for adoptees who died without ever being reunited with their biological families. Among the dozens of tags, one laminated handwritten note flutters, left by anonymous birth parents searching for a daughter they named Bora: “You are not alone. You have a mother and a father. I’m so sorry and I love you.”
The history of foreign adoption from South Korea stretches back to the end of the 1950-1953 Korean War, when the first wave of children sent abroad were mixed-race kids born to Korean women and U.S. soldiers, who were widely stigmatized as outcasts in Korean society at the time. Adoption numbers surged in the 1970s, when the country’s former military dictatorship pushed for large-scale foreign placement of full-Korean children, most often born to unwed mothers or families living in extreme poverty. From the 1970s through the mid-2000s, thousands of Korean children were sent to Western homes every year, with adoption numbers peaking at more than 6,600 placements annually in the 1980s, as the authoritarian government sought to reduce domestic population pressure.
After a yearslong advocacy campaign led by Paju-based photographer Lee Yong-nam and adoptee support nonprofit Me & Korea, Omma Poom Park opened to the public in June 2025. Lee, now 72, first became invested in adoption justice after spending decades searching for a Black-Korean childhood friend who was adopted to the United States as a child. “Adoptions continued unchecked and now the pain is surfacing,” he explained of the adoptees who travel to the park to add their names to the wall, most of whom are younger than the war generation that first saw widespread adoption.
On a neighboring hill overlooking the park, a converted former U.S. Army building operates as a dedicated museum that holds nearly 1,000 adoptee profiles, each featuring a photo, birth details, and a personal message to the adoptee’s birth mother.
One of those profiles belongs to Angela Lee-Pack, who was adopted by a family in Ontario, Canada, in 1971 when she was just 2 years old. Growing up, Lee-Pack endured severe abuse at the hands of her adoptive mother, including being locked in a closet without food, and later experienced further abuse in a second foster home before leaving at 15 and struggling for years to build a stable adult life. “I think about you every day and only wish the best for you,” she wrote to her biological mother. “I hope one day I will be able to know who I am.”
Lee-Pack has traveled to South Korea twice to search for her birth mother, posting flyers across Seoul and the southern city of Jeonju. During her first trip in 2019, a man contacted her believing she was the daughter of his late uncle. The lead gave her hope, but it slowly and painfully unraveled: eventually, the man tracked down a woman in her 70s whose background matched Lee-Pack’s adoption records, but she denied ever giving up a child and refused to meet. Lee-Pack collapsed in her hotel room and cried for hours. “Every time I look in the mirror I wonder who she is and what she looks like,” she said. “The thoughts never end.”
For Nicole Rieth, who was adopted to a family in Michigan at 4 months old in 1989, becoming a mother of two sons pushed her to launch her own search for her birth mother. Her adoption records note that she was the third child of a Seoul couple who surrendered her shortly after birth in 1988, citing extreme financial hardship at a time when the government was aggressively pressuring families to limit their number of children. Rieth first began her search in 2024, but letters sent by her adoption agency to her birth mother’s last known address went unanswered. She is now continuing her search through South Korea’s National Center for the Rights of the Child, a government agency, in the hopes that her sons will one day know the cultural heritage she never got to grow up with.
“I kind of don’t allow myself to hope because the whole journey has been a roller coaster of hoping, finding something out, and diving down into hopelessness, getting a glimmer of a maybe,” Rieth said. “And yet I want to exhaust every effort … so that there are no regrets.” For her, the act of putting her name on the wall at Omma Poom is not about forcing a relationship with her birth mother. “I’ve just always wanted to know who I looked like, because I’ve never had that before,” she explained.
Decades of unregulated adoption have left deep, lasting scars on both adoptees and their biological families. At the peak of foreign adoption, South Korean authorities largely turned a blind eye to rampant systemic fraud, including illegal procurement of children from hospitals and orphanages and deliberate falsification of children’s origins to speed up international placements. Tens of thousands of children were falsely labeled as abandoned orphans to make them eligible for adoption, leaving generations of adoptees with no clear information about their identity, family history, or the circumstances of their separation. On the other side, birth mothers were often pressured to surrender children born out of wedlock, some were separated from their children without their full consent, and many spent decades searching only to learn their children were sent overseas with falsified paperwork.
The recent gathering at Omma Poom came just weeks after a group of birth mothers formally asked South Korea’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission to open an investigation into the illegal adoptions of their children, joining hundreds of existing fraud and abuse claims filed by adoptees across the globe.
Jalyn Smith, who was adopted to Michigan in 1993, had her adoption agency locate her birth mother in 2021. According to adoption records, the woman had surrendered Smith after separating from Smith’s biological father — but she declined to meet or have any contact. Five years later, Smith is continuing her search, and chose to add her name to the memorial wall. “Hanging it up, I felt proud,” Smith said. “I feel proud to be part of this community, though it comes with a lot of conflicting feelings of sadness and anger and grief.”
-
Rubio says US will only provide sanctions relief to Iran in exchange for nuclear concessions
In remarks before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio laid out an uncompromising new set of terms for any future agreement with Iran, tying any rollback of US economic sanctions exclusively to Tehran’s full surrender of its nuclear enrichment program. The hardline position directly rejects Iran’s longstanding demand that economic relief, including the unfreezing of billions of dollars in Iranian assets held abroad, be included as a core component of any phased ceasefire deal.
Rubio emphasized that the existing sanctions regime against Iran is directly tied to its nuclear activities, particularly its production of highly enriched uranium. “If they agree to give up those things, there will be sanctions relief,” he told committee members, adding that Tehran must commit to either accepting strict, long-term limitations on its enrichment work or abandoning the program entirely.
The top US diplomat noted that Iran has recently signaled a willingness to discuss elements of its nuclear program that it had previously refused to negotiate, though he declined to share specific details of any backchannel discussions. His account conflicts sharply with an official statement issued by Tehran just last Friday, which flatly denied that any nuclear negotiations are currently underway.
Rubio’s comments also make clear that the US is in no position to release the billions in frozen Iranian assets that Tehran has demanded as a prerequisite to extending a current ceasefire. Last week, Ali Bagheri Kani, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, reiterated that the release of these funds is a “legal right” of the Iranian people, and Iranian state media has made clear that any ceasefire agreement will not be finalized without concrete economic concessions from the West.
Beyond the nuclear file, Rubio also issued a firm rejection of Iran’s reported plans to impose tolls on commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global chokepoint for oil and natural gas shipments. “They have to announce very clearly, ‘The straits are now open, we’re not charging a toll’”, Rubio said, adding that Washington also demands Iran stop firing on passing commercial vessels and assist in removing mines that US officials claim Iran has placed across large stretches of the waterway. Iran has not yet publicly responded to Rubio’s claims about mined waters.
Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), coastal states may only claim up to 12 nautical miles of territorial waters. At its narrowest point, the Strait of Hormuz is just 21 nautical miles wide, split between territorial waters controlled by Iran and Oman. International law explicitly bars coastal states bordering international straits from restricting transit or charging tolls on vessels passing through the waterway. Even so, legal experts interviewed by Middle East Eye note that Iran could find loopholes to impose charges – framing them as “piloting fees” or “service charges” – if it secures cooperation from Omani authorities.
The current diplomatic impasse comes against a backdrop of massive political upheaval in Iran following the outbreak of war. Early in the conflict, Israeli assassinations killed longtime Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and senior Iranian officials who had previously led nuclear talks with Western powers, including former national security advisor Ali Larijani. The new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, was severely wounded in an Israeli strike that killed most of his family, and has not appeared in public since the conflict began. He currently communicates with Iranian leadership and negotiators through an indirect, secure messaging system, and has only addressed the Iranian public via written press statements. Rubio told senators that US intelligence assesses the new supreme leader is taking an increasingly active role in guiding Iran’s negotiating positions. “I think there are indications out there that he is increasingly engaging at some level,” Rubio said.
Earlier in the conflict, former US President Donald Trump noted that negotiations with Tehran were complicated by political uncertainty, saying Washington did not have a clear picture of who held decision-making power in the country amid the post-assassination leadership reshuffle.
-
Prominent Greek shipping mogul willing to pay Iranian transit toll in Hormuz
At the high-profile Posidonia shipping conference held in Athens this Tuesday, a leading figure in global shipping has thrown the global maritime community into debate with an unexpected stance on a contentious Middle East waterway issue. Evangelos Marinakis, a Greek shipping tycoon whose fleet of more than 150 vessels spans oil tankers, LNG carriers and bulk carriers, and who also owns prominent European football clubs Nottingham Forest and Olympiacos, says he is willing to pay a transit toll to Iran to keep the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz open. The $100,000 to $200,000 per-vessel fee, scaled to a ship’s size and cargo volume, is a far better outcome than facing disruptive delays and security risks, he argued, adding that the collected funds could help Iran offset damage it has suffered from ongoing US-Israeli military action against the country.
Marinakis’ position immediately puts him at sharp odds with major global and domestic political actors, including the Trump administration and his own home country’s government. Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis made the country’s official stance clear in a May interview with the Financial Times, stating that Iran has no right to impose any form of toll on transit through the strait. The split among Greece’s most powerful shipping leaders further highlights deep divisions over how to handle the escalating crisis in the strategic waterway: just days after Marinakis’ remarks, fellow Greek billionaire shipowner George Procopiou pushed back against the idea of an Iranian toll at the same Posidonia forum, invoking Greek maritime tradition of breaking blockades to defend his opposition. Procopiou’s firm Dynacom has been one of the rare shipping operators continuing to send vessels through the strait amid ongoing regional conflict, reaping the benefits of skyrocketing freight rates driven by security risk premiums.
This debate comes as Iran has formally pushed to secure the right to charge transit tolls as part of any potential negotiated end to the current regional conflict, and has already moved to build diplomatic support from Oman, the only other state that shares territorial waters over the Strait of Hormuz. Geographically and legally, the situation is uniquely complex: at its narrowest point, the strait measures just 21 nautical miles across, while international law under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) allows coastal nations to claim territorial water rights up to 12 nautical miles. UNCLOS explicitly prohibits states bordering international straits from restricting transit or charging tolls for passage through their territorial waters in such key global waterways. However, legal experts interviewed by Middle East Eye note that Iran could still structure charges under alternative labels such as compulsory piloting fees or administrative service fees if Oman agrees to cooperate, creating a legal workaround for the policy. Multiple industry sources have already confirmed that some vessel operators have quietly paid unofficial transit fees to Iran in Chinese yuan in recent months.
With Greek shipping families controlling roughly 20% of the world’s total merchant fleet, the split among the country’s top industry leaders carries major implications for global energy trade and supply chain stability. Nearly 20% of the world’s daily oil consumption and a large share of global LNG trade passes through the Strait of Hormuz, making any disruption or new transit cost a shock that would ripple through global energy and commodity markets. The U.S. government has already issued a firm rejection of any Iranian attempt to impose transit charges, leaving shipping operators caught between conflicting legal, political and commercial pressures as they navigate one of the world’s most strategically critical waterways.
-
Sailors stressed and exhausted after months trapped by Strait of Hormuz blockade
For Pakistani captain Hassan Khan, who asked to keep his real identity hidden for safety, the glassy calm of the Gulf waters can often lull him into a fleeting moment of normalcy — before the weight of his situation crashes back. Three months have passed since his vessel, along with roughly 1,600 other commercial ships, became trapped in or near the Strait of Hormuz after the outbreak of the US-Israeli war with Iran in late February.
Once the beating heart of global energy trade, carrying one-fifth of the world’s daily oil and gas supplies, this vital chokepoint has been reduced to a deadly no-man’s-land. Missiles streak across the sky above while uncharted mines drift beneath the surface, bringing all commercial transit to a grinding halt. An estimated 20,000 sailors remain stuck on vessels stranded on the wrong side of the strait, cut off from the open ocean and facing a daily battle against fear, exhaustion, and growing resource scarcity.
On Khan’s ship, the crew has attempted to cling to familiar routines to maintain some semblance of normalcy. But the old dynamic has vanished entirely. Rarely do any crew members volunteer for the infrequent, tightly restricted shore leave. Lighthearted crew banter has been replaced by tense, anxious silence, broken only by the constant vibration of mobile phones as sailors check in with frantic family members back home. Even in their sleep, crew members startle awake at the smallest unexpected noise. “The stress never leaves our minds,” Khan explained. “Everyone is worn out, completely drained both physically and mentally.”
The logjam of trapped vessels began days after the war started, when Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz — the only navigable exit from the Gulf to the Indian Ocean — and barred all commercial traffic from passing without explicit government approval. “It’s like being stuck in a pond with only one drain, and that drain is Hormuz,” described Shafiqul Islam, captain of the Bangladesh-owned bulk carrier *Banglar Joyjatra*, which is carrying 37,000 tonnes of fertiliser bound for South Africa.
Islam has made two attempts to exit the Gulf over the past three months, and both have ended in disappointment. Following an April 8 ceasefire announcement, Islam learned that another commercial vessel had secured passage approval from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). He steered *Banglar Joyjatra* toward the strait alongside four other trapped ships, only to be turned away by Iranian military warnings before they could reach the waterway.
Nine days later, a second opportunity appeared to open up when Iranian officials announced the strait would be “fully open” to all commercial traffic in compliance with the ceasefire terms. But Iran abruptly reversed its decision after the United States refused to lift its ongoing naval blockade of Iranian ports. By that time, Islam’s ship was already within 30 nautical miles of the strait, and he was forced to turn back amid repeated radio warnings of imminent attacks. Islam counts himself lucky, however: just two days into the conflict, his ship was anchored only 200 meters from Dubai’s Jebel Ali Port, a facility that was targeted in an Iranian retaliatory strike. Since then, he and his 30-member crew have witnessed dozens of attacks firsthand. “Sometimes missiles pass right over a nearby ship, and other times falling debris lands on the deck of the next vessel,” Islam said. “When attacks run all through the night, none of us can even close our eyes to sleep.”
“ We have seen horror and destruction with our own eyes,” added Rashedul Hasan, the *Banglar Joyjatra*’s chief engineer. Their fear is well-founded: the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) confirms that at least 11 sailors have been killed and one more remains missing across 39 verified violent incidents in the area.
While the April ceasefire has reduced large-scale hostilities, the region remains on edge. Military activity continues to be a daily sight: sailors regularly spot drones, fighter jets, naval warships and submarines patrolling the waters. “The military vessels use bright searchlights and broadcast warnings over loudspeakers. They do this to deter any ship from trying to cross,” explained Sajid Masood, a Pakistani cook working on a stranded oil tanker who also requested a pseudonym for security.
Beyond the constant threat of violence, trapped crews are facing a growing humanitarian crisis as critical supplies run short and prices skyrocket. While the Gulf’s major hubs, including Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Kuwait City, maintain established ship supply networks, delivery schedules have become completely unpredictable. For vessels that have shifted to safe anchorage off UAE ports, the cost of basic provisions has jumped exponentially. Hasan told reporters that a recent 180-tonne water delivery that would have normally cost between $1,500 and $2,000 wound up costing the crew $11,000. An anonymous South Korean sailor trapped on a different vessel accused some suppliers of price gouging, saying “it feels like many vendors are deliberately exploiting this crisis to charge inflated prices and make excessive profits.”
The situation is set to worsen as summer approaches. Regional air temperatures already topped 30 degrees Celsius in May, and are expected to climb as high as 45 degrees Celsius in the coming months, increasing ships’ daily water demand for cooling and crew use. On Khan’s vessel, the crew still has enough staples to get by, but fresh produce and legumes have become almost impossible to source. “We can still get beef and chicken, but the easy access to fresh foods we had before is gone,” Khan said.
For shipping companies, the crisis has already resulted in billions of dollars in lost revenue and cargo delays, and many are already planning to cut staffing costs to offset losses. For the trapped sailors, the human cost is far higher: most sailors’ employment contracts are expiring, and large-scale crew rotations have been put on hold indefinitely. Many seafarers are now rethinking their decision to work in the industry, saying the crisis has exposed just how quickly access to international waterways can become a weapon in future conflicts.
Masood, whose contract ends in just one month, says he is now reconsidering his decades-long career at sea. But for now, his only focus is getting home to his family in Pakistan, where he planned to bring back gifts: Barbie dolls for his two daughters and a toy airplane for his young son. “I thought I would be home weeks ago, but we’re still stuck here,” he said. “Every single day my family messages asking when I’ll come home, and I have no answer to give them.”
A small number of vessels — roughly 750 since late February, according to maritime analytics firm Kpler — have managed to secure passage through the strait. Jonathan Schroden, a researcher at Washington DC-based non-profit think tank CNA, noted that most of these successful transits are for vessels owned by companies from China, India, or Pakistan, and rely on direct government diplomacy with Tehran. “On top of diplomatic support, it appears ship owners have also paid a transit fee running into millions of dollars per vessel,” Schroden added.
For the *Banglar Joyjatra*, diplomatic negotiations with Iran are the crew’s only path out. The Bangladeshi government has been working alongside the ship’s owner, state-run Bangladesh Shipping Corporation (BSC), to secure exit approval. Initially, BSC and the government agreed to pay the transit fee Iran demanded, but the plan collapsed after the United States threatened to impose sanctions on any entity that complied with Iran’s terms. “We are caught between two sides now,” said BSC managing director Commodore Mahmudul Hasan. “We are facing a double crisis that we can’t seem to escape.”
Even for crew members who have managed to hold onto hope, the uncertainty of each passing day wears on. Hasan, the *Banglar Joyjatra*’s chief engineer, says he still believes the crew will get through this “critical moment” — but for thousands of trapped sailors across the Gulf, every day stuck at anchor is another day of fear, uncertainty, and waiting for a way home.
-
South Koreans vote in local elections seen as a gauge of support after President Lee’s first year
South Korean voters headed to polling stations across the country on Wednesday to cast ballots in high-stakes local elections and parliamentary by-elections, widely viewed as a pivotal mid-term assessment of public support for President Lee Jae Myung’s one-year-old liberal administration. The election cycle comes 18 months after former conservative President Yoon Suk Yeol’s catastrophic martial law declaration triggered a national political crisis that ended with Yoon’s impeachment, removal from office, and eventual conviction on rebellion charges, leaving the main conservative opposition People Power Party (PPP) fractured and deeply weakened.
Across roughly 14,300 polling locations open from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. local time, more than 44.6 million eligible voters chose candidates for 17 key races, including 16 mayoral and provincial gubernatorial seats, 12 of which are currently held by the PPP. The elections also fill 14 vacant seats in South Korea’s 300-member National Assembly through by-elections, adding another layer of political consequence to the day’s voting.
Early pre-election opinion polling pointed to a dominant showing for Lee’s Democratic Party (DP), with some projections suggesting the liberal party could seize as many as 15 of the 16 available gubernatorial and mayoral posts. But more recent survey data indicates that PPP and independent candidates have narrowed the gap, with some even pulling ahead of DP contenders in five to seven competitive races. Political analysts widely agree that given the opposition’s fractured position, the DP needs a landslide victory — including a win in the closely watched Seoul mayoral race — to solidify Lee’s political mandate and extend liberal control of South Korean politics for years to come.
“The conservatives’ support base has been fractured and weakened in the wake of Yoon’s impeachment, while the liberals’ support base has grown stronger. Considering that, results of the elections will determine whether their dominance would prolong for a considerable time,” explained Jeong Han-Wool, director of the Korean People Research Institute.
Choi Jin, head of the Seoul-based Institute of Presidential Leadership, noted the DP entered the contest with a built-in advantage: widespread public anger remains over Yoon’s 2024 martial law imposition, and the Lee administration is still viewed by many voters as a new government that deserves more time to deliver results, rather than facing pushback mid-term. Choi defines a resounding DP victory as winning at least 12 of the 16 top local posts, and warns that a loss in the Seoul mayoral race would deal “a tremendous blow” to Lee’s government.
The Seoul contest has emerged as the highest-profile race of the election cycle, pitting the DP’s Chong Won-o — a former Seoul district leader who rose to prominence after Lee praised his local governance last fall — against incumbent mayor and PPP political heavyweight Oh Se-hoon. On the eve of voting, Oh argued that the national political landscape benefits from bipartisan checks and balance, urging voters to keep Seoul, the last major conservative stronghold, in opposition hands. “Our country would be safer when the rival forces keep each other in check than one side controlling everything. Please, leave Seoul, the last stronghold, in our hands,” Oh told reporters Tuesday.
For his part, Chong called on Seoul voters to deliver what he framed as a “stern verdict” on Oh’s tenure, criticizing the incumbent for what he described as incompetent and irresponsible leadership during his time in office.
Thursday marks exactly one year since Lee took office, after winning a snap election called following the Constitutional Court’s ruling to remove Yoon from office over his martial law order. Lee currently holds an approval rating above 60%, and Yoon was convicted of rebellion and sentenced to life in prison by a Seoul district court in February 2025.
In the wake of Yoon’s ouster, the PPP has been mired in bitter internal conflict between reformist lawmakers who supported the impeachment and hardline loyalists who remained loyal to the ousted leader. One of the highest-stakes parliamentary by-elections pits expelled PPP reformist leader Han Dong-hoon against DP candidate Ha Jung-woo, a former AI policy adviser to Lee, in Busan — South Korea’s second-largest city. Polling shows Han holds a narrow lead in the race.
Jeong argues that a Han win could allow anti-Yoon conservative reformists to regroup and establish a new competitive force within South Korea’s divided conservative movement. But Choi offers a different take, noting a Han victory could actually deepen conservative divisions, as Yoon loyalists would feel heightened political pressure and close ranks to defend their influence.
-
US reaffirms Somali sovereignty in blow to Somaliland and Israel
More than a year after Israel made global headlines as the first nation to formally recognize the breakaway Somali region of Somaliland as an independent state, the United States has issued a definitive policy stance that effectively shatters Somaliland’s lingering hopes for international sovereignty recognition. In a congressionally mandated report examining opportunities for expanded U.S. engagement with Somaliland, the U.S. State Department made clear that Somaliland is formally considered part of the Federal Republic of Somalia — a position that aligns with longstanding international consensus on the region’s status. The report also notes that within this territorial framework, Washington will maintain a positive, pragmatic working relationship with Hargeisa’s regional authorities and continue exploring new avenues for cooperation.
The diplomatic chain of events that led to this moment began in November 2023, when Somaliland President Abdirahman Abdullahi Mohamed held a closed-door meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Mossad Director David Barnea, and Foreign Minister Gideon Saar in Jerusalem. One month later, on December 26, 2023, Israel officially recognized Somaliland’s sovereignty, and Saar traveled to the breakaway region shortly after the announcement to cement bilateral ties. In reciprocation, Somaliland recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and announced plans to open an embassy in the contested city, drawing vocal support from prominent pro-Israel figures in Western politics and media. Earlier this year, a delegation of high-profile Western backers including former Jewish Chronicle editor Jake Wallis Simons, Henry Jackson Society associate fellow Andrew Fox, and former UK Conservative Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson traveled to Hargeisa to attend Somaliland’s annual self-declared independence day celebrations, boosting the region’s global profile.
Somaliland’s leadership has held out high hopes that Israel’s recognition would open the floodgates for further international backing, with the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, India, Cyprus, and Georgia targeted as next potential recognizers. For months, lobbying efforts by former Trump administration officials Tibor Nagy and Peter Pham had raised optimism among Somaliland’s political circles that Washington might also shift its position to formal recognition. However, a congressional source familiar with internal discussions told Middle East Eye that the Trump administration never signaled any willingness to break with longstanding U.S. policy on the issue, even as Somaliland courted Washington with offers of access to valuable mineral resources including lithium and coltan, both critical to global technology and energy supply chains. Analysts add that former President Trump’s well-documented public hostility toward Somalia and Somali Americans — including racist remarks labeling Somalis as “low IQ” and “crooked,” and attacking Somali American U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar as “garbage” — made any policy shift unlikely from the start.
For Somaliland, the U.S. announcement marks a major setback to its decades-long push for independence. One anonymous Somali policy analyst who works with officials on both sides of the sovereignty dispute described the State Department report as a “consequential announcement that may effectively close the door on any lingering hopes of U.S. recognition.” The analyst noted that the decision aligns with Washington’s broader strategic ambitions across the entire territory of Somalia, arguing that “why settle for part of the cake when the whole cake remains within reach.”
Rooble Mohamed, a communications adviser for the Somaliland government, acknowledged the current reality of U.S. non-recognition, drawing a parallel to Washington’s informal relationship with Taiwan: the U.S. does not formally recognize Taiwan as a sovereign state, but maintains extensive unofficial ties and cooperation with Taipei, an arrangement Somaliland appears willing to accept for now. When asked about the risks of aligning with Israel amid global backlash over the ongoing military campaign in Gaza that has drawn widespread condemnation, Mohamed pushed back on criticism, noting “We are one of the Muslim countries of the world, I don’t think we are different. I think it is normal to have a relationship with Israel. It does not mean the Palestinians are our enemies.” He added that after decades of unrecognized statehood, formal sovereignty recognition remains Somaliland’s top priority, and the government sees no viable alternative to its current diplomatic outreach.
The strategic importance of Somaliland’s location on the Bab al-Mandab Strait, a critical chokepoint connecting the Red Sea and Indian Ocean that carries a third of the world’s global shipping trade, has grown dramatically in recent years amid rising Houthi activity in Yemen and escalating regional tensions with Iran. Even before the 2020 Abraham Accords normalized Israeli-UAE relations, Israeli military and intelligence operatives assisted the UAE in building a network of military bases across the Gulf of Aden to counter Iranian influence, with the key Somaliland port of Berbera serving as a central node in that network. While that network has been partially disrupted by a recent rift between the UAE and its former Yemen coalition partner Saudi Arabia, Berbera remains a key strategic asset for regional powers. Currently, UAE logistics giant DP World operates Berbera’s port, with a minority stake held by the UK government through its foreign investment arm, and Israeli and Somaliland officials are currently in talks to establish an Israeli military base at the site.
The U.S. State Department report explicitly acknowledges Somaliland’s strategic value, noting that its location “positions it as a potential partner on shared security interests, including freedom of commercial and military navigation from the Red Sea to the Indian Ocean.” The report also notes that Somaliland authorities have actively courted U.S. investment in natural resources and prioritized infrastructure development, trade, and economic growth, pointing to ongoing expansion of Berbera’s airport and seaport that will turn the site into a major logistics hub for landlocked Ethiopia, creating new commercial opportunities for U.S. firms. Even so, the report concludes that core challenges remain: the unresolved sovereignty dispute between Mogadishu and Hargeisa, and Somaliland’s refusal to cooperate with Somalia’s federal government, create persistent barriers to foreign investment, banking access, and expanded international trade.
-
Ahead of NBA finals, advocates renew call for league to sever ties with UAE
As the New York Knicks prepare to take the court in the NBA Finals, a growing coalition of U.S. lawmakers and human rights advocates is putting intense pressure on the league to end its multi-billion dollar partnerships with the United Arab Emirates, accusing the Gulf nation of using global sports as a tool for “sportswashing” its backing of a paramilitary force accused of mass human rights abuses in Sudan’s ongoing civil war. The campaign, led by Democratic Congressman Jim McGovern, co-chair of the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, spotlights a years-long pattern of financial, logistical and military support that Abu Dhabi has provided to Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a group widely documented to have committed widespread atrocities against civilians across Sudan during the four-year conflict. The UAE has repeatedly denied these allegations, despite mounting evidence including satellite imagery, flight tracking data, weapons records and firsthand testimony from former RSF commanders reported by multiple independent outlets. The NBA currently holds two major high-value deals with UAE entities: a 2021 partnership with the UAE Department of Tourism that expanded in 2026 to include a global NBA academy in Abu Dhabi, and a 2024 sponsorship agreement with Emirates Airlines that rebranded the league’s popular in-season tournament as the Emirates NBA Cup, which the Knicks won earlier this season. Beyond the league-wide agreements, the New York Knicks themselves hold an independent $30 million sponsorship deal with the UAE, and English Premier League side Arsenal – which recently claimed the 2023-24 league title before falling in the Champions League final – also maintains high-profile ties to Gulf sponsors. Both teams count New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani as a vocal public supporter, a connection advocates say highlights how effectively sports branding can obscure problematic political ties. During a virtual press briefing held Tuesday, McGovern was joined by a cohort of humanitarian advocates to formally demand the NBA sever all partnerships with the UAE, arguing that the league’s commercial ties directly enable human rights catastrophe in Sudan, which currently hosts the world’s largest ongoing humanitarian displacement crisis. “Fans should know that the sport that they are enjoying is fuelling crimes against humanity. They should know that the NBA is investing in the UAE, and the UAE is investing in atrocities in Sudan,” McGovern stated during the event. He added that after he sent a formal letter raising concerns to NBA leadership, the league only responded with a generic form reply that failed to address questions about its corporate social responsibility commitments, noting that the league said only that it abides by U.S. State Department guidance in all markets where it operates. “Our goal is for the NBA to get the UAE to divest from atrocities in Sudan; we know you can, and your reputation and your conscience will benefit from it,” McGovern added. John Prendergast, a former Clinton White House official and co-founder of investigative watchdog group The Sentry, warned that the partnerships between the NBA, WNBA and the UAE put the leagues just one step removed from what he called “perhaps the worst case of racial violence and injustice in the world.” Prendergast estimated the combined deals will generate roughly $500 million in combined advertising revenue for both the NBA and the UAE government. Niemat Ahmadi, president of the Darfur Women Action Group, pushed back against the idea that the league relies on these Gulf sponsorships to turn a profit, arguing that the dynamic is reversed. “The NBA doesn’t need the Emirates. The Emirates needs the NBA. That’s why they jumped into this partnership,” Ahmadi said. “There are many, many American companies who have way more money to spend…[the NBA] did not go to the Emirates and ask for this deal. The Emirates is trying to rebrand.” Prendergast pointed to the recent end of Arsenal’s “Visit Rwanda” sleeve sponsorship, which was canceled last year after sustained fan pressure over human rights concerns, as evidence that similar public pressure can push the NBA to cut ties. Advocates also noted that New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s recent public appearance in an Arsenal kurta during Eid al-Adha prayers highlighted how invisible sportswashing can be to the general public. “We’re going to reach out to his office,” said Jeremy Konyndyk, president of Refugees International. “I think what it underscores is just how effective the sportswashing approach is. People put an Arsenal jersey on. They put an NBA jersey on. They don’t even think about what it says on the front…They don’t think about what that implies.” In response to mounting criticism, Emirati officials and allies have pushed back against accusations that the UAE is singularly responsible for fueling the Sudan conflict. Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, an Emirati academic with close ties to Abu Dhabi’s leadership, recently argued that the UAE has been unfairly singled out, noting that the RSF also receives support from other regional actors including Uganda, Ethiopia and Chad. Middle East Eye, which originally reported on this story, has reached out to both the NBA’s media team and the Sudanese ambassador to the United States for comment on the demands. The outlet has also previously published multiple investigations documenting the evidence linking the UAE to RSF support.
-
Italian activists escalate Mediterranean port protests over Gaza genocide
A broad coalition of pro-Palestinian activists, grassroots labor unions and solidarity organizers has launched a coordinated national mobilization in Italy, centered on the strategic Mediterranean port of Gioia Tauro in Calabria, to disrupt military supply chains they say support military actions in Gaza. The May 29 protest, branded “Global Intifada Disarm,” combined coordinated on-shore demonstrations at ports, logistics hubs and military-linked factories across the country with a symbolic maritime action, as five vessels from the Thousand Madleens to Gaza initiative sailed to Gioia Tauro to amplify their demands.
The maritime component of the action launched a day early, when protest boats departed the nearby coastal town of Cetraro and navigated toward Gioia Tauro – one of the busiest and most logistically important container ports in the entire Mediterranean region. Speaking from one of the protest vessels, Antonio Viteritti of grassroots organizing group La Base Cosenza accused the Italian government, national institutions, and global shipping giant Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC) of complicity in the crisis in Gaza by enabling military-related cargo transit through the port. Viteritti told reporters that 16 containers of dual-use ballistic steel, a material capable of being repurposed for missile manufacturing, have been held on Gioia Tauro’s docks for months, and that authorities have failed to issue a response to repeated calls to halt the shipment’s departure. He also reminded observers that two separate weapon shipments bound for Israel were seized at the same port one year prior to the 2025 action.
Two days before the national mobilization, BDS Italy – the Italian branch of the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement – shared intelligence with allied trade unions and local activist networks that the container ship MSC Manasvi was scheduled to dock at Gioia Tauro to collect eight of the high-scrutiny ballistic steel containers. In what organizers framed as a major victory for direct action, the ship remained anchored offshore for multiple hours before ultimately turning back to open ocean without taking possession of the controversial cargo.
This confrontation builds on months of escalating scrutiny over military and dual-use cargo transit through Gioia Tauro. Earlier in 2025, the “No Harbour for Genocide” campaign, backed by BDS Italy, first raised public alarms about a shipment of Indian-origin ballistic steel being transported on MSC-operated vessels, as first reported by Italian investigative outlet Altreconomia. MSC is not only one of the world’s largest container shipping firms, but also operates the primary container terminal at Gioia Tauro, putting it at the center of controversy over the port’s cargo management practices.
Following those initial reports, Italy’s Finance Police and national Customs Agency carried out formal inspections of eight containers at the port on March 18, launching technical evaluations to classify the material as intended for civilian, dual-use, or full military applications. After the inspections concluded, Five Star Movement Member of Parliament Stefania Ascari submitted a formal parliamentary question demanding the Italian central government issue public clarification on the status of the shipment and the rigor of port control protocols.
Peppe Marra, regional secretary of the grassroots USB union in Calabria, emphasized that sustained public pressure and media attention remain critical to preventing covert movement of military cargo to Israel through Italian infrastructure. Marra argued that continuous scrutiny prevents containers from being moved under cover of darkness at a later date, a practice he suggested may have occurred without public detection in the past. His comments echo widespread concerns across labor and solidarity groups over a lack of transparency and accountability in the management of Italy’s strategic port infrastructure and commercial cargo movements.
Calabrian activists have framed their campaign against military supply chains as inherently connected to broader struggles for economic justice in southern Italy, linking the complicity they see in military activity to longstanding patterns of labor exploitation and systemic inequality across the Mezzogiorno. “The Mediterranean is not Israel’s, it is ours. It belongs to all those communities in the Global South that struggle every day for dignified work, quality healthcare, safe territories that are increasingly affected by climate change, and above all for a world free from war,” explained Roberto Panza of La Base Cosenza, speaking aboard one of the protest vessels. Panza added that the Global Intifada Disarm campaign calls for coordinated local action to disrupt military supply chains globally, including systematic mapping of all ports and cargo carriers moving military or dual-use materials.
The May 29 national mobilization is the latest in a growing wave of pro-Palestinian solidarity action across Italy that began with the start of the Gaza crisis and the launch of the Global Sumud Flotilla last autumn. In recent months, mass demonstrations, university occupation campaigns, dockworker work stoppages and community solidarity initiatives have spread across every region of the country, drawing participation from students, rank-and-file workers and grassroots labor organizations. Organizers report growing cross-sector convergence between traditional labor rights struggles and pro-Palestinian solidarity mobilization, a trend on clear display at Gioia Tauro, where activists tied their opposition to the Gaza crisis to demands for full transparency over military and dual-use cargo moving through Italian public infrastructure.
-
How Britain is moving towards a ban on Israeli settlement goods
A growing wave of cross-party pressure in the United Kingdom is pushing the ruling Labour government toward a historic policy shift: an imminent ban on imports of goods produced in illegal Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territories, multiple insiders have confirmed to independent outlet Middle East Eye.
Just two years ago, the Labour Party held a firm position opposing any form of sanctions or boycotts targeting Israel. That stance has undergone a complete ideological reversal in recent months, with senior party figures now openly endorsing a settlement goods ban as a necessary step aligned with international law. Sources close to the government confirm that Middle East Minister Hamish Falconer privately told Labour MPs late last year that such a ban is a desirable policy outcome, though final authority rests with 10 Downing Street.
The push for action draws its legal foundation from the 2024 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory ruling, which formally deemed Israel’s long-standing occupation of Palestinian territory illegal under international law. The ICJ ruled that all UN member states have a legal obligation to avoid providing aid or assistance to the occupation. Two years on from that ruling, proponents of the ban argue the UK is falling far behind its European allies in upholding this obligation.
Across the European Union, momentum for restriction has accelerated sharply in recent months. France and Sweden recently tabled a joint proposal calling for the bloc to implement strict mandatory import controls on settlement goods, while the Netherlands enacted a national ban on trade in goods originating from occupied Palestinian territories last month. This shifting European landscape has created a clear opening for the UK to align with allied action.
The ongoing shifts in global geopolitics, particularly the US-Israeli standoff with Iran, have also reduced the Starmer government’s willingness to defer to Washington’s preferences on Middle East policy, insiders note.
A parliamentary debate on the proposed ban is already scheduled, secured by Abtisam Mohamed, a Labour MP serving on the parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) which oversees government foreign policy. While a final date for the debate has not been confirmed, the event is expected to amplify pressure on Downing Street to act. Mohamed argues that the UK’s current inaction is inconsistent with its stated commitment to a rules-based international order, pointing to a clear precedent: the UK already enforces strict trade sanctions on Russian-occupied territories of Ukraine. “If we can impose strict sanctions on Russian-occupied territories under the Russian Sanctions Guidance, why not Israeli-occupied territories?” Mohamed asked.
On-the-ground data underscores the urgency of action for advocates. Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem records that Israel has forcibly displaced 59 Palestinian communities, comprising more than 4,000 people, from the West Bank since 7 October 2023. The United Nations documented nearly 2,000 separate settler attacks against Palestinian communities in 2025, an average of roughly five violent incidents per day.
Emily Thornberry, senior Labour MP and chair of the FAC, whose views carry significant weight among both cabinet ministers and backbench MPs, has emerged as a leading voice for aggressive action. She described the ongoing situation in occupied Palestinian territory as “intolerable, and yet we tolerate it,” arguing that the UK must impose tangible economic costs to end settlement expansion. “We should be banning the import of goods produced in illegal settlements. We should be placing sanctions on those involved in the settlements. We should be making sure we are stopping the involvement of any British companies,” Thornberry laid out. “We should be coming down hard on insurance networks. We should be making it clear that it is not possible to construct settlements on the West Bank, and we are going to do everything to stop it.”
The Starmer government has already taken incremental steps to signal disapproval of settlement activity. In May 2025, it imposed sanctions on multiple prominent Israeli settlers in the West Bank, including veteran far-right activist Daniella Weiss, head of the Nachala settlement movement. The following month, the UK joined a coalition of allied nations in sanctioning two far-right Israeli cabinet ministers—National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich—over their repeated incitement of violence against Palestinian communities in Gaza and the West Bank.
A Foreign Office spokesperson reaffirmed the government’s public stance in a statement to Middle East Eye, noting: “We have strongly and repeatedly condemned settler violence and the expansion of illegal settlements, and we have imposed sanctions both on those responsible for that violence and on individual members of the Israeli cabinet for inciting it. We continue to call on the Israeli authorities to clamp down on all those who are seeking to inflame tensions, and to tackle the unacceptable violence and destruction of property that is being committed by settler groups against Palestinian communities.”
But progressive and opposition MPs argue these incremental measures are not enough, and that the current voluntary labelling policy for settlement goods is woefully insufficient. In response to criticism, the government has noted that its current guidance requires accurate labelling of settlement goods to avoid misleading consumers, and that it publishes clear risk warnings for UK businesses operating in settlements.
Kim Johnson, a Labour MP and prominent advocate for action on Israeli violations of international law, said the UK should have imposed sweeping restrictions long ago. “Our government cannot claim to support a rules-based international order, while allowing economic and political support to flow to activities that violate international law,” Johnson said. Scottish National Party trade spokesperson Chris Law echoed this criticism, arguing that voluntary labelling does not go far enough to uphold the UK’s legal and moral obligations. “Imported settlement products should not be labelled as such for the benefit of consumers, they should be banned so that the UK is no longer involved in this immoral trade and to demonstrate to Israel that flagrant breaches of international law will not be tolerated,” Law said, noting that “it is time for the UK government to stop making excuses.”
Green Party foreign affairs spokesperson Ellie Chowns, whose party made major gains in recent UK local elections amid voter anger over Labour’s Middle East policy, called on the government to go even further than a settlement goods ban, demanding additional sanctions on all Israeli officials responsible for authorizing illegal settlement activity. She called the Labour government’s current approach “an utter failure of our legal and moral obligations”, describing settlement goods as the “proceeds of crime”. Independent MP Shockat Adam, who traveled to the occupied West Bank for a fact-finding mission last year, added that settlement expansion is directly driving the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians, arguing that “international law cannot be applied only when it is politically convenient”.
Insiders note that the UK is unlikely to enact a ban unilaterally, and would most likely move in coordination with European allies such as France and the Netherlands, mirroring the coordinated approach the UK took last year when it joined Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Norway in sanctioning Ben Gvir and Smotrich, and recognized Palestinian statehood alongside France, Canada and Australia last September.
Beyond legal and moral arguments, domestic political pressures are creating a major incentive for the Starmer government to shift its policy. Labour is facing growing erosion of support among its left-wing base over its handling of the Israel-Gaza conflict, with the Green Party capitalizing on this discontent to make major electoral gains in recent local elections.
The coming expected leadership challenge to Prime Minister Keir Starmer in the next few months is widely seen as the most significant factor driving potential policy change. Rank-and-file Labour members are far more critical of Israel than the parliamentary party: a June 2025 poll found that nine out of ten ordinary Labour members believe the UK should adopt a much more critical stance toward Israel than the current government does. All potential leadership candidates, including frontrunner Andy Burnham, Mayor of Greater Manchester, and former Health Secretary Wes Streeting, will face intense pressure from party members to adopt a more strident position on settlement activity and the ongoing crisis in Gaza.
It has already been revealed that Streeting privately supported full sanctions on Israel last year, and he has ramped up public criticism of Israeli policy in recent months. Even Starmer himself may choose to adjust his policy ahead of a leadership contest, in order to undercut potential challengers and win back disaffected left-wing voters.
For the combination of international legal pressure, shifting allied policy, cross-party parliamentary momentum, and domestic political competition, experts say a significant policy shift—at minimum, an import ban on goods from illegal Israeli settlements—has become increasingly likely in the near future.