标签: Asia

亚洲

  • From faith to technology – more of India’s wealthy are giving to science

    From faith to technology – more of India’s wealthy are giving to science

    For decades, philanthropy in India has been overwhelmingly oriented toward faith-based initiatives, with nearly half of all private donations flowing to religious organizations and temples rather than secular, long-term public good initiatives. Today, that long-standing pattern is shifting dramatically, as a new cohort of the nation’s billionaires and business leaders are directing hundreds of millions of dollars into foundational scientific research, academic infrastructure, and talent development — marking a pivotal turning point for India’s innovation ecosystem.

    The trend kicked off into the public eye earlier this year, when Indian-American theoretical physicist Jainendra Jain, a 2025 Wolf Prize co-recipient renowned for his revolutionary work in quantum physics, got an unexpected outreach from Abhishek Lodha, CEO of Mumbai-based real estate giant Lodha Group. Lodha, the developer behind Mumbai’s iconic gold-hued Trump Tower that overlooks the Arabian Sea, offered Jain the position of founding director for a new theoretical physics institute to be built in Mumbai. Jain, a professor at Penn State University, said he was shocked by the offer. “I was pleasantly surprised someone building skyscrapers would suddenly be interested in putting money into fundamental sciences. It’s a common thing to do for very rich people in the US, but not so much in India,” Jain told the BBC at the institute’s glitzy launch event in late May. Lodha has committed $100 million to launch and sustain the institute over the next eight to 10 years, with a mission to let researchers spend years pursuing high-quality foundational work without pressure for immediate commercial outcomes, with the long-term goal of fostering homegrown innovation, commercialization, and domestic technology development.

    Lodha’s initiative is far from an isolated case. Just weeks after the institute’s launch, Rajiv Bajaj, heir to one of India’s oldest industrial dynasties, launched the nation’s largest engineering scholarship program for women, offering up to 800,000 rupees (nearly $9,000) per recipient to cover education costs at top-tier Indian universities. Other leading Indian business leaders have made similar commitments in recent years: Infosys co-founder Kris Gopalakrishnan has dedicated funding to advanced brain research; pharmaceutical billionaire Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw launched a cutting-edge frontier biology laboratory in 2022 to advance bioscience innovation; and at least six additional tech billionaires based in Bengaluru — India’s equivalent of Silicon Valley — have pledged major sums to research projects ranging from robotic astronomy to multi-specialty medical research.

    Experts frame this growing wave of giving as a reflection of a new consensus among India’s wealthy: a nation’s long-term global competitiveness is inextricably tied to its strength in foundational science. “No great nation has thrived without a deep scientific base. And we believe India produces great minds. So it’s not for a shortage of talent that this has not yet taken off, but a shortage of infrastructure,” Lodha explained.

    This shift comes at a critical juncture for India’s development trajectory. For years, analysts have raised concerns that India has fallen behind global peers in cutting-edge frontier innovation, from artificial intelligence to advanced robotics. The nation’s gross spending on research and development hovers at just 0.6% to 0.7% of GDP, far lower than major economies like China, South Korea, and the United States. Critically, the private sector contributes only 36% of India’s total R&D spending, compared to over 70% in most major developed economies. Mazumdar-Shaw, who has supported scientific initiatives across India and globally, notes that for decades, India relied almost exclusively on limited government funding for academic and scientific institutions, leaving many under-resourced. “All great academic institutions in the world from Harvard to MIT and Stanford have been built with philanthropic support. In India the whole approach so far has been that this is the government’s job,” she said. That long-held assumption is now being overturned.

    While early 20th century business dynasties like the Tatas did pioneer American-style philanthropic investment in science — establishing landmark institutions such as the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research in Mumbai and the Indian Institute of Science in Bengaluru — there was a decades-long gap in large-scale private science giving after that early wave. Today’s resurgence is being driven by two distinct groups of modern givers: the current generation of leaders from long-established business families, and first-generation tech wealth creators, according to Neera Nundy, co-founder of Dasra, a nonprofit that advises organizations on philanthropic strategy. “This cohort is more tech-driven, data-oriented, and outcomes-focused, which naturally aligns with investments in science, innovation, and research-led solutions,” Nundy explained.

    Even with the high-profile new commitments, however, philanthropic funding for science and innovation still lags far behind more traditional popular causes like education and healthcare, which continue to capture the majority of private giving in India. Given India’s low per-capita income and competing urgent development priorities, this imbalance is not surprising, Nundy notes. India’s research ecosystem also faces structural barriers, including weak collaboration between industry and academia, and a growing gap between the skills graduates produce and the needs of cutting-edge research and industry. Still, the long-term potential for growth in science-focused philanthropy is substantial. Nundy estimates that Indian family philanthropists alone have the capacity to give an additional $14 to 15 billion by fiscal year 2030. How much of that will flow to science will depend on building a robust, trusted ecosystem that can support large-scale, long-term scientific investment, she says.

    Mazumdar-Shaw argues that sectors with natural alignments between scientific research and business growth, such as pharmaceuticals, should lead this shift. “India’s pharma companies are not doing cutting-edge research. But the next value-creation opportunity for them lies in innovative drugs, for which a lot more funding needs to come into research institutions,” she explained.

    For Lodha, this shift in giving is a natural evolution of India’s development. “This is an evolution. A society in need of upliftment was met with philanthropy of service and now naturally you’ll see the trend shift to philanthropy of excellence,” he says.

  • Nigel Farage resigns as MP to force by-election he will stand in

    Nigel Farage resigns as MP to force by-election he will stand in

    In a dramatic Tuesday press conference broadcast live from central London, senior British right-wing political figure Nigel Farage announced his immediate resignation as the Member of Parliament for Clacton — and immediately confirmed he would run in the resulting by-election, casting the move as a stand against what he calls a coordinated smear campaign by the UK political establishment and national media.

    Farage’s resignation comes on the heels of two successive damaging revelations published by *The Sunday Times*, which have opened new ethical and regulatory probes into the Reform UK leader’s financial ties. First, the outlet reported earlier this month that British-Thai crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne donated £5 million to Farage personally in early 2024, just months before Farage won the Clacton seat in a general election. Now, a second follow-up investigation revealed that 32-year-old convicted aristocrat George Cottrell — who the paper describes as Farage’s closest personal advisor for more than a decade — covered the cost of Farage’s personal security and social media team in the 12 months leading up to Farage’s election to the House of Commons.

    Cottrell, a self-described crypto gambler nicknamed “Posh George,” has a criminal record: he previously faced up to 20 years in a U.S. prison after pleading guilty to 21 charges including money laundering, fraud, blackmail and extortion. He has accompanied Farage on official trips around the UK and across Westminster, the *Sunday Times* confirmed. He is also linked to Harborne through Tether.bet, an online casino and bookmaker that issues its own digital token, in which Harborne holds a partial ownership stake.

    The Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards is already conducting an official inquiry into whether Farage violated parliamentary rules of conduct by failing to properly declare Harborne’s £5 million donation. Farage confirmed Tuesday that a second separate investigation into the Cottrell payments has now been launched in response to the latest *Sunday Times* reporting. Under House of Commons procedural rules, an ongoing standards investigation is paused if a sitting MP resigns — but the inquiry can be immediately reactivated if the MP wins re-election.

    In fiery remarks from the press conference podium, Farage denied any wrongdoing, framing the revelations as an unfair attack by his political and media opponents. “The establishment has decided they can’t beat us fairly. They’ve chosen to use foul means,” Farage told reporters. “I’ve done nothing wrong. I’ve not broken the law in any way. I’ve not misused public money. My personal MP expenses are zero.”

    A former commodities trader who left the finance sector decades ago to lead the Brexit campaign, Farage pushed back against criticism of his outside income, arguing that political leaders should not be barred from earning money outside of parliament. “Britain’s political and media class seem to fundamentally object to any MP who has outside income,” he said. “Making money is not a crime. I gave up my former job in finance at a huge cost to fight for Brexit, and came out of that decades-long fight with very little money. Since then, I have earned income through work as a broadcaster and social media influencer, and that is entirely legitimate.” He described Harborne’s £5 million donation as a “large personal gift” and a “lottery win,” asking reporters, “Do we want leaders that know how to make money?”

    Farage cited the recent publication of details of his multi-million pound property portfolio — including a home owned by his daughter that was featured in an article in *The Times* — as the “final straw” that pushed him to resign. “I’ve never been angrier in my life,” he said of the coordinated coverage from *The Times*, *Sunday Times* and Sky News. Notably, both *The Times* and *Sunday Times* are owned by News Corp, the media company controlled by the Murdoch family. Farage has previously praised 95-year-old Rupert Murdoch as a “remarkable bloke” and “very good man,” and the pair were photographed celebrating together at a garden party shortly after the 2016 Brexit referendum, where both were reported to be in an ecstatic mood.

    Farage also claimed he has been the target of repeated threats, recalling one recent incident where he was forced to flee his local pub by a hostile crowd that later damaged his car. Critics of the Reform UK leader have previously linked his inflammatory rhetoric to a rise in violent far-right protests across the UK and Northern Ireland, where far-right demonstrators have targeted care workers and migrant communities in violent attacks.

    Rupert Lowe, a former Reform UK MP who now leads the rival right-wing party Restore, rejected Farage’s framing of the controversy, saying the MP was clearly aware he was required to declare Harborne’s donation to parliamentary authorities. “He should have declared that five million pounds. He knows it. We all know it,” Lowe told reporters. “Now he is going to weaponise a by-election to distract from that… Will Farage fund it out of his own pocket? Because he bloody well should.”

  • UK train operator bans Palestine badges after pressure from pro-Israel legal group

    UK train operator bans Palestine badges after pressure from pro-Israel legal group

    A major British train operating company has implemented a ban on staff wearing pro-Palestine solidarity badges during working hours, following a formal legal complaint lodged by a pro-Israel advocacy group that argued the political symbols created a hostile environment for Jewish passengers. The incident that sparked the policy change dates back to June 14, when a Jewish passenger was traveling on a London North Eastern Railway (LNER) service connecting Edinburgh to London. The passenger, who identifies as Jewish, filed a complaint stating that a food service employee wearing an official RMT trade union “Palestine Solidarity” badge left them feeling uncomfortable and unwelcome during their journey.

    The badge at the center of the dispute was produced and distributed by the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT), Britain’s main rail workers’ union. It features the text “Palestine Solidarity” overlaying the Palestinian national flag alongside the RMT’s official logo. After receiving the passenger’s complaint, UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), a pro-Israel legal organization, issued a formal legal letter to LNER last month pressing the company to address the issue.

    In its complaint, UKLFI argued that political symbols worn by customer-facing rail staff violate the UK’s 2010 Equality Act, which places a legal obligation on service providers to avoid subjecting customers to harassment based on protected characteristics, including religion. The group claimed the badge could create an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for Jewish, Israeli and Zionist passengers.

    In response to queries from Middle East Eye, an LNER spokesperson confirmed the company’s existing uniform policy regulates the badges staff may wear while on duty. Under the policy, customer-facing staff are only permitted to wear one small pin badge on their blazer lapel, which must either be issued directly by LNER, aligned to an official company charity or public campaign, or limited to the standard logo of the worker’s trade union. Unauthorized external items, including political solidarity badges, are not permitted under the existing policy.

    LNER Managing Director David Horne confirmed in a response to UKLFI that the company had taken swift and appropriate action following the complaint. Horne noted that the employee involved was spoken to on June 17, three days after the reported incident, and reminded of the company’s uniform requirements. A company-wide briefing was also issued to all LNER staff to reiterate that no unauthorized badges or accessories may be worn as part of the official uniform during working hours. Horne added that the chair of LNER’s internal On Train Company Council, the staff representative body, was informed of the disciplinary action and expressed agreement with the company’s position.

    UKLFI director Caroline Turner praised LNER’s response, saying the organization was pleased the rail provider acted quickly and decisively to address the complaint. “Public transport providers serve passengers from every community,” Turner said in a formal statement. “Jewish passengers should be able to travel without being confronted by political messaging from staff members whilst receiving services.”

    The RMT, which has been one of the most prominent British trade unions supporting Palestinian solidarity and backing protests against Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, declined to comment on the LNER decision. The union has previously issued public statements condemning Israel’s actions in Gaza, encouraged its members to organize pro-Palestine advocacy in workplaces, and called on workers to join national pro-Palestine marches across the UK.

    LNER’s decision comes against a backdrop of growing national debate in the UK over the limits of pro-Palestine solidarity expression in public workplaces, in the wake of Israel’s ongoing military offensive in Gaza that began in October 2023. Palestinian solidarity campaigners have raised widespread concerns that British employers are disproportionately restricting displays of support for Palestinians, while opponents argue that customer-facing public service staff should not display overt political messaging that could alienate passengers or service users.

    The LNER case is not an isolated incident. Earlier in 2024, the UK Department of Health and Social Care endorsed a review of anti-Jewish hate and racism in the National Health Service led by the government’s antisemitism adviser Lord John Mann. The review recommended mandatory antisemitism training for 1.5 million NHS workers, alongside a ban on all NHS staff displaying political symbols including pro-Palestine badges in the workplace, and a ban on staff attending pro-Palestine protests while wearing official NHS uniform. Since the outbreak of the war, multiple British public sector workers have faced disciplinary action for displaying pro-Palestine solidarity in the workplace. One high-profile case involved a British-Palestinian nurse who was ordered to remove a video call background depicting a watermelon, a common symbol of Palestinian solidarity, after it was flagged as potentially antisemitic.

  • ‘Abandoned and left to die’: Family of Hussam Abu Safiya says he has been betrayed by rights groups

    ‘Abandoned and left to die’: Family of Hussam Abu Safiya says he has been betrayed by rights groups

    The family of a prominent detained Palestinian doctor has issued a desperate final appeal for international intervention, accusing global human rights bodies and the wider international community of betrayal amid mounting evidence that the medic is being tortured to death in Israeli custody. Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, a respected paediatrician and former medical director of Gaza’s Kamal Adwan Hospital, has been held without formal charges by Israeli authorities since his abduction in December 2024. His rapidly deteriorating health, compounded by ongoing abuse and denied medical care, has left his life hanging by a thread, according to lawyers and advocacy groups monitoring his case.

    In an exclusive interview with Middle East Eye, Abu Safiya’s son Elias, a medically trained professional who once worked alongside his father at Kamal Adwan during Israel’s military campaign in northern Gaza, said the era of quiet diplomatic appeals has ended. “The moment for simple appeals has passed. This is a final, urgent call for every person of conscience to intervene and speak out publicly about my father’s situation,” Elias stated. He added that the stark double standard in global responses to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has left his family with no illusions: “The world clearly does not see us as fully human, or as people deserving of equal rights. There is exponentially more support for Israeli causes than for Palestinian lives. We have been abandoned, and Palestinians like my father are left to die alone in Israeli prison cells.”

    The gravity of Abu Safiya’s condition was first confirmed by his lawyer, Nasser Odeh, who visited the medic on July 2 at Israel’s secretive Rakefet underground interrogation facility, located inside Nitzan Prison in northern Israel. Odeh told reporters he barely recognized his client after brutal new assault left visible injuries across his face and head. The paediatrician was described as extremely frail, struggling to breathe and speak, and suffering severe psychological breakdown. In a devastating message passed through his lawyer, Abu Safiya reportedly said: “This is the last time you will see me… They brought me here to kill me. I don’t see myself surviving. This is the end.”

    Details of the abuse emerged publicly after Physicians for Human Rights Israel (PHRI), an Israeli advocacy group, issued an urgent warning last week that Abu Safiya’s life is in imminent danger, calling for his immediate release. According to PHRI’s investigation, four to five Israeli prison guards assaulted Abu Safiya in his cell ahead of his June Supreme Court hearing, beating him with a hammer and metal batons that left him with extensive injuries across his body and skull. After the attack, the medic was transferred to the Rakefet facility, where he has faced daily beatings that have repeatedly knocked him unconscious. He has been held in solitary confinement for more than a month, and has been consistently denied any form of independent medical treatment.

    Abu Safiya already carried six pieces of shrapnel in his leg from an Israeli quadcopter attack that targeted his family as they slept inside Kamal Adwan Hospital earlier in 2024. The untreated wound continues to bleed and swell, and he has developed an enlarged heart from chronic high blood pressure during his detention. Medical analysts close to the family say his current symptoms, resulting from the recent head assaults, strongly suggest he has developed a life-threatening blood clot putting pressure on his brain.

    Derek Summerfield, an honorary senior lecturer at King’s College London and a leading researcher on the psychiatric impacts of detention and torture for Palestinian prisoners in Israeli custody, told Middle East Eye that the systemic abuse of Abu Safiya fits a long-standing pattern that has grown worse in recent years. “Torture is very much an everyday matter in Israel and has been used as a weapon against Palestinians in interrogation suites for decades. The savagery inflicted on Palestinian detainees has increased markedly since 2023. The Israeli state feels it has complete impunity, and doctors who speak out are specifically targeted as part of that crackdown,” Summerfield explained. He added that Israeli authorities likely intend for Abu Safiya to die in custody rather than be released to share his account of abuse with the global public. “Dr Abu Safiya represents a heroic resilience that Israel is determined to quash. The more international pressure we can build, the more likely it is they will back down and not allow him to die,” Summerfield said.

    Abu Safiya is one of 14 Gaza-based doctors currently held without charge by Israel, and his case echoes the tragic fate of another prominent Gazan health leader, Adnan al-Bursh, the former head of orthopaedics at Gaza City’s Al-Shifa Hospital. Al-Bursh was detained by Israeli forces in December 2023 and was found dead in Israeli custody in April 2024. Testimonies from released prisoners confirm he was repeatedly beaten, tortured and sexually assaulted during his detention, and Israel has still refused to return his body to his family for burial.

    According to data collected by Healthcare Workers Watch, an organization that tracks the treatment of Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons, Abu Safiya was specifically targeted for harsher humiliation, starvation and torture because of his public profile and his refusal to abandon his patients. When the Israeli military declared northern Gaza a combat zone and ordered all civilians and medical staff to evacuate, Abu Safiya stayed behind to continue treating injured and sick children. He also publicly spoke out about the widespread famine and child casualties caused by Israeli military operations, a stance that his family says has made him a target. Last year, in October 2024, Elias’s 20-year-old brother Ebrahim was killed by Israeli fire; the family believes the killing was a deliberate act of revenge against Abu Safiya. “We don’t even know whether to grieve the son we already lost, or wait to grieve the father we are losing now. Words cannot describe the depth of the pain we have endured,” Elias said.

    Elias, who worked alongside his father through relentless Israeli bombardments and the eventual siege of Kamal Adwan Hospital, said he remains deeply proud of his father’s unwavering commitment to his patients. “When the local population was being starved and killed, he stood steadfast and refused to betray their trust or shirk his responsibilities, and as a result people saw him as a beacon of hope. I don’t have the words to describe how proud I am of his courage,” Elias said. He added that his father’s last instruction to him was to speak out not just for him, but for all Palestinian health workers being abused in Israeli custody.

    International bodies including the United Nations have called for the immediate release of all detained Palestinian healthcare workers, and PHRI has filed a formal petition with Israel’s Supreme Court calling for Abu Safiya’s release and access to an independent medical evaluation. The court is set to receive a response from Israeli state authorities on July 7. Israeli Knesset member Ofer Cassif has also publicly called for Abu Safiya’s immediate release. Elias noted that even within Israeli society, the severe abuse of his father has become impossible to ignore.

    Activist groups across the UK are mobilizing this week to shine a spotlight on Abu Safiya’s case, with a coalition of medical organizations set to demonstrate Friday outside the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) in London. The RCPCH has a long history of training doctors from Gaza, and activists will deliver a petition urging the college to publicly condemn the targeting, detention and killing of Gazan health workers and call for Abu Safiya’s immediate release. To date, the college has not issued any public statement on the case.

    “Dr Abu Safiya’s situation is no longer tolerable for any medical professional with a conscience. When one paediatrician is punished for protecting children, all paediatricians must speak up. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health used to train Gaza’s doctors and has a duty to speak up,” said Reyhana Alborz, co-chair of Child Health Advocates 4 Palestine. Amira Nimerawi, co-founder and CEO of Health Workers 4 Palestine, echoed that sentiment, telling Middle East Eye: “Every institution with the power to demand his release has the facts in front of them. Silence at this point is not neutrality, it is complicity in whatever happens next to him.”

    For Elias, carrying his father’s message forward is both a privilege and a duty, rooted in the example his father set until the moment of his arrest. “He was still defending his people, still carrying the humanitarian mission of his profession up to the point of his arrest, and it is a privilege and an honour to carry his message to the world. He taught us that sacrifice comes at a price, and this is a price we have paid and continue to pay,” Elias said. “Those who remain silent now are complicit and colluding with Israel, and I urge anyone who is in a position of influence to put pressure on these criminals by speaking out for my father and all of the Palestinian prisoners.”

  • ‘This is our sport, not theirs’: Klopp attacks Fifa chief over Balogun red card reversal

    ‘This is our sport, not theirs’: Klopp attacks Fifa chief over Balogun red card reversal

    A fiery global controversy has engulfed world football after global governing body FIFA overturned a red card issued to United States striker Folarin Balogun, a decision that came after former U.S. President Donald Trump personally lobbied FIFA President Gianni Infantino to revisit the call. The incident has sparked widespread condemnation from football figures, politicians and governing bodies, who warn the move has fatally undermined the sport’s core principle of impartial officiating.

    The controversy traces back to a recent qualifying match between the U.S. and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where referee Raphael Claus issued Balogun a straight red card for a collision with an opposing player. Per standard FIFA rules, a red card carries an automatic one-match suspension that would have ruled Balogun out of the U.S.’s next fixture against Belgium. That all changed when Trump confirmed on Monday he had directly called Infantino to demand a review of the red card, insisting the incident was not a foul at all.

    Speaking to reporters at the White House, Trump framed the call as a personal intervention rooted in his own self-described deep understanding of sport. “That wasn’t even an infraction, that was two guys running full speed that happened to crash into each other,” Trump said, before launching a personal attack on Claus, calling the referee “very suspect” and hinting at unspecified questionable past conduct. He also praised Infantino, claiming the FIFA chief’s respect had grown “tenfold” following their interaction.

    Behind the scenes, the lobbying effort was far broader than a single presidential phone call, reporting from Politico reveals: White House FIFA World Cup Task Force executive director Andrew Giuliani, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and senior United States Soccer Federation officials spent four days organizing and lobbying to overturn the suspension. On Sunday, FIFA stunned the global sports community by reversing the red card, replacing it with a one-year probationary period, by invoking Article 27 of the FIFA disciplinary code – a provision that is almost never used in practice. Balogun was cleared to start against Belgium on Monday, though he turned in an underwhelming performance as Belgium secured a comfortable 4-1 victory.

    Infantino has pushed back against claims of political interference, insisting the decision was made independently by FIFA’s judicial bodies and not as a result of his conversation with Trump. “During our conversation, I explained that there was an ongoing legal process involving Fifa’s independent judicial bodies and that the case would be decided in due course by the competent bodies,” Infantino said. “That is how Fifa’s system works, and it is a principle that I will always uphold.”

    That explanation has done little to quiet widespread outrage. Former Liverpool manager Jürgen Klopp, one of the most respected figures in top club football, delivered a rare public rebuke of Infantino in response to the debacle. “This is our sport, not theirs,” Klopp said. “If Donald Trump and Gianni Infantino really sorted this out between themselves, it is madness. It calls everything into question.”

    FIFA’s chief of referees, Pierluigi Collina, rushed to defend Claus, the referee at the center of Trump’s attack, calling him an “experienced and highly respected” official and confirming FIFA retains full confidence in his work. The South American Football Confederation echoed that defense in an official statement.

    The backlash has extended to political circles in the United Kingdom, where multiple senior politicians have called for Infantino’s immediate resignation. Clive Betts, chair of the UK Parliament’s all-party group for football and a member of the ruling Labour Party, said: “The first thing they’ve got to do is explain their decision and if it literally was just a phone call from Trump then I’m sorry, but I think he has to resign or Fifa has to sack him if he won’t.” Ed Davey, leader of the UK Liberal Democrats, added: “No matter where it’s held, the World Cup belongs to the fans – not gangsters like Trump.” Former British sports minister Gerry Sutcliffe called the situation “appalling”, saying: “This clearly is an appalling situation where politicians and sport executives have ruined the integrity of the game. Infantino should resign immediately and Fifa should hold an immediate inquiry. President Trump admits contacting Infantino.”

    Even disgraced former FIFA president Sepp Blatter, who was banned from FIFA activities in 2015 over a widespread corruption scandal, joined the criticism. In a post on X, Blatter wrote: “Red cards are not overturned by political phone calls. They are overturned by rules, evidence and independent bodies. If a US President intervenes with the FIFA President – and a player is suddenly cleared before a World Cup knockout match – the question is unavoidable: Quo vadis [where are you going], FIFA?”

    European football’s governing body UEFA went a step further, saying the decision to reverse the red card “crossed a red line” in its own official statement. “Football, like any other sports, relies on rules, which are the basis for fair, honest and transparent competition. Sometimes rules are open to interpretation. In this case not,” the statement read. “A minimum automatic suspension of one match following a red card is not a discretionary option and does not require the decision of a competent body to be enacted.”

    The Belgian Football Association, which was directly impacted by the decision since it was set to face the U.S. with Balogun in the line-up, challenged Balogun’s eligibility to play before the match, noting it would leave “all further actions open” if FIFA allowed him to take the field. FIFA rejected Belgium’s appeal, ruling the association was not an interested party in the proceedings and rendering the challenge inadmissible. After the match, Belgian midfielder Nicolas Raskin said his squad had been unified by a “sense of injustice” over the off-pitch chaos, saying the team was determined to respond on the pitch. Responding to the controversy, after Romelu Lukaku scored Belgium’s fourth goal the team celebrated by performing the “Trump dance” that the former president popularized during his 2024 election campaign. The Belgian FA also posted a photo of Lukaku cupping his ear to Instagram with the caption “overturn this”, a thinly veiled jab at FIFA’s controversial decision.

  • ‘Farcical reality’: Healthcare workers respond to targeting over pro-Palestine symbols

    ‘Farcical reality’: Healthcare workers respond to targeting over pro-Palestine symbols

    A new set of workplace restrictions for UK National Health Service (NHS) staff, which bans the display of political symbols in health facilities and bars workers from wearing medical scrubs at public protests, has triggered widespread condemnation from healthcare professionals and politicians alike. Critics argue the policy is weaponizing legitimate concerns about antisemitism to silence public expressions of solidarity with the Palestinian people amid the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

    The new guidance stems from the Mann report, an inquiry into antisemitism within the NHS commissioned by former UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting in 2025. While NHS England has formally adopted the recommendations, enforcement is left to individual regional NHS trusts. Even as stakeholders broadly agree that addressing antisemitism and all forms of racism within the public health system is a critical priority, leading medical bodies and frontline workers warn that the broad scope of the ban risks severe overreach that undermines free speech.

    The British Medical Association (BMA), the UK’s leading doctors’ union, has raised deep alarm over the vague language of the policy, questioning how authorities will define what qualifies as a “political symbol.” The union has called for clear, nationally consistent guidelines that draw a firm line between legitimate expressive activity and professional misconduct, warning that a blanket ban on all symbols interpreted as political goes far beyond what is needed to combat discrimination.

    Labour MP Kim Johnson echoed these concerns, noting that pro-Palestine expression has been disproportionately targeted as part of a broader national crackdown on Palestinian rights advocacy. Johnson emphasized that sweeping restrictions on solidarity messaging risk conflating legitimate demonstrations of identity and support with professional wrongdoing, ultimately undermining rather than advancing efforts to root out racism in the health service.

    Medact, a UK-based medical justice advocacy organization, said the Mann report’s recommendations bypass open, nuanced debate to impose a one-size-fits-all ban on expression. Medact spokesperson Nina Radulovic argued that political leaders and segments of the UK media are more focused on suppressing dissenting views than engaging with the urgent ethical questions frontline health workers are raising about the NHS, corporate influence, and the UK’s role in the political dynamics driving the war in Gaza.

    Professor Nick Maynard, a veteran British surgeon who has worked in Gaza hospitals throughout the current conflict, described the framing of the new policy as deliberately dishonest. Maynard, who witnessed firsthand what United Nations experts have labeled “medicide” – the deliberate targeting of healthcare infrastructure and personnel by Israeli forces, including the widespread use of deadly double-tap airstrikes on first responders – said the policy conflates pro-Palestine solidarity with antisemitism as part of a deliberate government campaign to silence critical doctors. He added that the deliberate destruction of Gaza’s health system is a core pillar of Israel’s policy of ethnic cleansing, a reality that has compelled healthcare workers globally to speak out. Maynard noted that despite Streeting’s recent public positioning as sympathetic to Palestinians, the former health secretary has led efforts to silence NHS workers who advocate for Gaza.

    Dr Omar Abdel-Mannan, a 15-year NHS veteran and co-founder of Health Workers 4 Palestine, framed the ban as part of a growing wave of censorship targeting pro-Palestine voices across multiple UK sectors. He argued that authorities fear health workers because their professional authority gives their statements unique credibility with the public, making their calls for accountability for Gaza particularly threatening to the status quo. Abdel-Mannan also questioned the foundation of the Mann report itself, noting that the NHS lacks even basic data on racist incidents across many regional trusts, making it impossible for the inquiry to meaningfully address the problem it was meant to solve.

    He pointed to the high-profile case of Palestinian doctor Ghassan Abu-Sittah, who was reported to the UK General Medical Council (GMC) by the pro-Israel advocacy group UK Lawyers for Israel over his pro-Palestine activism. GMC tribunals twice dismissed all antisemitism claims against Abu-Sittah, but the doctor has alleged Streeting pressured the GMC to launch what he calls a McCarthyite witch hunt against him and other critical clinicians – an unprecedented political interference that Abdel-Mannan said has created a chilling effect across the NHS, pushing many workers to self-censor out of fear of professional retaliation.

    Ahmad Baker, a British-Palestinian nurse at London’s Whipps Cross Hospital, is one worker who has already faced disciplinary action under the new policy direction. Baker was ordered by hospital managers to remove a still-life painting featuring a watermelon from the background of his work video calls, with managers labeling the artwork potentially antisemitic – a common misinterpretation of the watermelon, which has become a widely recognized symbol of Palestinian identity. Baker, who is now pursuing legal action against Barts Health NHS Trust alongside two other NHS employees, said he is being told to hide his Palestinian identity at the exact moment that his people are facing genocide in Gaza because of that identity.

    He also highlighted the glaring double standard in how the policy is applied: after Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine, NHS staff who wore pro-Ukraine solidarity badges faced no disciplinary action or scrutiny, unlike workers who display symbols of support for Palestine. For Baker, these public displays of solidarity matter because they let other supporters know they are not alone, building a collective movement for justice – which is exactly why authorities are seeking to ban them. He added that the concept of political neutrality in healthcare is widely misinterpreted: while clinical care must be impartial for all patients, there is no requirement for health workers to set aside their political beliefs, and they have a moral obligation to speak out against genocide rather than remain silent.

    Advocacy group Health Workers for a Free Palestine warned that full implementation of the Mann recommendations would create an absurd reality where NHS managers are pulled away from core patient care duties to adjudicate whether everyday items – from fruit to pieces of jewelry – qualify as punishable political expression, all while Gaza’s entire health system is systematically destroyed. Dr Aarash Saleh, who joined Baker’s legal challenge against Barts Health, said he knows of one colleague who was disciplined simply for wearing watermelon-shaped earrings. Saleh noted that even though Mann has insisted his report should not be weaponized against pro-Palestine voices, the symbol ban has almost exclusively been used to target Palestine supporters.

    Saleh added that the ban on health workers wearing scrubs at protests is even more unjustifiable. He called the rule an overreach of government power that blocks clinicians from marching as healthcare professionals in solidarity with their Gazan colleagues who are being targeted by Israeli forces, breaking with a long history of UK medical workers advocating for marginalized communities. Dr Sara Ali, who is also a party to the legal challenge, emphasized that the policy contradicts the core mission of the NHS. “I find it deeply troubling that an institution whose core purpose is the provision of care should regard expressions of human empathy and solidarity with a people undergoing a genocide as inappropriate or objectionable,” Ali said. “Defending the right to express such solidarity is important because healthcare professionals should not be required to abandon their humanity when they come to work. Compassion and empathy for human suffering are not separate from our professional values – they are fundamental to them.”

  • Belgium considers becoming latest EU country to recognise Palestinian statehood

    Belgium considers becoming latest EU country to recognise Palestinian statehood

    In a landmark announcement Monday, Belgian Foreign Minister Maxime Prevot confirmed he has directed his ministerial team to finalize preparations for Belgium’s formal recognition of an independent Palestinian state. The long-awaited policy shift comes just after Hamas carried out a key prerequisite set by the Belgian government: dissolving its 18-year governing administration in the Gaza Strip.

    Speaking to public broadcaster VRT, Prevot acknowledged uncertainty over whether the preparations will be completed in time for this Friday’s scheduled council of ministers meeting, but emphasized that the issue will be brought to the body for a vote in the near future. “I don’t know if we will be ready by Friday, but it will be on the table soon,” Prevot told reporters.

    Hamas’s formal dissolution of its Gaza governance clears the path for a handover of power to the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), a Cairo-based body made up of independent Palestinian technocrats drawn from the Gaza Strip. This new administrative structure was designed to oversee daily civilian affairs in the enclave under the terms of the September 2025 ceasefire agreement mediated by the United States, Qatar, and Egypt.

    The pathway to this step was laid out more than a year ago, when Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever announced at United Nations headquarters in New York that Belgium would recognize Palestinian statehood only after two core conditions were met: the release of all remaining hostages held in Gaza, and the full withdrawal of Hamas from the territory’s governing institutions. A member of the Belgian parliament whose party had long pushed for recognition noted Monday that a cross-party agreement with the federal government had been reached the previous summer after months of negotiations, saying “Belgium must not break its word” on its commitment to recognize Palestine once conditions were met.

    If Belgium proceeds with recognition, it will join a growing wave of European nations that have formalized their recognition of Palestinian statehood following the outbreak of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza in October 2023, which the report notes has killed more than 73,000 Palestinians to date, with thousands more still missing and presumed dead under rubble. Spain, Ireland, and Norway became the first Western European states to grant formal recognition in 2024, joining more than 140 existing United Nations member states that already recognize Palestinian statehood. Most recently, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia announced their recognition in September 2025, a move that was quickly followed by France and Portugal. The wave of recognitions has drawn sharp condemnation from both the United States and Israel, which have opposed unilateral recognition of Palestine by Western nations.

  • China protests Japan’s interference in research vessels’ work

    China protests Japan’s interference in research vessels’ work

    BEIJING – China has issued a firm formal protest to Tokyo over Japanese interference with the lawful operations of Chinese research vessels in waters adjacent to the Diaoyu Islands, according to Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning, who made the announcement Tuesday.

    The diplomatic pushback came after the Japan Coast Guard claimed that a Chinese maritime survey ship had lowered a cable into the water last Friday in an area Japan claims as its exclusive economic zone.

    In her official remarks, Mao Ning reaffirmed China’s long-held and unambiguous position: the Diaoyu Islands and their affiliated islets have been an inherent part of Chinese territory since ancient times. Conducting regular research activities in adjacent waters falls fully within China’s sovereign rights, and the operations of Chinese vessels are entirely lawful and unquestionable, she added.

    The diplomatic exchange marks the latest escalation in ongoing territorial tensions over the Diaoyu Islands, a strategically significant island chain in the East China Sea that has been a point of contention between the two neighboring countries for decades.

  • Will the Iran-US MoU reshape economic relations in the Gulf?

    Will the Iran-US MoU reshape economic relations in the Gulf?

    On June 17, the United States and Iran signed a landmark Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that carries the potential to upend the long-standing economic status quo of the Persian Gulf, unlocking new avenues for expanded bilateral and regional trade, as well as foreign direct investment into the Islamic Republic. At the core of this preliminary agreement is a sweeping commitment to roll back decades of punitive U.S. sanctions and reinsert Iran into the fabric of regional economic cooperation frameworks.

    Under the terms laid out in the MoU, Washington will lift both primary and secondary sanctions on Iran, and establish a $300 billion reconstruction and development fund backed by the U.S. and its regional Gulf partners. For Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, which have long balanced geopolitical tension with Iran against the untapped commercial potential of closer ties, the deal represents a potential turning point after decades of estrangement.

    Qatar, one of the key mediators that brokered the agreement, has already moved to frame sanctions relief as a major economic opportunity. Speaking on the sidelines of this year’s G7 summit, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim highlighted that the deal would open “huge investment opportunities in Iran”, signaling that many Gulf capitals view expanded economic engagement as a tangible reward for successful diplomatic outreach. This momentum builds on the 2023 Iran-Saudi Arabia reconciliation deal, which saw Riyadh signal its readiness to launch large-scale infrastructure and investment projects inside Iran shortly after diplomatic ties were restored. At the time, Saudi Finance Minister Mohammed al-Jadaan noted that investments could roll out “very quickly” once diplomatic relations were normalized, but those plans never materialized, held back largely by the continued weight of U.S. secondary sanctions that deterred major Saudi and international firms from entering the Iranian market. The new US-Iran MoU seeks to remove that core barrier.

    The preliminary text explicitly requires the full removal of all U.S. primary and secondary sanctions, and mandates that Washington issue all necessary licenses, waivers and regulatory approvals to enable unimpeded financial transactions between Iran and other regional states. Despite this clear framework, experts warn that full implementation will be a slow, gradual process, with significant lingering risks that will deter rapid large-scale investment.

    Robert Mogielnicki, a non-resident fellow at the Arab Gulf States Institute, notes that even in the most optimistic scenarios, sanctions-related risk will not disappear quickly. Regional and international businesses remain deeply cautious about the long-term durability of any U.S.-Iran agreement, a hesitation rooted in the 2018 U.S. withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the landmark Iran nuclear deal. Just three years after that agreement was signed, Washington walked away and reimposed crippling sanctions, forcing global multinationals including Boeing to exit the Iranian market almost overnight.

    Ali Ahmadi, executive fellow at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy, explains that memories of that collapse have left lasting scars on investor and banking confidence. “Even before the U.S. withdrew from the JCPOA, fears of a future pullout meant international markets were hesitant to lend to Iran,” he said. He added that years of suspended financial links between Iran and the global banking system mean rebuilding those connections will not be quick or simple, especially for large global banks with heavy exposure to U.S. dollar regulation and regulatory risk.

    As a result, industry analysts broadly agree that large-scale cross-border regional investment into Iran will expand gradually, as confidence rebuilds and the financial infrastructure needed to support transactions is reconstructed. In the near term, growth will be concentrated in existing small and medium-volume trade routes, with sectors including consumer goods, electronics, automobiles, medical supplies, pharmaceuticals and construction materials poised to see immediate expansion.

    Iraq, alongside the Kurdistan Regional Government, will also play a central role in this early growth, notes Amanj Yarwaessi, director of the MEED Foundation. Baghdad and Erbil already maintain high-volume trade links with Iran, supported by established cross-border transport infrastructure, multiple official border crossings, and deep-rooted private sector relationships that have persisted through years of sanctions and tension.

    Notably, all six GCC member states have publicly welcomed the June MoU, a show of unified diplomatic support that comes even as the bloc has faced months of direct Iranian missile and drone attacks targeting GCC territory starting in late February. Alongside Qatari and Pakistani mediation that enabled the MoU, Gulf states have already taken tangible steps toward deeper engagement: Oman has held bilateral talks with Iran over joint management of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, and delegations from Doha, Muscat and Riyadh all attended the July 3 funeral of former Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

    Mehran Haghirian, research director at the Bourse & Bazaar Foundation, explains that this unified GCC approach marks a clear shift from pre-2023 dynamics. “Qatar and Oman are not just representing their own interests, but those of the entire GCC,” he said, contrasting this with the split approach seen in years past, when even after the UAE-Iran reconciliation, Dubai expanded private trade with Tehran while Abu Dhabi continued to frame Iran as a core threat to regional security. Haghirian notes that recent regional conflict has forced that long-unresolved tension into the open, clearing the way for a coordinated GCC approach.

    Still, analysts agree that the long-term success of Iran-GCC rapprochement will depend on whether economic progress can be matched by tangible progress on regional security. GCC states have made clear that large-scale long-term investment will not move forward unless Tehran provides credible assurances that it will halt attacks on GCC territory and de-escalate regional tensions.

    Justin Alexander, director of Khalij Economics, argues that for Iran to unlock the full economic benefits of Gulf trade and investment, it will need to acknowledge the harm caused by recent attacks that have killed Gulf nationals, and make binding commitments to avoid future aggression. Despite these significant security and implementation hurdles, the underlying commercial incentives for closer regional integration remain strong for both Iran and its Gulf neighbors.

    Decades of geographic proximity, pre-existing trade networks, and deep people-to-people business connections have created a foundation of commercial links that have persisted through years of strained diplomatic relations and repeated rounds of U.S. sanctions. These existing connections, spanning traders, logistics providers, distributors and cross-border investors, mean regional integration can build on existing infrastructure rather than starting from zero. If security concerns can be addressed and sanctions risks are gradually eliminated, this foundation could support rapid expansion of economic ties across the Gulf.

  • Congressional committee on China asks Wizards and Capitals owner to cut ties with Alibaba

    Congressional committee on China asks Wizards and Capitals owner to cut ties with Alibaba

    A top congressional panel focused on U.S.-China policy is escalating pressure on the owner of Washington D.C.’s major professional sports teams to end all business partnerships with Alibaba Group, the Chinese technology giant that is currently challenging a recent Pentagon designation labeling it a “Chinese military company.”

    Rep. John Moolenaar, the Republican chair of the U.S. House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, made the formal demand in a written letter sent to Ted Leonsis, founder and CEO of Monumental Sports & Entertainment (MSE). MSE is the parent company that owns both the NBA’s Washington Wizards and the NHL’s Washington Capitals, two of the capital city’s most high-profile professional sports franchises.

    Copies of the correspondence, obtained by The Associated Press, show Moolenaar tied his request directly to a decision made by the U.S. Department of Defense one month earlier, which added Alibaba to a growing roster of entities accused of supporting China’s state-led military-civil fusion strategy. The lawmaker gave Leonsis a deadline of July 15 to confirm MSE has ended or will end all active commercial ties with Alibaba and its subsidiaries.

    Alibaba has already pushed back against the Pentagon’s classification, filing a federal lawsuit seeking to have its name struck from the government’s blacklist. The current list of designated Chinese military companies includes 188 total entities, spanning from state-owned defense manufacturing conglomerates to private Chinese technology firms such as Alibaba. This designation reflects a sharp rise in longstanding concerns among U.S. national security officials over Beijing’s strategy of leveraging private and non-state commercial enterprises to advance its military modernization and technological development goals.

    As of Monday, MSE officials had not issued an immediate response to AP’s request for comment on the congressional demand. Notably, MSE is far from the only U.S. professional sports organization with financial or commercial connections to Alibaba. Joseph Tsai, the co-founder of Alibaba who remains a major stakeholder in the firm, owns the NBA’s Brooklyn Nets and the WNBA’s New York Liberty, meaning the Chinese tech giant has deep existing ties to North American professional sports.

    The House select committee, which was first established in 2023 to coordinate congressional oversight and policy on U.S.-China relations, has increasingly turned its attention to global sports in recent months. Earlier this year, Moolenaar and the committee’s top Democratic member, Raja Krishnamoorthi of Illinois, sent a joint letter to the International Olympic Committee (IOC) raising concerns over the World Anti-Doping Agency’s handling of a doping case involving 23 Chinese swimmers who tested positive for performance-enhancing substances.

    Twelve months ago, the panel also sent a letter to then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, voicing concerns about Alibaba’s global sponsorship deal with the IOC, and warning that the partnership could lead to a similar commercial agreement between the firm and organizers of the 2028 Los Angeles Olympic Games. The letter at the time highlighted steps that Paris 2024 organizers had taken to reduce Alibaba’s operational role in the 2024 Summer Games.

    Weeks after the committee sent that 2023 letter, Los Angeles Olympic organizers announced that Google, one of Alibaba’s major global technology competitors, would serve as the official cloud services provider for the 2028 Games, ending speculation that Alibaba would secure that high-profile contract.