标签： Asia

A coalition of major UK pro-Palestine advocacy groups has launched a formal complaint against Mark Rowley, Commissioner of London’s Metropolitan Police, over allegations he made false, stigmatizing claims that protest organizers intentionally route demonstrations near synagogues to stoke antisemitic tension. The legal action marks one of the most significant public challenges to UK policing’s handling of the ongoing pro-Palestine protest movement, which has drawn hundreds of thousands of participants to central London since the outbreak of the Israel-Gaza conflict in October 2023.

Rowley made his controversial claims in two separate high-profile interviews with The Times and ITV News in recent weeks, stating that pro-Palestine protest organizers repeatedly planned to march near Jewish places of worship, framing this alleged intent as inherently antisemitic. “The fact that features as the organisers’ intent, I think that sends a message … that feels like antisemitism,” Rowley told The Times. Speaking to ITV, he added: “They set out with an intent to march near synagogues etc and every single time that we put conditions on to prevent that.”

Lawyers from Hodge Jones & Allen submitted the official complaint on Wednesday to the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), the body that oversees London’s police force, on behalf of the Palestine Coalition — an umbrella grouping that includes the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, the Palestinian Forum of Britain, the Stop the War Coalition, Friends of Al-Aqsa, the Muslim Association of Britain and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

The complaint argues that Rowley’s matching claims across two interviews prove his remarks were no accidental misstatement, but a deliberate effort to discredit and stigmatize the long-running protest movement organized by the coalition. The document clarifies that the mass marches held since October 2023 have been organized to protest Israeli violations of international law in Gaza and the West Bank, as well as the British government’s ongoing political and military complicity in these actions.

The complaint explicitly rejects Rowley’s factual claims, noting that while some pre-approved march routes have passed near major London landmarks that fall in the general vicinity of synagogues and other houses of worship, organizers have never intentionally targeted or routed protests near these sites specifically. All protest routes, the coalition emphasizes, have been formally agreed upon by Metropolitan Police officials in advance of every demonstration. On occasions where police requested route adjustments to move marches further from synagogues or public transit stations used by worshippers, the coalition says it willingly complied, even while rejecting the unsubstantiated claim that the protests posed any inherent threat to Jewish communities.

“At no point during any negotiations has it been suggested that Metropolitan police officers believed that the objective of the march itself was to ensure that they went past a synagogue,” the complaint reads.

Rowley’s remarks, the coalition argues, directly violate the 2020 Police Conduct Regulations, which require top police leaders to act with honesty and integrity, uphold fairness and impartiality, avoid abuse of authority, and maintain public confidence in the police service. “The Commissioner’s comments were in breach of those standards,” the complaint alleges. Beyond factual inaccuracy, the document accuses Rowley of abusive use of his power, and argues that his framing of pro-Palestine protests as antisemitic constitutes racial discrimination against protest participants.

The complaint also highlights what it frames as unequal treatment of demonstrations by the Metropolitan Police, pointing out that the coalition’s upcoming 16 May Nakba Day march has faced severe route restrictions, while police have allowed space for a far-right demonstration led by controversial figure Tommy Robinson to proceed in central London. The coalition is demanding an immediate retraction of Rowley’s claims and a formal public apology to the movement.

This complaint comes amid escalating political pressure to restrict or ban pro-Palestine protests across the UK, amplified by a recent stabbing attack in the heavily Jewish northwest London neighborhood of Golders Green. On Wednesday, a 45-year-old Somali-born British man was arrested in connection with the stabbings of two Jewish men, as well as an earlier fatal stabbing of a Muslim man in south London. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has publicly linked the attack to pro-Palestine marches, using the incident to call for tighter restrictions on protests, including potential full bans. In a BBC Today interview over the weekend, Starmer said offensive protest language should be actively policed and suggested there was a credible case for banning future demonstrations entirely.

Last week, the same coalition groups already pushed back against coordinated efforts by politicians and mainstream media outlets to smear the protest movement and advance calls for bans. The legal complaint against Rowley marks a major escalation of that pushback, challenging the top UK police official’s claims at the heart of the growing campaign to restrict pro-Palestine speech and assembly.

Seventy-eight years after the end of World War II, one of the most defining pillars of Japan’s post-war national identity is facing the most significant challenge to its existence in modern history. The country’s long-standing pacifist constitution, drafted in the aftermath of the global conflict to embed anti-war principles into Japanese politics and society, is now at the center of a fierce national debate, as Prime Minister Fumio Kishida pushes forward an aggressive agenda to revise its iconic Article 9.

Article 9, the clause that has shaped Japan’s security posture for nearly eight decades, formally renounces war as a sovereign right of the nation and bans the maintenance of offensive military capabilities for use in international conflict. For generations, this constitutional provision has served as both a domestic commitment to peace and a global signal of Japan’s rejection of the imperialist expansion that defined the early 20th century.

But shifting regional security dynamics, including rising military assertiveness from China in the Indo-Pacific, persistent nuclear and ballistic missile threats from North Korea, and evolving security alliances with the United States, have pushed the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) to frame constitutional revision as a necessary step to adapt Japan to 21st century security realities. Proponents of the change argue that updating the constitution will allow Japan to play a more active role in collective security efforts with its allies, modernize its self-defense capabilities to deter regional aggression, and clarify the legal status of the country’s already expanding military forces.

Despite these arguments from ruling party officials, the push for revision has sparked deep controversy across Japan and drawn sharp criticism from regional neighbors that suffered under Japanese imperial occupation during World War II. Domestic opposition groups argue that revising the pacifist constitution would break the long-standing national commitment to peace, drag Japan into potential foreign conflicts, and undermine the social consensus that has kept the country focused on diplomatic and economic development over military expansion. Critics across East Asia warn that the shift away from post-war pacifism could destabilize regional security and reignite historical tensions over Japanese militarism.

As the debate continues to unfold, the future of Japan’s anti-war stance remains one of the most consequential political issues facing the country, with implications that stretch far beyond its borders and reshape the security architecture of the entire Indo-Pacific region.

In the bustling core of Manhattan’s Chinatown, nestled between a midtown hotel, a local spa, and a neighborhood coffee shop, sits an unassuming six-story glass-front building. What looks to passersby like an ordinary community space sits at the center of a high-stakes federal espionage case that opened this week in Brooklyn federal court, pitting U.S. prosecutors’ allegations of a secret Chinese spy operations hub against defense claims of an innocent community service project derailed by geopolitical tension.

U.S. prosecutors allege the location was an unregistered overseas outpost for China’s national police, explicitly tasked by Beijing with monitoring, silencing, and intimidating Chinese pro-democracy dissidents residing on American soil. Inside the space, authorities discovered a banner clearly labeling the site the “Fuzhou Police Overseas Service Station, New York USA.”

The accused, 64-year-old Lu Jianwang — a U.S. citizen who has lived in the country for decades, also known as Harry Lu — went on trial Wednesday, more than three years after federal agents arrested him at his Bronx residence. He faces two felony charges: conspiracy to act as an unregistered foreign agent and intentional destruction of evidence, including deleted WeChat communications that prosecutors claim were sent to his Chinese government handler.

Opening arguments laid out two starkly conflicting narratives of Lu’s work. Prosecutor Lindsey Oken told jurors that while Lu resided in New York City, he ultimately took direction from Beijing. Oken explained that Lu and co-defendant Chen Jinping, who has already pleaded guilty to the conspiracy charge, launched the Chinatown outpost in 2022, shortly after Lu attended an official ceremony in his home province of Fujian. At that event, China’s Ministry of Public Security publicly announced the launch of 30 similar overseas police stations across the globe.

Oken emphasized that these outposts are a tool of the Chinese government to track and pressure individuals Beijing labels as threats to its national interests. She told the jury that the prosecution will call a dissident who was directly targeted by the New York outpost as a witness during the trial. The Manhattan outpost shared office space with the America ChangLe Association, a community group co-founded and operated by Lu and his brother Jimmy. Tax filings for the group list it as a “social gathering place for Fujianese people,” and defense counsel noted the name “ChangLe” translates to “eternal joy.”

While Oken acknowledged that the group openly advertised its service helping Chinese diaspora members renew Chinese driver’s licenses remotely, a workaround for pandemic-era international travel bans, she noted that even this public activity violates U.S. law. Under the federal Foreign Agents Registration Act, any individual acting on behalf of a foreign government or official entity must register their activity with the U.S. Department of Justice — a step Lu never took, Oken said.

Lu’s defense attorney, John Carman, pushed back hard against the prosecution’s framing of the case as a high-stakes international spy plot, instead casting it as a minor bureaucratic oversight that has been blown out of proportion amid rising U.S.-China tensions. Carman argued that the entire case boils down to an unfiled government form, not espionage. “He is not a spy, not a part of Chinese intelligence services, not a member of the Chinese Communist Party, and he is not an agent of the Chinese government,” Carman told jurors in his opening statement. He summed up the case with two common phrases: “No good deed goes unpunished” and “Guilt by association.”

Carman recounted that the FBI launched a raid on the Chinatown space in October 2022, acting on a report from a non-profit that monitors transnational repression by China. During the raid, agents searched through drawers, seized paperwork, broke open locked cabinets and a safe, and confiscated a desktop computer and multiple cellphones. “They turned the place upside down,” Carman told the jury.

Prosecutors confirmed that the day after the raid, Lu admitted to FBI agents that he had set up the outpost, maintained contact with a contact in China via WeChat, and deleted all of their messages. Carman noted that neither of Lu’s two hours of interviews with FBI agents were recorded, a procedural detail that undermines the reliability of the prosecution’s account. Lu was ultimately arrested in April 2023.

Co-defendant Chen Jinping pleaded guilty to conspiracy to act as a foreign agent in December 2024. He is currently released on bond and will not be sentenced until after Lu’s trial concludes.

At the defense table on Wednesday, Lu sat alongside Baimadajie Angwang, a former New York Police Department officer who was acquitted of charges accusing him of acting as an “intelligence asset” for China three years ago. Angwang, who is currently suing the NYPD to get his job back, is working as an investigator for Lu’s defense team. Lu, dressed in a dark suit, pale blue tie, and glasses, speaks limited English and followed the proceedings through a translation earpiece that rendered arguments into his native Fujianese. Both Lu and Angwang wore small American flag pins on their lapels.

As Lu and his legal team arrived at the courthouse Wednesday morning, several dozen supporters — including members of Lu’s local church — gathered outside to rally on his behalf. Participants held signs reading “Justice for Harry Lu” and “Chinese Americans Are Americans!” and waved small American flags to demonstrate their support.

Carman closed his opening argument by reinforcing that Lu’s only loyalty is to his local community. “If Harry Lu is an agent of anyone, he is an agent for his community — the local people in his neighborhood,” he told jurors. “You have the life of an innocent man in your hands.”

A bipartisan-adjacent bloc of 30 progressive House Democrats has issued an unprecedented call for the U.S. government to abandon its 55-year policy of deliberate ambiguity around Israel’s undeclared nuclear program, demanding that Washington hold Israel to the same nonproliferation and transparency standards applied to all other nations in the Middle East.

Led by Texas Congressman Joaquin Castro, the group — which includes high-profile progressive lawmakers Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ro Khanna, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and Pramila Jayapal — sent a formal joint letter to Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday laying out their demands. In the letter, the lawmakers highlight a glaring contradiction at the heart of current U.S. policy: Washington is deeply entangled in ongoing conflict in the region alongside Israel, yet the executive branch still officially refuses to acknowledge the country’s widely documented nuclear capabilities.

The representatives argue that Congress holds a clear constitutional obligation to gain full clarity on the regional nuclear balance, given that thousands of U.S. service members are deployed across the Middle East. Without transparent information about Israel’s program, they say, Congress cannot properly assess the risk of nuclear escalation in any regional conflict, nor evaluate the Biden administration’s contingency planning for high-stakes nuclear scenarios. The letter explicitly states that lawmakers have not yet received the level of detailed information they deem necessary to fulfill this oversight duty.

Currently, Israel stands as one of just five nations worldwide that have refused to join the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), the global agreement that blocks non-nuclear states from acquiring atomic weapons and mandates international inspections for all signatories. Because of Israel’s non-participation, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has no legal authority to inspect or verify the size and status of Israel’s reported nuclear stockpile.

For decades, Israel has maintained its iconic policy of nuclear opacity: officials neither confirm nor deny the existence of a nuclear arsenal, even though the program has been an open international secret for more than half a century. Independent analysis from the Nuclear Threat Initiative estimates that Israel currently holds approximately 90 assembled nuclear warheads, with enough separated plutonium — between 750 and 1,110 kilograms — to build an additional 90 to 180 weapons, bringing the country’s total potential stockpile to between 187 and 277 nuclear devices.

The lawmakers argue that Washington cannot build a consistent, credible nonproliferation policy for the Middle East — which currently targets Iranian civilian nuclear activities and addresses emerging Saudi nuclear ambitions — while continuing to maintain official silence about Israel’s program at a time when the U.S. is a direct participant in regional conflict. “We ask that you hold Israel to the same standard of transparency that the United States expects from any other country that may be pursuing or retaining nuclear weapons capability,” the letter concludes.

The history of the U.S.-Israeli nuclear ambiguity stretches back to the founding of Israel’s program in the 1950s. Initially developed with covert French support, without the knowledge of the U.S. government, the program was centered at the Dimona nuclear complex in Israel’s Negev Desert. According to declassified U.S. documents analyzed by prominent Israeli-American nuclear historian Avner Cohen, author of *Israel and the Bomb*, U.S. officials grew suspicious of Dimona’s purpose as early as the late 1950s and conducted eight official inspections of the site between 1961 and 1969. During each visit, Israeli officials concealed an underground plutonium separation plant — critical for producing weapons-grade material — and camouflaged other sections of the complex to hide its true military purpose.

By the end of the 1960s, the U.S. had uncovered the full scale of Israel’s nuclear project, and a secret bilateral agreement was struck that remains in place today. As documented by Cohen, the 1969 Nixon-Meir deal — named for then-U.S. President Richard Nixon and Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir — saw Washington agree to refrain from public questioning of Israel’s program, in exchange for Israel maintaining its policy of official opacity. “About half a century ago Israel acquired nuclear weapons capability, but it has done so in a manner unlike any other nuclear weapons state did, prior or after,” Cohen explained in a 2023 interview with Middle East Eye. Over the decades that followed, successive U.S. administrations have upheld this agreement, even reportedly threatening disciplinary action against any U.S. official who publicly acknowledges Israel’s nuclear program. As recently as 2009, when then-President Barack Obama was asked directly whether any Middle Eastern nation possessed nuclear weapons, he declined to answer, stating he would not speculate on the issue.

The only major public breach of Israel’s opacity came in 1986, when Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician who worked at Dimona for nine years, leaked full details of the program and 60 on-site photographs to the U.K.’s *The Sunday Times*. Vanunu’s disclosures confirmed that Dimona produced enough plutonium to build roughly 12 new nuclear warheads per year, confirming the program’s large scale. Before the story could be published, Vanunu — who was staying in London with support from the newspaper — was lured to Rome by a female Israeli Mossad agent, drugged, and abducted back to Israel. He was convicted of espionage and treason, serving 18 years in prison, more than half of that time in solitary confinement. Since his release in 2004, Vanunu has remained subject to strict travel bans and restrictions on speaking with foreign journalists, limitations that remain in force decades later.

On Wednesday, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez made a public call for the European Commission to put into effect the EU’s long-dormant Blocking Statute, a defensive regulatory tool designed to counteract extraterritorial third-country sanctions. His demand comes in response to sweeping US sanctions imposed over the past year by the Donald Trump administration that target senior International Criminal Court (ICC) personnel and a top United Nations human rights official, measures that threaten the operational independence of both global institutions.