TOP NEWS

Videos show the aftermath of strikes in Iran, as search teams recover bodies from rubble. Residents are using torches to look for loved ones, as air raids appear to have knocked out power in some parts. Iran’s health ministry says more than 1,500 people have been killed during the US and Israel’s war.

Gregoire headed a list uniting the traditional left, the Greens and the Communists to victory in French capital.

The Socialist Party’s Emmanuel Gregoire has won the Paris mayoral race, as the results of nationwide municipal elections showed gains for the traditional left and right, and a major win for the far right in the city of Nice.

Sunday’s run-off votes in more than 1,500 communes saw Gregoire on course to become mayor of the French capital, with exit polls showing that the far-right National Rally (RN) fell short of taking control of the key southern cities of Marseille and Toulon.

Gregoire, who headed a list uniting the traditional left, the Greens and the Communists, clinched the prized mayoralty with an estimated 51 to 53 percent of the vote, according to pollsters, seeing off Conservative rival Rachida Dati, who conceded defeat.

The 48-year-old son of a teacher and civil servant is stepping into the spotlight after previously serving as deputy to outgoing mayor and fellow Socialist Anne Hidalgo. During his bid, he had promised that Paris would stand as a “city of refuge” and a “bastion against the right and the far right”.

In Marseille, the second-largest city in the country, Socialist Mayor Benoit Payan was on track to be re-elected with 56.3 percent of the vote, according to an Elabe poll for BFM TV. RN’s chances of winning the coveted prize took a hit after the withdrawal of a hard-left candidate from France Unbowed (LFI) aimed at uniting left-wing voters.

Socialist Party chief Olivier Faure hailed the wins in Paris and Marseille, positioning his party as a bulwark against the far right. “Only the left can prevent France from this regression,” he said.

In Toulon, an Elebe poll showed centre-right candidate Josée Massi leading at 53.5 percent, with RN candidate Laure Lavalette conceding defeat. Yet, senior RN officials rejected suggestions that the party’s loss indicated it had hit a “glass ceiling” ahead of next year’s presidential election.

“The National Rally and its candidates have achieved tonight, in this municipal election, the biggest breakthrough in its entire history,” RN chief Jordan Bardella said, alluding to wins in local constituencies where it previously had no presence.

In the first round, Bardella’s anti-immigration party won re-election in the southern city of Perpignan, and it won in smaller cities, too. And on Sunday, exit polls indicated that Eric Ciotti, a former mainstream conservative who is now an ally of the RN, won in Nice, France’s fifth-biggest city.

Former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe was re-elected mayor in his northern city of Le Havre, according to the TF1 and LCI broadcasters, delivering a better-than-expected performance that boosts his hopes of running for president in 2027.

Philippe, a centre-right politician who served as prime minister under centrist President Emmanuel Macron, made a speech with a clear national message, saying his victory showed that “there were reasons to be hopeful” in the values of France and that the extremes can be beaten.

Turnout at 5pm local time (16:00 GMT) was just higher than 48 percent in France’s mainland, more than than in the 2020 vote held during the COVID-19 pandemic, but four points lower than in 2014, according to the Ministry of Interior.

March 22 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s four largest banks are tightening corporate payment guarantees as exporters face mounting pressure from U.S. tariffs and a prolonged period of high exchange rates.

The combined value of guarantees issued by KB Kookmin Bank, Shinhan Bank, Hana Bank and Woori Bank reached 79.2 trillion won (about $59 billion) at the end of last year, up 3.9% from a year earlier, according to financial industry data.

The increase marks a sharp slowdown compared with double-digit growth in previous years, reflecting a more cautious approach by banks amid rising economic uncertainty.

Banks have scaled back new guarantees as U.S. tariff policies weigh on export profitability and a weaker won raises costs for companies. The won-dollar exchange rate has hovered around 1,500 won, adding further pressure on corporate balance sheets.

Payment guarantees, commonly used by exporters, allow companies to secure financing or complete trade transactions by relying on a bank’s credit backing. If a company defaults, the bank assumes the repayment obligation.

Industry data show that firm guarantees – where the amount is fixed and the bank assumes the debt – rose 8.5% to 60.9 trillion won (about $45 billion), while contingent guarantees fell 8.8% to 18.3 trillion won (about $13.7 billion).

Analysts said banks are favoring lower-risk transactions and reducing exposure to more complex contingent guarantees, which are harder to manage.

The slowdown also reflects weaker demand. Large exporters, which drove much of last year’s trade growth, often do not require bank guarantees, while rising delinquency risks have prompted lenders to focus on balance sheet stability.

Looking ahead, growth in guarantees is expected to remain subdued as geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and global logistics disruptions continue to weigh on trade.

A prolonged period of high exchange rates could further increase risks, as most guarantees are denominated in foreign currencies, meaning their value rises in won terms even without new issuance.

Experts say stabilizing the foreign exchange market and expanding trade finance support will be key to preventing broader financial strain on companies.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260323010006560

US-Israel attacks on Iran continue as Israeli forces blow up the Qasimiyah Bridge in south Lebanon.

March 22 (Asia Today) — South Korea should maintain “strategic ambiguity” in responding to U.S. pressure over the Middle East crisis, experts said, as tensions surrounding Iran and the Strait of Hormuz intensify.

The call comes after Donald Trump urged allies including South Korea, Japan and European partners to play a greater role following U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran, raising concerns in Seoul about balancing its alliance with Washington and broader diplomatic interests.

South Korean officials said they are taking a cautious approach and have not received formal requests from the United States regarding potential military deployment to the Strait of Hormuz.

The government is focusing on assessing the intent behind Trump’s remarks while weighing the risks of deeper involvement in the region.

The Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy shipping route, has long been vulnerable to disruption. Analysts say any effort to secure maritime traffic would likely require multinational coordination rather than unilateral action.

Foreign ministers from the Group of Seven nations recently condemned Iran’s attacks on civilian infrastructure and said they are prepared to take steps to support global energy supplies, though the timing of any direct action remains unclear.

A Foreign Ministry official said stability in Middle Eastern shipping lanes is vital for South Korea and other major economies, noting that ensuring safe passage is a challenge that cannot be addressed by a single country.

Experts pointed to Japan’s approach under Sanae Takaichi as a potential model. Tokyo has prioritized its alliance with the United States while limiting direct military involvement, balancing energy security, international law and domestic public opinion.

Lee Ki-tae, a senior researcher at the Sejong Institute, said South Korea should similarly avoid automatic military intervention and instead preserve flexibility.

“Maintaining strategic ambiguity allows South Korea to uphold its alliance while avoiding immediate alignment with any one side,” he said.

Park Won-gon, a professor at Ewha Womans University, said logistical and political constraints also support a cautious stance. He noted that deploying naval forces would require parliamentary approval, a process that could take about two months.

He added that evolving and sometimes inconsistent messaging from Washington further underscores the need for careful deliberation.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260323010006558

Many of Tehran’s top leaders – from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei to senior security figures – have been assassinated by the United States and Israel,

US President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu have framed the killings as victories in their war on Iran.

But Iran says its governance structure is designed to withstand such blows.

And that means the loss of any individual should not lead to the downfall of the system.

But how does this unique leadership structure work?

Who is keeping the government running, and how?

And what does it mean for the ongoing war?

Presenter: James Bays

Guests

Hamid Reza Gholamzadeh – director of House of Diplomacy, a think tank

Ali Vaez – director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group

Tim Ripley – defence analyst and editor of Defence Eye

Governing liberals edge ahead of opposition conservatives in a race too close to call, according to exit poll.

Slovenia’s governing Freedom Movement (GS) is on track to win a parliamentary election but will need to find more coalition partners to form a government, according to an exit poll.

GS was set to secure 29.9 percent of the votes, or 30 seats in the country’s 90-seat parliament, in a dip from its previous result of 41 seats, according to the poll, published by TV Slovenia and Pop TV on Sunday.

The opposition Slovenian Democratic Party, led by populist Janez Jansa, is expected to come second and secure 27 seats in parliament, according to the Mediana polling agency.

As he voted, incumbent Prime Minister Robert Golob, 59, called on citizens to cast their ballots.

“Democracy and Slovenia’s sovereignty cannot be taken for granted any more,” he told reporters.

Jansa welcomed the exit poll results and said he would wait for the final result.

“If someone wants a government like the one we’ve had so far, then they are probably satisfied with what these parallel results indicate,” Jansa said.

“Whoever wants change will likely have to wait for the final results, just as we will, and then we will analyse the situation. But we have done everything that was within our power,” he said.

The opposition party leader has served as prime minister three times, most recently from 2020 to 2022.

Ahead of the vote, the election had been marred by controversy after a report last week alleged that Jansa met with officials from the Israeli spy firm Black Cube in December.

Golob told journalists after the report: “The fact that … foreign services are interfering in the elections of a democratic member state of the European Union is something unheard of.”

US President Trump, who cut off oil supplies to Cuba after abducting Venezuela’s President Maduro, has threatened to take over the island-nation.

The Cuban government has said it is prepared for any potential United States attacks as the island-nation begins to recover from yet another blackout under a punishing oil blockade imposed by Washington that has pushed its economy to the brink.

Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernandez de Cossio responded on Sunday to US President Donald Trump’s threats this week to take over Cuba, insisting that it had “historically been ready to mobilise as a nation for military aggression”.

“We don’t believe it is something that is probable, but we would be naive if we do not prepare,” de Cossio told NBC’s Meet the Press.

His comments were aired a day after the latest collapse of the country’s ageing nationwide grid that had left millions of people in the dark. Saturday’s outage was the second in the past week and the third in March.

The state-run Electric Union and the Ministry of Energy and Mines said some 72,000 customers in the capital, Havana, including five hospitals, had electricity again early on Sunday. But the number represented only a fraction of Havana’s total population of approximately two million.

The Cuban Electric Union, which reports to the Ministry of Energy and Mines, said the total disconnection of the national system was caused by an unexpected shutdown of a generation unit at the Nuevitas thermoelectric plant in Camaguey province, without providing details on the specific cause of the failure.

Trump, who started blocking oil from reaching the island after abducting Cuba’s ally, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, early this year, has warned potential oil exporters that they could face high tariffs.

According to President Miguel Diaz-Canel, Cuba has not received oil from foreign suppliers for three months. The country produces barely 40 percent of the fuel it needs to power its economy.

On March 16, Trump escalated his rhetoric against Cuba, arguing the leadership was on the verge of collapse and saying he expected to have the “honour” of taking the country.

De Cossio denied that the nature, structure, or makeup of the Cuban government was up for negotiation in what Havana has called a “serious and responsible” dialogue with Washington launched earlier this month. He added that a change of the ruling system was “absolutely” off the table in discussions.

This week, General Francis Donovan, head of the US Southern Command overseeing armed forces in Latin America, told lawmakers at a US Senate hearing on Trump’s military action in the region that troops were not rehearsing for an invasion of Cuba or actively preparing to take over the Communist-run island.

But, he added, the US stood ready to address any threats to the US embassy, to defend its base at Guantanamo Bay, and aid US government efforts to address any mass migration from the island, if needed.

The Cuban government reportedly refused a request by the embassy in Havana to allow it to import diesel for its generators in response to the oil blockade, The Associated Press reported on Saturday, citing two US officials.

March 22 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump is threatening to obliterate Iran’s power plants if it doesn’t re-open the Strait of Hormuz and allow oil tankers through.

“If Iran doesn’t FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!” Trump posted on Truth Social Saturday night.

CNN quoted Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad ⁠Baqer Qalibaf as saying that if Trump carries out this plan, Iran will retaliate by attacking infrastructure and energy facilities throughout the Middle East, driving up the prices for oil even further than they have been for the past three weeks.

The New York Times said about 175 people were injured Sunday morning in Iranian missile attacks on Arad and Dimona, residential neighborhoods in southern Israel.

The locations are near Israel’s biggest nuclear research and reactor center.

Last week, Trump asked members of NATO, whose countries depend on the oil transported through the Strait of Hormuz, to help re-open and police the essential trade route between Iran and Oman.

Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Japan responded with a statement of support that said, “We express our readiness to contribute to appropriate efforts to ensure safe passage through the Strait.”

Iran closed the waterway Feb. 28 after the United States and Israel tried to destroy Iran’s nuclear program and long-range missile manufacturing facilities.

March 22 (UPI) — The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear Watson vs. Republican Nation Committee, a legal case that could have ramifications on mail-in balloting deadlines in the upcoming mid-term elections, on Monday.

About 30 percent of voters cast their ballots by mail in 2024.

CBS noted that 14 states and the District of Columbia have extended deadlines for counting mail-in ballots that are postmarked by Election Day.

Illinois, for instance, counts ballots received up to two weeks after Election Day, while California has a grace period of seven days.

This week’s case will look at whether extended deadlines violate federal statutes recognizing Election Day as a specific date.

“The longer the period over which the election is conducted, the greater the opportunity for and risk of fraud,” USA Today quoted conservative groups, backing the RNC’s attempt to count only ballots received by Election Day, as saying in the court filing.

Marc Elias, a Democratic elections attorney representing Vet Voices and the Alliance for Retired Americans, told the newspaper eliminating grace periods could disproportionately impact Democrats because they are more likely to vote by mail than Republicans.

“People are being stripped of their voting rights through no fault of their own,” Elias said, noting delays in the U.S. Postal Service might be one reason ballots don’t arrive at their local polling places until after Election Day.

The case will be heard as U.S. President Trump continues to pressure the Senate to pass the SAVE America Act, which would require those registering to vote to show proof of citizenship with passports or birth certificates.

“THE SAVE AMERICA ACT MUST BE PASSED BY THE SENATE. THERE IS NOTHING THAT IS MORE IMPORTANT FOR THE U.S.A. Voter I.D., Proof of Citizenship, etc. Get it done and watch all of the good things that will happen!!!” Trump wrote on X Friday.

A recent Harvard CAPS/Harris poll showed that 71 percent of voters support the SAVE Act.

Follow the build-up, analysis and live text commentary of the Madrid derby as Real host Atletico at the Bernabeu.

During the Gaza war, protesters have flooded the streets of major British cities, calling on their leaders to cut off the supply of weapons and other military hardware to Israel.

The United Kingdom’s relationship with its ally is under scrutiny. Jeremy Corbyn, a British MP, set up the Gaza Tribunal to examine whether the UK’s support for Israel amounts to complicity. Doctors and aid workers gave emotional accounts of the horrors they saw while working in the Gaza Strip, and journalists presented evidence of weapons shipments and spy flights allegedly operating from a nearby British air force base. All were making the case that the UK’s unwavering support for Israel is no longer legally or morally justifiable.

In its final report, published on March 16, the Gaza Tribunal said the UK has failed in its duty to prevent genocide and has been complicit in atrocities. It also recommended that the UK end all military cooperation with Israel.

The UK government has yet to comment on the allegations.

As the United States-Israeli war on Iran enters its fourth week, the conflict seems to have escalated beyond President Donald Trump’s control.

The Iranian government has been able to endure the killings of its top political and military leaders and has launched retaliatory attacks on Israel and Gulf countries despite weeks of air strikes.

Tehran has also been able to impose a de facto blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway through which a fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas supplies pass, sending oil prices soaring. Analysts said the conflict risks unleashing a global recession. And that has put pressure on Trump, prompting his administration to allow the sale of sanctioned Russian oil to try to ease the energy crisis and pressure allies to police the strait, so far unsuccessfully.

Trump’s response in how to deal with the situation has been anything but coherent.

On Saturday, Trump upped the ante, issuing a threat to “obliterate” Iran’s power plants if Tehran does not reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours. This came a day after he said the US was “winding down” its military operations in Iran.

Analysts said Trump launched the war without a clear goal and misjudged how Tehran would respond. The conflict has expanded across the Middle East.

So is Trump looking to exit the war – or escalate it?

Trump’s mixed messaging on the Iran war

Here’s a brief look at the changing statements from Washington:

Is the war winding up or widening?

While one statement from Trump signalled that the US is considering “winding down” the war on Iran, another one indicated that the conflict would widen in the coming days.

On Saturday, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that Washington was “very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran”.

Trump listed the goals of the war as: completely degrading Iran’s missile capability, destroying its defence industrial base, eliminating the Iranian navy and air force, never allowing Iran to get even close to having nuclear weapons, protecting Middle Eastern allies, and guarding and policing the Strait of Hormuz.

Both Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have claimed repeatedly in the past few days that Iranian military capabilities have been “completely destroyed” even as Tehran continues to retaliate against Israel and strike countries in the region.

US military officials said they have carried out heavy bombardments of Iran’s coast, including with bunker buster bombs, but still have not been able to limit Tehran’s capacity to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz.

On Saturday, Trump said the US “has blown Iran off of the map” and insisted that he has “met my own goals … and weeks ahead of schedule!” He also reiterated that Iran’s “leadership is gone, their navy and air force are dead, they have absolutely no defense, and they want to make a deal”.

Iranian leaders have consistently denied reaching out to the US with a ceasefire offer.

Just an hour later, Trump returned to his Truth Social platform with a warning for Iran.

“If Iran doesn’t FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!” Trump wrote.

Iran has since responded by saying it will hit energy sites across the Middle East if its power facilities are targeted. It has already fired hundreds of missiles and drones on Gulf countries, targeting US assets as well as energy facilities.

Between Trump’s claims to be “winding down” operations and upping the ante later, his administration announced it is sending three more warships to the Middle East with about 2,500 additional Marines.

The US military said about 50,000 military personnel are already deployed for the war against Iran.

When will the war on Iran end?

That has been among the foremost questions posed to US officials, including Trump, since the war on Iran was launched on February 28.

The next day, Trump told the Daily Mail that “it will be four weeks or so. It’s always been about a four-week process.” A day later, Trump said at the White House: “We projected four to five weeks, but we have capability to go far longer than that.”

On March 8, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told the CBS TV network’s 60 Minutes programme: “This is only just the beginning.” The next day, the US president told the same channel that he thinks “the war is very complete, pretty much.” And the US military operation was “way ahead of schedule”.

Then, on March 9, Trump said one could say the war is “both complete and just beginning”. Later the same day, the president said: “We’ve already won in many ways, but we haven’t won enough” and promised to go further and harsher against Iran.

On March 11, Trump said: “We don’t want to leave early, do we? We’ve got to finish the job.”

Why did US and Israel launch strikes on Iran?

Responses to this question are perhaps the most telling about US posturing in the war against Iran.

On March 2, Hegseth said the attacks were aimed at ending “47 long years” of war by “the expansionist and Islamist regime in Tehran” and were launched because Iran refused to negotiate with the US.

Hours later, Marco Rubio, the secretary of state, told reporters the US knew Israel was about to strike Iran, adding that the Trump administration believed the US needed to launch a pre-emptive strike before Iran’s retaliation potentially targeted US forces. “We went proactively in a defensive way to prevent them from inflicting higher damage,” he said.

This sparked a massive row in Washington with critics saying Israel had forced the US into war with Iran. Soon Trump rebutted his top diplomat, saying: “They [Iran] were going to attack. If we didn’t do it, they were going to attack first. … So if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”

The next day, the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, concluded that Trump just had a “good feeling” that Iran would strike so Washington attacked Tehran.

The launch of the war came as Washington and Tehran were scheduled to meet for another round of talks that were started late last year. Before the war, their Omani mediator said a deal was “within reach”.

The US and Israeli assertion that Tehran was on the verge of making a nuclear bomb has not been backed up by the United Nations nuclear watchdog. Last week, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard also told Congress that Iran was not in a position to make an atomic bomb.

Some analysts said the Trump administration was convinced to go to war by Netanyahu, who has been seeking US military intervention in Iran for decades. They said Trump was buoyed by a swift US military operation in Venezuela and did not think through Iran’s strengths before going into the war. In January, the US military abducted President Nicolas Maduro in a military operation in Caracas that took two and a half hours.

What does the conflicting messaging mean for US strategy?

Analysts said the moving goalposts in the Iran war show the policy limits of the current Trump administration as well as its strategy, to some extent, of keeping off-ramps available.

Zeidon Alkinani, a Middle East analyst at the Arab Perspectives Institute, told Al Jazeera that in the earlier days of the hostilities, there appeared to be clearer targets and limited objectives.

“There now seems to be a more chaotic reaction,” he said. He described the attacks as increasingly reciprocal, suggesting strikes on oil or energy facilities could prompt further escalation.

Last week, Iran attacked energy facilities in Qatar and caused “significant damage”, knocking out  17 percent of Qatar’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity. Qatar produces 20 percent of global LNG supplies. Iran said the attack was in retaliation for Israeli attacks on a gas plant.

Paolo von Schirach, president of the Global Policy Institute, told Al Jazeera that Trump changes his mind “very quickly” and it is hard to predict what his next step could be in the war on Iran.

The analyst said it was unclear to him what “tools” Trump has to end the war.

“We look at his message saying the war is winding down. OK, good. Things are quiet. Maybe there is an off-ramp somehow. But now he says that if the Iranians don’t open the Strait of Hormuz, then we [the US] are going to unleash hell and what have you,” von Schirach noted.

“It is not quite clear to me what he wants and what the tools are to accomplish this.”

Von Schirach added that it would be difficult to predict whether the US could force Iran into submission, given its size and population. Using as a reference Iraq, where 150,000 American soldiers were deployed during the Second Gulf War, the analyst predicted that the US might need as many as half a million soldiers if Trump “wants to take over Iran”.

Under the guise of preserving secularism, this law allows the exclusion of people based on their religious identity.

On Monday, the Supreme Court of Canada will begin a four-day hearing for one of the most consequential constitutional cases in the country’s recent history. At issue is Quebec’s so-called “secularism law”, known as Bill 21 – a law enacted in 2019 that prohibits certain public sector workers from wearing visible religious symbols at work.

It bars many public sector employees, including teachers, prosecutors, police officers, and judges, from wearing religious symbols such as hijabs, turbans, kippahs, and other visible expressions of faith while at work.

There is much at stake in this case that raises fundamental questions about religious freedom, equality, and the limits of state power in a constitutional democracy. In addition, another significant issue is that to get the bill passed, Quebec’s government had used the “notwithstanding clause”, a unique provision in Canadian law that allows it to override fundamental rights and freedoms. No other constitutional democracy in the world has a similar blanket override of fundamental rights and freedoms.

The Quebec government claims that the law is necessary to preserve the religious neutrality of the state. Yet Bill 21 does the opposite: by forcing some individuals to choose between their profession and their religious identity, the Quebec government is not remaining neutral – it is effectively excluding people of faith from public sector employment.

The use of this extraordinary, and until recently rarely used, constitutional mechanism has turned the spotlight on Bill 21 beyond the borders of Quebec and the debate over secularism and religious freedoms. It has become a test of how far a democratic government can go in limiting fundamental rights and freedoms.

Evidence before the courts shows that Bill 21 affects religious people of many faiths, including Jewish men who wear kippahs and Sikh men and women who wear turbans; but its impact falls particularly heavily on Muslim women who wear the hijab. For many Muslim women who wear headscarves, teaching and other public service careers have effectively been closed off.

The message of exclusion that this law sends to young people is especially troubling. Generations of young people in Quebec are being told that their full participation in public life requires abandoning visible aspects of their identity.

This is why the National Council of Canadian Muslims and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association launched the constitutional challenge against Bill 21. The Supreme Court of Canada must consider the implications, and possible limitations, of allowing governments to sidestep rights protections through pre-emptive use of constitutional override powers. The court’s decision will help determine whether constitutional rights in Canada remain meaningful constraints on government power, or whether they can be suspended whenever politically convenient.

These questions extend far beyond Canada. Across Europe and elsewhere, debates about secularism have increasingly centred on restrictions targeting religious expression, often impacting Muslim women in particular.

Canada often prides itself on being a model of multicultural democracy, one that accommodates diversity. Bill 21 challenges that reputation by testing whether neutrality can coexist with policies that effectively exclude people of visible faith from public service.

True secularism does not demand the erasure of religious identity. A neutral state does not require citizens to shed visible expressions of belief in order to participate fully in public life.

The Supreme Court of Canada now has the opportunity to reaffirm these principles and clarify that constitutional rights cannot be easily set aside. At a time when countries around the world are grappling with questions of belonging, pluralism, and the rights of minorities, the Canadian court’s ruling will send an important signal about whether liberal democracies are willing to uphold their commitments to freedom and equality.

We say this is not an abstract idea, but an imperative to demonstrate that commitments to freedom and equality are more than mere words.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

‘These are countries that face drought, food or economic difficulties that compound this crisis much farther.’
David Owiro, founder of the African Development Think Tanks, says that African countries are particularly vulnerable to the economic consequences of the US-Israeli war on Iran.

Retired US Army officer Peter Mansoor explains why the US and Iran are at ‘stalemate’ and what the US needs to do to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Latin American leaders met at the 10th Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) Summit in Bogota on Saturday where Colombian President Gustavo Petro called for an immediate Middle East ceasefire to prevent a global economic crisis and ‘potential world war’.

Iranian missiles struck two communities in southern Israel, leaving buildings shattered and dozens injured in dual attacks not far from Israel’s main nuclear research centre.

The Iranian strikes late on Saturday came after Tehran’s main nuclear enrichment facility at Natanz was hit earlier in the day. Israel denied responsibility for the strike on Natanz, nearly 220km (135 miles) southeast of Tehran.

The Pentagon declined to comment on the strike on Natanz, which was also hit during the first week of the war and the 12-day war last June. Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Maria Zakharova said such strikes posed a “real risk of catastrophic disaster throughout the Middle East”.

Iran retaliated hours later.

Israel’s military said it was not able to intercept missiles that hit the southern cities of Dimona and Arad, the largest near the centre in Israel’s sparsely populated Negev desert. It was the first time Iranian missiles had penetrated Israel’s air defence systems in the area around the nuclear site.

The Israeli Ministry of Health said at least 180 people were wounded in the missile attacks on the southern city of Dimona and nearby Arad.

Dimona is about 20km (12 miles) west of the nuclear research centre, and Arad is around 35km (22 miles) to the north.

Israel is believed to be the only Middle East nation with nuclear weapons, though its leaders refuse to confirm or deny their existence. The UN nuclear watchdog said on X it had not received reports of damage to the Israeli centre or abnormal radiation levels.

Voters choosing between incumbent PM Robert Golob and pro-Trump Janez Jansa, with neither likely to win parliamentary majority.

Slovenians are voting in a tight parliamentary election, as incumbent liberal Prime Minister Robert Golob takes on right-wing populist Janez Jansa, who is eyeing a comeback.

Polls opened at 7am local time (06:00 GMT) on Sunday and will close at 7pm (18:00 GMT), with exit poll results to be released after voting.

A return of Jansa, an admirer of United States President Donald Trump, could see the former Yugoslav nation, a European Union member of two million people, take an illiberal turn again after four years of centre-left rule under 59-year-old Golob.

Neither is likely to win a parliamentary majority in the vote, which could be decided by smaller coalition partners.

Latest opinion polls confirm Jansa’s Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS) and Golob’s Freedom Movement (GS) are set for a close race after an eleventh-hour campaign drama involving allegations of foreign meddling and corruption.

The last government of three-time premier Jansa, who is pro-Israel and an ally of nationalist Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, saw mass protests and EU criticism over rule-of-law concerns.

Under Golob, a political newcomer when he took over from Jansa in 2022, Slovenia legalised same-sex marriage and became one of the few EU countries to describe Israel’s war in Gaza as genocide.

Analysts say Jansa, 67, has a devoted voter base, and the lower the turnout, the higher the chances of him winning the election.

At stake is the domestic and foreign agenda of Slovenia, where the outgoing government focused on social and health reforms but delivered mixed results, resulting in a fall in popularity for Golob’s governing coalition.

Jansa has promised to introduce tax breaks for businesses and cut funding for civil society, welfare and media.

Slovenia, an Alpine country with a developed industrial base, emerged stronger from the collapse of Yugoslavia than other states such as Serbia or Bosnia and Herzegovina, which have been held back by war, economic sanctions and political infighting.

Jansa would also likely change Golob’s foreign policy under which Slovenia was one of the few European countries that recognised an independent Palestinian state and last year imposed an arms embargo on Israel.

At least six people on board a Qatari military helicopter have been killed in a crash in the Gulf state’s waters after a “technical malfunction”, the government said.

Seven people were on board, with Qatar’s interior ministry on Sunday saying operations continue ‌to find the last missing person.

“A Qatari helicopter had a technical malfunction during a routine duty, which led to its crash in the regional waters of the State,” the country’s defence ministry earlier said in a statement on X.

More to come…

SANTIAGO, Chile, March 20 (UPI) — Mining companies BHP and U.S.-based Freeport-McMoRan submitted two copper projects worth more than $12.5 billion combined to Chile’s Environmental Impact Assessment System, marking one of the clearest signs of a revival in mining investment in the country.

BHP, through Minera Escondida, the world’s largest copper producer, submitted the “Nueva Concentradora Escondida” project valued at $5 billion, which would allow it to continue operations by replacing the Los Colorados plant. That plant is at the end of its useful life.

The project includes an ore processing capacity of 460 thousands of tons per day in the Antofagasta region. If approved, it would begin operations between 2031 and 2032.

Minera El Abra, the Chilean subsidiary of Freeport-McMoRan, is seeking to invest $7.5 billion to extend its operations by 40 years and increase its production by more than 300,000 metric tons of copper annually starting in 2033, once it becomes operational.

The initiative includes the construction of a concentrator plant, a desalination facility, among other projects.

Analysts say these investments respond to sustained growth in global copper demand, driven by electrification, power grids and the energy transition, although they also note that they are being accelerated by a shift in the local political environment after the arrival of a government led by José Antonio Kast.

As one of its first measures, the administration introduced the National Reconstruction Bill, which includes initiatives to reduce bureaucracy and streamline permitting.

The proposal includes lowering the corporate tax rate from to 23% from 27% to align it with countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Finance Minister Jorge Quiroz told local media this week that the government aims to offer clear rules, legal certainty and an agile, non-discriminatory process that respects the environment.

“This investment will move forward smoothly,” he said, referring to the Escondida project.

The president of the Chilean Mining Chamber, Manuel Viera, said about $18 billion in projects are stalled due to bureaucratic hurdles in the permitting process.

“And in just one week, the president of the republic has indicated that they should be unlocked. That is a sign that signal has been well received by investors, and we expect news like those of Escondida and El Abra to continue in the coming months because Chile also needs more and better mining,” he said.

Cristian Cifuentes, senior leader of studies and content at the Center for Copper and Mining Studies, or Cesco, told UPI that the announcements represent a clear indication of a revival in mining investment, although the trend already had been emerging without such concrete evidence.

“It is a validation of Chile as a competitive jurisdiction in a highly capital-intensive global context,” he said.

He added that while investment decisions respond to global copper demand, their execution depends “critically on local conditions: permitting, institutional stability and political signals.”

“Any improvement in regulatory certainty or pro-investment narrative accelerates decisions that, in many cases, were already in the pipeline. At the same time, these filings show that, despite recent regulatory tensions, the country maintains baseline conditions that allow investment decisions to move forward,” he said.

Víctor Frangi, managing director of Delivery & Transformation at KPMG Chile, said the country is creating more favorable conditions to activate projects, in an environment in which copper demand is projected to increase by about 40% by 2040.

“Chile approved the Framework Law on Sectoral Authorizations, which seeks to reduce permitting times by between 30% and 70%, along with the modernization of the Environmental Impact Assessment System regulations to focus evaluations on projects with significant impact,” he said.

Frangi said that Chile now offers greater business certainty and a more limited level of risk, which facilitates large-scale investment decisions.

Analysts warn, though that growing regional competition to attract mining investment exists.

“Countries such as Argentina have improved their macroeconomic environment and promoted initiatives such as the Incentive Regime for Large Investments, positioning themselves to attract large-scale projects, such as Vicuña, a joint venture between Lundin Mining and BHP, with an estimated investment of $18 billion,” Frangi said.

He added that Peru and even the Democratic Republic of Congo also show dynamism.

“Chile faces the challenge of remaining competitive against other destinations that are also capturing investment. There are replacement and efficiency projects, such as the new Escondida concentrator, and changes in the operating model, such as the advance of desalination as a standard in water use,” Frangi said.

Viera said mining companies are seeking more copper deposits amid growing global demand.

He added that armed conflicts between the United States and Iran, as well as between Russia and Ukraine, have disrupted the balance between supply and demand.

“They have broken the balance of supply and demand. As armed conflicts increase, demand rises for critical minerals used in weapons manufacturing. These are factors driving the search for copper, iron and other minerals, in addition to demand linked to the development of technologies associated with climate change,” he said.

Israeli settlers set fire to homes and vehicles near Jenin amid reports of widespread violence across the occupied territory.

Israeli settlers have torched homes and vehicles in at least two areas of the occupied West Bank, wounding at least one person, amid reports of settler violence across the Palestinian territory.

The Palestinian Wafa news agency, citing local sources, said Israeli settlers stormed the village of al-Fandaqumiya and the town of Seilat al-Dahr, south of Jenin, late on Saturday.

In al-Fandaqumiya, Israeli settlers set “homes and vehicles ablaze and damaged additional houses by smashing windows” as Palestinians “attempted to confront them and put out the fires”, the agency reported.

In Seilat al-Dahr, the settlers targeted several homes, attempted to set them alight and physically assaulted a resident, leaving him wounded.

Footage verified by Al Jazeera showed large fires burning inside homes in Seilat al-Dahr, and another house engulfed in flames in al-Fandaqumiya as residents frantically tried to extinguish them.

There was also an attack on Masafer Yatta, south of Hebron, where settlers wounded two Palestinians. Three others were arrested as settlers stormed the area under the protection of Israeli forces, Wafa reported.

The attacks, which took place late on Saturday during Eid al-Fitr celebrations, are the latest in a wave of settler violence in the occupied territory that has previously resulted in killings.

Other images and videos shared by Palestinian authorities showed settler attacks on the villages of Qaryut and Jalud, south of Nablus. In Jalud, a four-wheel-drive vehicle was seen completely burned out following the attack.

Violence was reported elsewhere across the occupied West Bank.

Near the town of Haris, west of Salfit, settlers gathered on the main road and pelted Palestinian vehicles with stones, according to Wafa.

In Ramallah, settlers near Rawabi Square on the Ramallah-Nablus Road threw stones at passing Palestinian-registered vehicles, with no injuries reported.

Similar incidents were reported in Tuqu, southeast of Bethlehem.

Settler violence in the West Bank has intensified in the shadow of Israel’s genocidal war on nearby Gaza.

More than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli troops and settlers in the West Bank since the Gaza war began in October 2023, according to the latest United Nations figures.

In late February, Israeli settlers defaced and set fire to a mosque near Nablus in the occupied West Bank during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

In February, the UN Human Rights Council warned in a new report (PDF) that Israeli policies in the occupied West Bank – including “the systematic unlawful use of force by Israeli security forces” and unlawful demolitions of Palestinian homes – aim to uproot Palestinian communities.

Human rights groups say Israeli authorities have allowed the settlers to operate with total impunity in their attacks against Palestinians.

Israeli organisation B’Tselem has also accused its government of actively aiding the settlers’ violence “as part of a strategy to cement the takeover of Palestinian land”.

Elsewhere in the occupied West Bank, two Palestinians were injured on Saturday night by live fire from Israeli forces south of Tulkarem.

The Palestine Red Crescent Society (PRCS) reported that at least two people were wounded after being shot by Israeli forces at the Jabara checkpoint.