blocks

China’s Commerce Ministry says the move against Japanese firms will prevent the remilitarisation of Japan.

Japan has strongly protested China’s move to restrict the export of “dual-use” items to 20 Japanese business entities that Beijing says could be used for military purposes, in the latest twist in a months-long diplomatic row between the two countries.

Japanese Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Sato Kei said at a news conference that the move by China’s Ministry of Commerce on Tuesday was “deplorable” and would “not be tolerated” by Tokyo.

Companies affected by China’s export ban on dual-use items, or items that can be used for civilian or military purposes, include Mitsubishi Heavy Industries’ shipbuilding group, aerospace and marine machinery subsidiaries, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Japan’s National Defense Academy, and the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency.

Beijing said restricting the export of dual-use items to the Japanese firms was necessary to “safeguard national security and interests and fulfil international obligations such as non-proliferation”, adding that the companies were involved in “enhancing Japan’s military strength”.

China’s Commerce Ministry said on Tuesday that it would also add another 20 entities to its export restrictions watchlist, including Japanese automaker Subaru, petroleum company ENEOS Corporation, and Mitsubishi Materials Corporation.

Chinese exporters must submit a risk assessment report for each company to ensure “dual-use items will not be used for any purpose that would enhance Japan’s military strength”, according to a statement on the Commerce Ministry’s website.

China has imposed similar restrictions on the US and Taiwan as a form of political protest, particularly over Washington’s ongoing unofficial support for the self-governed island. Beijing claims democratic Taiwan as its territory and has not ruled out using force for “reunification”.

Tokyo and Beijing have a historically acrimonious relationship, but diplomatic ties took a turn for the worse in November, when Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi told legislators that a Chinese attack on Taiwan would constitute a “survival-threatening situation” for Japan, which could necessitate military action.

Japan has had a pacifist constitution which restricts its use of force, but an attack on Taiwan could legally allow Tokyo to activate its army, the Self-Defence Forces, Takaichi said.

Takaichi’s remarks were some of the most explicit regarding whether Japan could become involved in a conflict in the Taiwan Strait, and have been accompanied by a push to expand Japan’s military capability.

Beijing reacted with fury to Takaichi’s remarks, discouraging Chinese citizens from visiting Japan, leading to a major drop in tourism revenue from Chinese visitors.

In January, Beijing also imposed Japanese export restrictions on rare earths like gallium, germanium, graphite and rare earth magnets that could be used for defence purposes, according to the US-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) think tank.

The CSIS said at the time that “these retaliatory measures underscore rising tensions between Beijing and Tokyo and serve as a pointed warning from China to countries that take explicit positions on cross-strait relations”.

Tokyo does not have official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, but several of its outlying islands, including Okinawa, are geographically closer to Taiwan than mainland Japan. Taiwan is also enormously popular with the Japanese public.

European Union fails to approve further Russia sanctions and a $106bn loan to Ukraine after Hungary refuses to agree.

The European Union has imposed sanctions on a new group of eight Russian individuals suspected of serious human rights violations, as EU member state Hungary vetoed additional sanctions on Moscow and a crucial loan for Ukraine on the eve of the war’s fourth anniversary.

The European Council on Monday said the individuals were members of the judiciary responsible ⁠for sentencing prominent Russian activists on politically motivated charges, as well as heads of penal colonies where political prisoners were held in inhuman and degrading conditions.

Under the sanctions, the individuals are banned from ⁠travelling to or transiting through the EU, their ⁠assets are frozen, and EU citizens and companies are prohibited from making funds available to them.

So far, 72 individuals have been hit by similar measures, including members of the judiciary, Ministry ⁠of Justice officials, and senior figures within Russia’s prison ⁠network.

The announcement came as the bloc failed to agree on a 20th sanctions package targeting the ‌Russian authorities more broadly and ‌a $106bn loan for Ukraine.

Hungary, the friendliest EU state to the Kremlin, vetoed the measures – which required unanimous approval within the EU bloc – following claims that Kyiv is delaying restarting the flow of Russian oil via a Soviet-era pipeline.

Kyiv says the Druzhba pipeline, which still carries Russian oil over Ukrainian territory to Europe, was damaged a month ago by a Russian drone strike, and it is fixing it as fast as it can.

Hungary and Slovakia, which have the EU’s only ⁠two refineries that still rely on oil via Druzhba, blame Ukraine for the delay.

Tensions were further exacerbated on Monday as Ukrainian security officials claimed to have launched a drone attack that sparked a fire at a Russian pumping station serving the Druzhba oil ⁠pipeline.

‘Message we didn’t want to send’

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto told reporters ahead of the EU meeting that Budapest would block the loan as Kyiv had taken the “political decision” to “endanger our energy security”.

“The Druzhba pipeline has not been hit by any Russian attack, the pipeline itself has not been harmed, and currently there is no physical reason and no physical obstacle to reinstall the deliveries,” he said.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas called the failure to approve the new package a “setback and message we didn’t want to send today, but the work continues”.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said in a post on X that Hungary and Slovakia should not be allowed to “hold the entire EU hostage” and called on them to “engage in constructive cooperation and responsible behaviour”.

Maximilian Hess, an analyst at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, said the loan was “crucial for keeping Kyiv able to finance itself going forward in this conflict”.

Hess argued Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban is using the issue to his political advantage ahead of elections on April 12.

“Orban is trying to make this a political issue, and he’s trying to blame his own economic difficulties on Ukraine [to boost] his chances in this election,” the analyst told Al Jazeera.

Independent polls suggest the right-wing nationalist leader is facing the most serious challenge yet in his 16 years as prime minister.

Feb. 23 (UPI) — A federal judge in Florida on Monday blocked the public release of former special counsel Jack Smith’s report on his investigation into classified documents held at President Donald Trump‘s Mar-a-Lago estate.

In the order, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon of the Southern District of Florida said Smith’s report should not be made public after she previously ruled that he was illegally appointed to spearhead the case.

In July 2024, she said Smith’s appointment as special counsel by President Joe Biden violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. She took issue with what she described as the “broad power” given to Smith, the “indefinite” appropriate given to the task and his lack of supervision.

Biden appointed Smith to investigate whether Trump — then the former president — mishandled classified documents by storing them at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla. Smith’s probe resulted in 41 criminal counts against Trump, but Cannon dismissed the case in 2024.

In her order Monday, she accused Smith of accelerating efforts to prepare the report after her ruling so it could be completed before he left his position in January 2025 upon Trump’s inauguration to a second term. She said Smith used “discover materials generated in this case,” and there was a 2023 protective order preventing the public release of such materials unless approved by a court.

Cannon said she’s also blocking the release of the report because doing so “would cause irreparable damage to former defendants” involved in the case. Also named in the indictment against Trump were his aide, Walton Nauta, and Carlos De Oliveira, a maintenance worker accused of helping Nauta move 30 boxes of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago into a storage room under Trump’s direction.

Smith defended his investigation into the handling of classified documents — and another into Trump’s alleged attempts to interfere with the 2020 election — to Congress in December. He said if given the same evidence, he would charge Trump with crimes again.

“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power,” Smith said.

“Our investigation also developed powerful evidence that showed President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a bathroom and a ballroom where events and gatherings took place.”

Feb. 23 (UPI) — A new package of European Union sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, the 20th such set of measures, was stalled Monday after being blocked by Hungary, which is demanding Ukraine reopen a pipeline supplying it with Russian oil.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said there was “not going to be progress” on the new round of sanctions at Monday’s meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels in time for the fourth anniversary of the war, which falls Tuesday.

“We are doing our utmost to have the sanctions package, through, and we are looking for ways how we can do it. But as we have heard some very strong statements from Hungary. I don’t really see they are going to change this unfortunately today,” she said.

“We should not tie together things that are not connected to each other at all. But let us listen to them explaining the reasons why they are blocking, and then see whether there are possibilities to overcome.”

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto took to social media Sunday to make Hungary’s quid pro quo stance clear.

“The EU aims to adopt the 20th sanctions package at the Foreign Affairs Council. Hungary will block it. Until Ukraine resumes oil transit to Hungary and Slovakia via the Druzhba pipeline, we will not allow decisions important to Kyiv to move forward,” Sijjarto wrote on X.

The pipeline was damaged in a Russian attack, but Hungary insists Ukraine is dragging its feet getting it up and running again.

The financial services, trade and energy sanctions package drawn up by the European Commission would bring in a full maritime services ban for Russian crude oil, reducing its income from energy and making it more difficult to find customers. Access to oil tankers for Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” will also be tackled, along with measures targeting its gas exports.

Transaction bans will be imposed on 20 more Russian banks as part of an effort to hobble Russian efforts to create its own payment systems to circumvent a ban on using the SWIFT international payments system while tightening restrictions on exports to Russia, including military-use goods and technologies, and import bans on Russian rare earth minerals, metals and chemicals, worth at least $1.1 billion in total.

Hungary’s block drew sharp criticism from Hungary’s EU partners with Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard telling Euronews it was a “shame” and a “disgrace.”

“Every delay that we have in the adoption of a sanctions package is a failure for Europe,” she said.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said he was certain the sanctions package would pass, saying it was a matter of when, not if, while Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw accused the government of Prime Minister Viktor Orban of leveraging anti-Ukrainian sentiment it had whipped up to boost its fortunes in elections in April.

Hungary announced Friday it would also block a $105 billion EU loan to Ukraine, accusing Ukraine of blackmailing Hungary by shutting off the pipeline and conspiring with Brussels and the Hungarian opposition to “create supply disruptions” in Hungary to push up fuel prices ahead of the election.

Orban previously agreed not to veto the loan, along with Slovakia and the Czech Republic, provided it was exempted from contributing financially.

Populist Orban has been in power since 2010 after a first term between 1998 and 2002 and has been president of his Fidesz, or Hungarian Civic Party, for the past 23 years.

Palestinian boy Nidal Abu Rabeea died in Gaza after waiting 14 months for Israel to allow his medical evacuation, despite having the necessary clearance. Thousands of Palestinians are blocked from seeking urgent medical care through the partially reopened Rafah crossing.

The latest deaths come as just 260 people, out of 18,500 in urgent need, have been allowed to seek medical care via the crossing to Egypt, the United Nations says.

Israeli fire has killed at least two Palestinians in separate incidents across the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, as Israel continues to block thousands of Palestinians from seeking urgent medical attention through the partially-reopened Rafah crossing in its ongoing, more than two-year genocidal war on the enclave.

Al Jazeera’s correspondent on the ground reported that one child was killed in the northern Strip when an Israeli drone targeted children on their way to check their destroyed homes in the area.

Meanwhile, soldiers opened fire on and killed Muhand Jamal al-Najjar, 20, near the Bani Suheila roundabout east of the city of Khan Younis, Palestinian news agency Wafa reported.

Gaza hospital sources told Al Jazeera that Israeli fire also wounded three Palestinians in al-Mughraqa in the central Strip and the al-Mawasi area of Rafah to the south. 

Since the “ceasefire”, which Israel has violated on a near-daily basis, took effect in mid-October, more than 600 Palestinians have been killed and more than 1,600 wounded, according to the latest figures released by the Palestinian Ministry of Health earlier this week.

Limited reopening

The latest deaths come as the Israeli military maintains its blockade on Palestinians looking to exit Gaza via the Rafah crossing to Egypt for medical care.

The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has tallied a total of 260 patients leaving Gaza since the first day of reopening two and a half weeks ago, the office told Al Jazeera on Wednesday – a small fraction of the roughly 18,500 people who desperately require evacuation.

The figure even falls short of an earlier promise from an Egyptian border official that at least 50 Palestinians would cross in each direction starting from the first day. Instead, just five patients were permitted to leave.

Human rights and medical groups, including the World Health Organization (WHO), have repeatedly called for Palestinians to be able to access critical care outside Gaza.

WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus wrote on social media earlier this month that the body wanted to see an “immediate reopening of the medical referral route to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem”, and for more countries to accept patients for specialised care not available in the Strip.

But Gaza’s health system – which Israel has largely decimated since starting its war on the embattled enclave in October 2023 – must look to “reduce reliance on medical evacuations”, he added.

“This is now the top priority,” Tedros said, ticking off necessities including scaling up health services inside Gaza, stocking fresh medical supplies, and repairing damaged facilities.

The rate of return to Gaza through the checkpoint has also been slow: 269 people had passed into Gaza as of February 11, OCHA said in its latest report.

One recent batch – made up of 41 people who were transported to Nasser Medical Complex – said Israeli soldiers subjected them to humiliating physical searches and intense interrogations, an Al Jazeera team reported.

Returnees have previously recounted being blindfolded during hours of political interrogations and psychological pressure before being allowed to re-enter Gaza.

A federal judge on Thursday blocked a Trump administration order slashing $600 million in federal grant funding for HIV programs in California and three other states, finding merit in the states’ argument that the move was politically motivated by disagreements over unrelated state sanctuary policies.

U.S. District Judge Manish Shah, an Obama appointee in Illinois, found that California, Colorado, Illinois and Minnesota were likely to succeed in arguing that President Trump and other administration officials targeted the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funding for termination “based on arbitrary, capricious, or unconstitutional rationales.”

Namely, Shah wrote that while Trump administration officials said the programs were cut for breaking with CDC priorities, other “recent statements” by officials “plausibly suggest that the reason for the direction is hostility to what the federal government calls ‘sanctuary jurisdictions’ or ‘sanctuary cities.’”

Shah found that the states had shown they would “suffer irreparable harm” from the cuts, and that the public interest would not be harmed by temporarily halting them — and as a result granted the states a temporary restraining order halting the administration’s action for 14 days while the litigation continues.

Shah wrote that while he may not have jurisdiction to block a simple grant termination, he did have jurisdiction to halt an administration directive to terminate funding based on unconstitutional grounds.

“More factual development is necessary and it may be that the only government action at issue is termination of grants for which I have no jurisdiction to review,” Shah wrote. “But as discussed, plaintiffs have made a sufficient showing that defendants issued internal guidance to terminate public-health grants for unlawful reasons; that guidance is enjoined as the parties develop a record.”

The cuts targeted a slate of programs aimed at tracking and curtailing HIV and other disease outbreaks, including one of California’s main early-warning systems for HIV outbreaks, state and local officials said. Some were oriented toward serving the LGBTQ+ community. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office said California faced “the largest share” of the cuts.

The White House said the cuts were to programs that “promote DEI and radical gender ideology,” while federal health officials said the programs in question did not reflect the CDC’s “priorities.”

Bonta cheered Shah’s order in a statement, saying he and his fellow attorneys general who sued are “confident that the facts and the law favor a permanent block of these reckless and illegal funding cuts.”

A United States judge has granted an injunction preventing the Department of Defense from stripping Senator Mark Kelly, a military veteran, of his retirement pension and military rank.

The Defense Department had taken punitive action against Kelly for critical statements he had made against President Donald Trump.

But on Thursday, Judge Richard J Leon, an appointee of Republican President George W Bush, issued a forceful rebuke, accusing the Trump administration of trying to stifle veterans’ free speech rights.

Leon directed much of his ruling at Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, a senior Trump official who announced on January 5 that Kelly would be censured for what he characterised as “seditious” statements.

“Rather than trying to shrink the First Amendment liberties of retired service members, Secretary Hegseth and his fellow Defendants might reflect and be grateful for the wisdom and expertise that retired service members have brought to public discussions and debate on military matters in our Nation over the past 250 years,” Leon wrote.

“If so, they will more fully appreciate why the Founding Fathers made free speech the first Amendment in the Bill of Rights!”

History of the case

Thursday’s decision comes after Kelly, a Democratic member of Congress, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on January 12, alleging “punitive retribution”.

He had drawn the Trump administration’s ire with several public statements questioning the president’s military decisions.

Kelly, who represents the swing state of Arizona, had condemned the administration for sending military troops to quell protests in Los Angeles in June 2025.

Then, in November, he was also one of six former members of the US’s military and intelligence communities to participate in a video reminding current service members of their duty to “refuse illegal orders”.

That video quickly attracted Trump’s attention, and the president issued a string of social media posts threatening imprisonment and even the death penalty.

“This is really bad, and Dangerous to our Country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP?” Trump wrote in one post.

In another, he suggested a harsher punishment: “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!”

Shortly thereafter, the Defense Department announced it had launched an investigation into the video and Kelly specifically, given his role as a retired Navy captain.

Hegseth accused Kelly of using “his rank and service affiliation” to discredit the US armed forces, and he echoed Trump’s claims that the video was “reckless and seditious”.

His decision to pen a formal letter of censure against Kelly prompted the senator to sue.

Such a letter serves as a procedural step towards lowering Kelly’s military rank at the time of his retirement, as well as curbing his post-military benefits.

But Kelly argued that such punishment would serve to dampen the rights of veterans to participate in political discourse – and would additionally hinder his work as a member of Congress.

An exclamation-filled ruling

In Thursday’s ruling, Judge Leon determined that Kelly was likely to prevail on the merits of his case – and, citing the folk singer Bob Dylan, he added that it was easy to see why.

“This Court has all it needs to conclude that Defendants have trampled on Senator Kelly’s First Amendment freedoms and threatened the constitutional liberties of millions of military retirees,” Leon said in his often quippy ruling.

“After all, as Bob Dylan famously said, ‘You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.’”

Leon acknowledged that granting an injunction against the government is an “extraordinary remedy”. But he argued it was necessary, given the gravity of the case.

The judge conceded that the Defense Department does have the ability to restrict the speech of active-service military members, given the need for discipline among troops.

But the Trump administration argued in its court filings that those restrictions extended to retired military veterans as well.

Leon, however, dismissed that assertion with the verbal equivalent of a snort: “Horsefeathers!”

“Speech from retired servicemembers – even speech opining on the lawfulness of military
operations – does not threaten ‘obedience, unity, commitment, and esprit de corps’ in the same way as speech from active-duty soldiers,” Leon wrote.

“Nor can speech from retired servicemembers ‘undermine the effectiveness of response to command’ as directly as speech from active-duty soldiers.”

Leon also acknowledged that Kelly’s role as a lawmaker in Congress compounded the harms from any attempts to curtail his free-speech rights.

“If legislators do not feel free to express their views and the views of their constituents without fear of reprisal by the Executive, our representative system of Government cannot function!” he wrote, in one of his many exclamatory statements.

The judge was also harshly critical of the Trump administration’s arguments that Kelly’s rank and retirement benefits were solely a military matter, not a judicial one.

Leon described Hegseth’s letter of censure as making Kelly’s punishment a “fait accompli” – a foregone conclusion – given that such a document cannot be appealed and could itself serve as the basis for a demotion.

“Here, the retaliation framework fits like a glove,” Leon said, appearing to validate the crux of Kelly’s lawsuit.

At another point, he rejected the government’s arguments by saying, “Put simply, Defendants’ response is anemic!”

The injunction he offered, though, is temporary and will last only until the lawsuit reaches a resolution.

Trump administration responds

In the wake of the injunction, Kelly took to social media to say the short-term victory was a win for all military veterans.

“Today a federal court made clear that Pete Hegseth violated the Constitution when he tried to punish me for something I said,” Kelly said in a video statement.

“But this case was never just about me. This administration was sending a message to millions of retired veterans that they, too, can be censured or demoted just for speaking out.”

He added that the US faces a “critical moment” in its history, warning of the erosion of fundamental rights.

Kelly then proceeded to accuse the Trump administration of “cracking down on our rights and trying to make examples of anybody they can”. He also acknowledged that the legal showdown had only just begun.

“I appreciate the judge’s careful consideration of this case,” Kelly said. “But I also know that this might not be over yet, because this president and this administration do not know how to admit when they’re wrong.”

Within a couple of hours of Kelly’s post, Hegseth himself shared a message on social media, confirming that the Trump administration would forge ahead with contesting Thursday’s decision.

“This will be immediately appealed,” Hegseth said of the injunction. “Sedition is sedition, ‘Captain.’”

Kelly is considered a Democratic contender for the presidency in 2028.

Lawyers say immigration judge found that the Department of Homeland Security failed to prove the Tufts student should be removed from the US.

A judge in the United States has blocked the deportation of Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish Tufts University student who was arrested last year as part of a crackdown on pro-Palestinian activists, according to her lawyers.

Ozturk’s lawyers detailed the decision in a letter filed at the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday.

They said the immigration judge concluded on January 29 that the US Department of Homeland Security had not met its burden of proving she was removable and terminated the proceedings against her.

Ozturk, a PhD student studying children’s relationship to social media, was arrested last March while walking down a street as the administration of US President Donald Trump began targeting foreign-born students and activists involved in pro-Palestinian advocacy.

Video showed masked agents handcuffing her and putting her into an unmarked vehicle.

The sole basis authorities provided for revoking her visa was an editorial she co-authored in Tufts’ student newspaper a year earlier, criticising her university’s response to Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

A petition to release her was first filed in federal court in Boston, where Tufts is located, and then moved to the city of Burlington in Vermont. In May of last year, a federal judge ordered her immediate release after finding she raised a substantial claim that her detention constituted unlawful retaliation in violation of her free speech rights.

Ozturk, who spent 45 days in a detention centre in southern Louisiana, has been back on the Tufts campus since.

The federal government appealed her release to the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals.

The January 29 decision, however, ends those proceedings for now.

Ozturk said it was heartening to know that some justice can prevail.

“Today, I breathe a sigh of relief knowing that despite the justice system’s flaws, my case may give hope to those who have also been wronged by the US government,” she said in a statement released by her lawyers.

Ozturk’s immigration lawyer, Mahsa Khanbabai, said the decision was issued by Immigration Judge Roopal Patel in Boston.

Patel’s decision is not itself public, and the Trump administration could challenge it ‌before the Board of Immigration Appeals, which is part of the US Department of Justice.

Khanbabai hailed Patel’s decision, while slamming what she called the Trump administration’s weaponisation of the US immigration system to target “valued members of our society”.

“It has manipulated immigration laws to silence people who advocate for Palestinian human rights and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza,” she said. “With this ruling, Judge Patel has delivered justice for Rumeysa; now, I hope that other immigration judges will follow her lead and decline to rubber-stamp the president’s cruel deportation agenda.”

The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said in a statement that Judge Patel’s decision reflected “judicial activism”.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem “has made it clear that anyone who thinks they can ‌come to America and hide behind the First Amendment to advocate for anti-American and anti-Semitic violence and terrorism – think again”.

The video of Ozturk’s arrest in the Boston suburb of Somerville was widely shared, turning her case into one of the highest-profile instances of the effort by Trump’s administration to deport non-citizen students with pro-Palestinian views.

Separately, a federal judge in Boston last month ruled that Noem and Secretary of State Marco Rubio had adopted an unlawful policy of detaining and deporting scholars like Ozturk that chilled the free speech of non-citizen academics at universities.

The Justice Department on Monday moved to appeal that decision.