independent

AFP via Getty Images

Why does Somaliland want independence?

Why did Israel recognise Somaliland as an independent state?

Why has Israel’s move been condemned so widely?

Is there any support for Israel’s declaration?

More BBC stories on Somaliland:

Getty Images/BBC

ONE lesser-visited region in Spain has been named as one of the best places to visit next year.

It has a main city that holds bull racing events along with huge valleys, mountains and even a desert.

Conde Nast Traveller declared Navarra, also called Navarre, as one of the ‘Best Places to Go in Spain and Portugal in 2026’.

The publication said: “We often make a point of covering lesser-known sites in every region and in 2026 we want to encourage readers to check out a new project focused on rural areas in Navarra.”

The landlocked region located in northern Spain, shares borders with the Basque Country, La Rioja, and Aragon in Spain.

Its capital, Pamplona, is home to around 200,000 residents.

SNOW WAY

All the best Xmas days out under £10 including FREE ice skating & Santa’s grotto

CHRIMBO WIN

Enter these travel comps before Xmas to win £2k holidays, ski trips & spa stays

And it’s famous for its San Fermín festival which is celebrated each year from July 6 to 14 with parades, music, dancing, and bullfights.

The most well-known event is called Encierro or Running of the Bulls.

It involves hundreds of people running in front of six bulls down a stretch of narrow streets which ends in Pamplona’s bullring.

The city also has a pretty Old Town, Cathedral, the Renaissance-like fort Ciudadela, Plaza del Castillo, and the Museum of Navarre.

It’s not just Pamplona, there are other smaller cities within the region, like Barañáin, Burlada, and Estella-Lizarra.

The region was even once an independent kingdom and known as the Kingdom of Navarre.

Eventually it as split with Lower Navarre merging into France, and Upper Navarre becoming a province of Spain.

Aside from the cities, Navarre also has a semi-desert region called Bardenas Reales which is around 162 square miles.

The desert has plenty of hiking trails and places to go biking – but unique rock formations aren’t to be climbed on themselves as they are part of an eco-system.

In contrast, part of Navarre encompasses the Pyrenean valleys.

It has high mountain peaks like Mesa de los Tres Reyes as well as green valleys, forests and even caves.

During the winter, the Pyrenean valleys become a great and popular spot for skiers.

From Navarre, travellers can easily get to other cities like San Sebastian and Bilbao, Madrid and Barcelona.

Here’s where to find the lesser-visited Spanish holiday destination that is now home to some of the best beer in the world…

A lesser-known holiday spot in Spain was last year declared home to the greatest beer in the world.

For four days last summer, professional beer sommeliers and experienced brewers gathered in Estoril, Portugal, for the World Beer Challenge.

The international contest declared which beers were the greatest in the world across a number of categories.

One of the winners of the 2024 gongs was Spanish beer Ambar Especial, which picked up a perfect 100/100 score from all 125 judges, who came from 29 different countries.

The beer is made in the city of Zaragoza in Spain and claimed the gold in the International Lager category at this year’s event.

It’s a city that is often overlooked by people heading to north Spain, with visitors more commonly heading to places like Barcelona, or the beaches of San Sebastian.

Plus, here’s another Spanish region undiscovered by Brits despite seaside views and ancient Roman cities.

And the Spanish coastal region with fewer than 2,000 Brits a year that has ‘endless’ beaches.

Dec. 17 (UPI) — Chairman Brendan Carr said the Federal Communications Commission isn’t independent from the Trump administration in testimony Wednesday before Congress, during which the word “independent” was removed from the agency’s mission statement online.

Carr’s comment came as members on the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee questioned him on who the FCC answers to in the wake of a controversy that led to the brief suspension of Jimmy Kimmel‘s late-night talk show on ABC.

The Walt Disney Co. suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! from Sept. 17 through Sept. 22 in response to comments he made about the assassination of right-wing activist and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk.

The controversy stemmed from Kimmel suggesting the alleged gunman who killed Kirk was a pro-Trump Republican.

The Make America Great Again “gang [is] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” he said in his monologue.

There was some discussion in the early days after the shooting as to the alleged shooter’s political leanings — he came from a largely right-wing family but had made some more left-leaning comments in recent months.

Just before the suspension, Carr described Kimmel’s comments as “truly sick” and threatened action against the network. At the time, Nester Media Group, which owns multiple ABC affiliates, was awaiting approval from the FCC for its planned merger with Tegna, prompting some to view Kimmel’s suspension as political.

“We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said at the time. “These companies can find ways to take action on Kimmel, or there is going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”

Carr denied that Kimmel’s suspension had anything to do with government censorship and instead blamed it on ratings.

Democrats on the committee questioned Wednesday if Carr was truly acting independently or if he was beholden to Trump’s politics, The Hill reported.

Sen. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., asked, “Yes or no, is the FCC an independent agency?

“On your website, it just simply says, man, the FCC is independent. This isn’t a trick question.”

“Congress did not include for-cause removal in the Communications Act,” Carr said. “So, formally speaking, the FCC is not independent.”

During testimony, the FCC’s website was updated to change the wording of its mission statement, eliminating the word “independent.” When asked about the removal, an FCC spokesperson cited the change in the administration 11 months ago.

“With the change in administration earlier this year, the FCC’s website and materials required updating. That work continues to ensure that they reflect the positions of the agency’s new leadership,” the spokesperson said in a statement to CNBC.

Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., accused Carr of being the chairman of the “Federal Censorship Committee,” saying he made “mafia threats” toward station owners in the wake of Kimmel’s comments about Kirk.

“And these broadcasters, they feel that censorship,” Markey said.

Carr said the broadcasters involved issued statements saying they made their decisions to suspend Kimmel independently of what he said about Kimmel.

“If broadcasters understand, perhaps for the first time in years, that they’re going to be held accountable to the public interest, to the broadcast hoax rule, to the news distortion policy, I think that’s a good thing,” Carr said, according to ABC News.

Minister says probe in response to case of ex-Reform UK lawmaker Nathan Gill, jailed for taking pro-Russia bribes.

The United Kingdom is launching an independent investigation into foreign interference in British politics, just weeks after a former Reform UK lawmaker was jailed for more than 10 years for taking bribes to make pro-Russia statements.

Steve Reed, the UK’s secretary of state for housing, communities and local government, said on Tuesday that he had ordered the probe in response to the case of Nathan Gill, a former Member of the European Parliament and ex-leader of Reform UK in Wales.

“A British politician took bribes to further the interests of the Russian regime,” Reed said in the House of Commons. “This conduct is a stain on our democracy. The independent review will work to remove that stain.”

Gill was sentenced to 10 years and six months in prison on November 21.

He pleaded guilty in September to accepting thousands of euros from a pro-Russian politician in Ukraine between 2018 and 2019, and making scripted statements and television appearances at his behest.

The case had spurred widespread condemnation from across the political spectrum, with Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party – which has been leading most polls – last month describing Gill’s actions as “reprehensible, treasonous and unforgivable”.

On Tuesday, Conservative MP Paul Holmes welcomed the independent review into foreign interference as a necessary step.

“Protecting the integrity of our democratic system from foreign interference is not a partisan issue. It goes to the heart of public trust in our elections,” Holmes told the House.

“Interference in our elections from foreign actors is something that we must all be vigilant against.”

Reed, the housing minister, said the independent probe would be led by Philip Rycroft, former UK permanent secretary for the Department for Exiting the European Union.

“The purpose of the review is to provide an in-depth assessment of the current financial rules and safeguards and make recommendations,” said Reed, adding that Rycroft has been asked to report his findings to the government by the end of March.

The minister noted that the British government put forward a strategy “for modern and secure elections” earlier this year in a push to address foreign interference and public distrust in the electoral system, among other issues.

But Reed said on Tuesday that “events have shown that we need to consider whether our firewall is enough”.

“The independent review will look at this,” he said, including by evaluating the UK’s existing political finance laws, systems to identify and mitigate foreign interference, and safeguards against illicit funding streams.

LAGUNA NIGUEL, CALIF. — At a time of huge bank mergers and cries to overhaul the nation’s banking system, Kenneth A. Guenther makes sure the smallest banks in America have one of the loudest voices.

The outspoken chief executive and executive vice president of the Independent Bankers Assn. of America more often than not finds himself at odds with powerful forces pushing for sweeping changes in the rules banks operate under as well as those promoting huge mergers as a way to improve the health of the nation’s banks.

The future of the Bush Administration’s bank reforms–allowing banks to open branches across state lines, allowing banks into Wall Street and insurance activities and permitting industrial and service companies to buy banks–is growing more uncertain. Two weeks ago, the House voted down a Democrat-altered version of the bank-reform plan. A much narrower bill, largely to bolster the nation’s dwindling bank deposit insurance fund, could be approved soon, but any major reforms are unlikely right now.

In fighting the Administration, Guenther has irked some powerful people. Treasury Secretary Nicholas F. Brady has said that Guenther “demeans his members, carrying on the way he does” in his opposition to the bank-overhaul plans.

A native of Rochester, N.Y., Guenther, 55, completed graduate studies at Johns Hopkins, the University of Rangoon and Yale University. A former Treasury and State Department official, Guenther served as a special assistant to three former heads of the Federal Reserve Board. He joined the 6,100-member banking trade group roughly 10 years ago.

Guenther’s basic point is that the deck is increasingly stacked against the small community banks. Although he has the image of a maverick, Guenther is very much a Washington insider, maintaining cordial relationships with many people he disagrees with publicly. He plays tennis with the likes of Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and various bank regulators–though he often finds himself at odds with them on policy.

Guenther uses blunt words to make his case. But the Washington influence shows in his dress–a formal business suit for morning meetings even at a resort hotel where everyone is dressed for golf. His populist style has made him a hero among independent bankers, while attracting criticism from those who accuse him of grandstanding.

Part of Guenther’s clout comes with his skill with the media. He is a prolific writer of letters to the editor, is quoted frequently and has strong friendships with reporters–in fact, he and his wife, Lilly, are godparents of a New York Times reporter’s twins.

Question: What future does the independent bank have in this age of banking consolidation?

Answer: There are going to be fewer big banks and medium-sized banks than smaller banks. As banks get larger, this opens up more niches for your smaller banks. Larger banks generally mean poorer services for your small business and small-time customers.

Q: Large banks would argue the opposite. They would say it will be good for customers, providing things they can’t get now.

A: With size comes regimentation. You are going to have to do things their way. There is going to be far less “high touch.” Those small banks providing high-touch services are going to have increased opportunities.

Q: What about public policy concerning mergers? You said Treasury is committed to seeing a lot of mergers. Why so?

A: Secretary (Nicholas F.) Brady wants to get the banks in this country into the No. 1 rank. But people aren’t looking at the cost of building banks to the size of the Japanese banks. Size alone does not mean a healthy, good, diversified financial system or political system. The Japanese have the largest banks in the world, but who wants their political system? Our diversified financial and economic system underlies our diversified political system.

Q: What about the argument that the big banks use , that there’s too much overcapacity? That there are too many banks?

A: There’s a very interesting study out from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis that says public policy promoting consolidation is not in the interests of the banking system or the economy. This study indicates that we should not be moving in that direction.

Q: What about the argument that says the banking system is inefficient?

A: I think our banking system is remarkably efficient. I think we have still the strongest entrepreneurial system in the world. It needs some fine tuning. But we don’t have to throw it out lock, stock and barrel and adopt a Japanese model.

Q: Does it need consolidation?

A: The industry is consolidating. The question is: Is it productive public policy to force more rapid consolidation?

Q: The House for now has rejected legislation to overhaul the banking system. What does this mean for the independent banks?

A: This legislation has nine lives–it’s on its fourth now. The Administration and their big-bank allies killed a version of the bill they didn’t like and moved immediately to resuscitate another version of Secretary Brady’s big-bank reform bill.

Q: Why should people care about these proposals?

A: Everybody in the United States should breathe a big sigh of relief because the House has turned back a proposal from the Administration which would have allowed the largest commercial firms–domestic and foreign–to buy the largest banks in this country. This would have totally restructured the economic and financial system of the United States and led to an enormous concentration of economic power. That’s always bad news for John Q. Public.

Q: Why shouldn’t a bank be allowed to open a branch across a state line?

A: Our problem with that is that the Treasury Department proposed to keep “too big to fail”–meaning the Treasury Department proposed that the bigger banks continue to have a 100% deposit insurance product. At the same time, they were proposing that our deposit insurance product be reduced. That means the big banks could go across state lines, offering a superior deposit insurance product. This would have driven money out of the smaller banks of this country.

Q: Do you fear that there will eventually be some cuts in deposit insurance?

A: Everybody knows that the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.) fund is hurting. Why not expand the assessment base? The foreign deposits in American banks that enjoy deposit insurance coverage do not pay deposit insurance premiums. Make everybody who has the insurance pay for the insurance. That could bring in literally billions and billions of dollars a year.

Q: Does it matter whether we declare a policy saying banks are not too big to fail? In a crunch, won’t we step in?

A: (Federal Reserve Board Chairman) Alan Greenspan is about as free market as you can get. But Greenspan has testified repeatedly before the Congress that the large uninsured depositor cannot be put at risk, because if he’s put at risk in this country we will have runs (on the banks). He will take his money and put it into the Japanese banks, or German banks. What Alan Greenspan is saying is, in the moment of truth, we are going to intervene to make sure the depositors in your big banks do not get hurt, because this is essential for the stability of the system. How can you make a policy prescription to cut back deposit insurance for John Q. Public, who banks with a smaller institution?

Q: What about proposals such as $100,000 protection per Social Security number?

A: In this day and age, $100,000 is not that much money. It’s a four-year college course for a student who doesn’t go to an Eastern school. Again, you are penalizing your smaller institutions. People will put their money in your “too-big-to-fail” banks.

Q: What about allowing banks into other lines of business?

A: You are opening the door into riskier areas. If you are moving into a business you don’t know well, you are not inclined to do it well in the beginning. And the doors that they are trying to open are really quite risky. Underwriting corporate debt, or underwriting stocks is a risky business. Will the banks do it well? Will it turn out to be profitable? I think these are question marks.

Q: What are the primary problems of independent banks these days?

A. We are in a recession that is deeper than anticipated. The Fed has just cut key interest rates. . . . The other problem is that the industry went too far overboard in terms of commercial real-estate development.

Q: How healthy are independent banks?

A: The independent banks are healthier than your larger banks.

Q: Can the voice of an independent bank be heard these days?

A: It’s enormously frustrating that this Administration is listening to a very select number of voices. The Treasury Department is promoting a legislative product that benefits a relatively few number of large financial institutions. This is why we have sort of adopted the theme that the Treasury is promoting Wall Street and we are here trying to protect Main Street. There are far more Main Street institutions than Wall Street institutions.

Q: Do you think that the deck is stacked against the independent bank?

A. The deck in this Administration is stacked against the independent banks. And therefore we have put together this wide-ranging Main Street coalition: small business, retired people, home builders and farm groups working against key elements in the Administration proposal.

Q: Both you and your association have taken a lot of criticism from people like Brady and also other trade groups.

A: No one likes to be criticized by the secretary of Treasury, who is a nice man. But I’m sorry, Mr. Secretary, your policy objectives are very different than ours. Your policy objectives will make life much tougher for millions of banks and small businesses.

Q: If they gave you the banking reform bill and said write it any way you want, what would you do?

A: The problem is that this bill focused on the weakness of the deposit insurance fund. Something has to be done to strengthen the deposit insurance fund, and thus strengthen depositor confidence. Then you move from that central issue that has to be addressed and ask yourself the next question: What can you do to definitely strengthen banking and the profitability of banking? There are some things that can be done in this area. Give banks some more retail products, and again this will increase what is available to the American consumer.

Q: Do you think taxpayers are going to have to pick up any of the tab for the banking problems as they have for the savings and loans?

A: It depends on what happens to the real-estate market in California. Just like with costs of the S&L; crisis, things are escalated by what happens in California. California is such a key state.

Q: And depending on what happens here is what is going to make the difference?

A. What happens in California will make the difference. The banking industry, to remain healthy, cannot pick up the full tab if things go very bad in California. At that time, the American taxpayer would have to decide: Do we want a healthy and growing banking industry or do we force the full tab on the banking industry?

Q: In this era of megamergers, with huge institutions being created, can the independent bank compete?

A: The independent bank will compete, the independent bank will survive and prosper. We run a high-touch operation: high-tech plus high-touch. There is going to be plenty of business around for those who don’t want to deal with the impersonal, insensitive elephants.

Q: What about the argument that we don’t need all of these little banks?

A: We don’t need all these big banks running around. There are definitely too many big banks in New York City–in a declining economy and declining city. The American market is really not over-banked. It’s one of the illusions that is out there. American small business wants to deal with your smaller bank, where you get better, personalized service.

Q: What about the argument that we need bigger banks to compete with foreign banks?

A: Perhaps in some areas, that’s the case. But what the big banks have lost in this country is the large commercial lending business. They’ve lost your commercial and industry loans. Big firms earlier went to banks to get this money, now they issue their own commercial paper. So the big banks are looking for a new role, and maybe they can’t find it.