National

LONDON — Ireland will boycott the Eurovision Song Contest for a second year over Israel’s participation, the country’s national broadcaster said Thursday.

RTÉ said it will not send an act to the 2027 competition in Bulgaria and will not broadcast the show because of the “appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis there which continues to put the lives of so many civilians at risk.”

Ireland was one of five countries — along with the Netherlands, Iceland, Slovenia and Spain — to skip Eurovision this year to protest Israel’s inclusion in the pan-continental music contest.

Eurovision Director Martin Green said organizers regretted RTÉ’s decision but “fully respect” it.

“All broadcasters decide on an annual basis to participate in the following year’s contest. We will remain in dialogue with RTÉ and hope to welcome them back to the contest in the future,” Green said.

Dutch broadcaster AVROTROS announced last month it will also boycott next year, calling Eurovision a “platform for division.”

“AVROTROS will not participate in the Eurovision Song Contest in 2027 because the event can no longer be considered neutral, with a participating country still involved in a large-scale military conflict,” it said.

Next year’s competition is due to take place in Bulgaria’s Black Sea resort of Burgas in May, after Bulgarian singer Dara won the 2026 event with her infectious party anthem “Bangaranga.”

The contest was founded in 1956, in part to help unite a shattered continent after World War II. It pits acts from dozens of countries against one another for the continent’s musical crown.

Israel has taken part in Eurovision since 1973, one of a few non-European countries to compete. But calls for Israel to be kicked out have swelled over the conduct of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government in the Hamas-Israel war in Gaza.

The 2024 Eurovision contest in Malmo, Sweden, the 2025 in Basel, Switzerland and this year’s contest in Vienna saw pro-Palestinian protests and heightened security.

RIYADH: Trade can grind to a halt before ports close or shipping lanes are blocked. Disruption can begin elsewhere, when cargo or vessels become too costly or difficult to insure, or when markets are unable to provide adequate coverage for war-related risks.

Against a backdrop of rising geopolitical risks in the region and their spillover into maritime traffic, insurance and reinsurance markets, Saudi Arabia is moving to establish a national framework to help keep trade flowing even in a highly volatile maritime environment.

In response, the Cabinet approved the establishment of the “Saudi War Risks Insurance Pool for Cargo and Vessels,” a step aimed at building domestic insurance capacity to address risks that could drive up transportation and trade costs or constrain global insurers’ ability to provide coverage.

The initiative is also intended to help ensure the continuity of goods flows and support businesses involved in transportation and logistics.

The move is particularly significant for Saudi Arabia as it expands its role as a trade and logistics hub. The competitiveness of ports and distribution centers depends not only on cargo-handling speed and transport costs, but also on companies’ ability to price and manage risks when geopolitical conditions change abruptly.

Saudi Finance Minister Mohammed Al-Jadaan said after the Cabinet approved the mechanism that the Saudi marine insurance pool was a specialized national mechanism designed to support the continuity of trade and supply chains through a public-private partnership.

He said the pool would directly enhance the technical preparedness of the domestic insurance market and expand its capacity to provide the necessary coverage under rules and frameworks set by the Insurance Authority.

He added that the initiative would strengthen the resilience of the national economy and help safeguard its stability amid regional and international crises and challenges.

Industry specialists who spoke to Asharq Al-Awsat said the pool’s economic value would be most evident during crises, when insurance premiums surge or insurers and reinsurers tighten their acceptance of risks associated with particular regions.

They said a stable insurance safety net could give transport companies, importers and exporters greater room to plan and continue operating.

A stable insurance environment

Logistics specialist Nashmi Al-Harbi said rising shipping risks in the Red Sea and the Gulf had prompted some insurers to tighten their conditions for covering vessels linked to the region.

That makes the establishment of the Saudi pool particularly timely for domestic transport and logistics companies, he said, as it would help reduce one of the main sources of uncertainty affecting international shipping contracts.

Al-Harbi told Asharq Al-Awsat that international companies doing business with Saudi Arabia, or whose cargo passes through its ports, would also benefit from greater clarity and stability in the insurance environment.

He said the pool’s scope would not be limited to vessels based in the kingdom but would extend to activities and companies with Saudi interests, subject to approved eligibility and coverage requirements.

Al-Harbi said providing stable war-risk coverage would make Saudi Arabia more attractive as a regional hub for storage, distribution and re-exporting.

Logistics companies do not consider only port, transport and cargo-handling costs when selecting destinations, he said. They also take into account the costs of risks to goods and vessels throughout their journeys.

The cost of risk

Supply chain and logistics expert Khalid Al-Ghamdi said the importance of the Saudi war-risk insurance pool went beyond providing coverage for vessels and cargo.

It also addressed a deeper challenge facing businesses: the difficulty of predicting risk costs when geopolitical conditions change suddenly.

Al-Ghamdi said a national war-risk safety net would give Saudi logistics companies greater stability when planning voyages, signing contracts and setting prices.

Companies managing thousands of containers need to know more than the cost of fuel, transport and cargo handling, he said.

They also need greater certainty about insurance costs so that insurance risks do not suddenly become a heavy financial burden or an obstacle to keeping voyages in operation.

The decision sends a message to international logistics companies that Saudi Arabia is continuing to build a business environment capable of operating even when shipping is disrupted, he said.

That could become an additional factor in decisions by global companies when choosing ports and distribution and re-export centers.

Al-Ghamdi added that the selection of a logistics hub was based not only on location and transport costs, but also on its ability to absorb shocks and manage risks associated with trade flows.

Strengthening that capacity could improve supply-chain resilience, bolster international companies’ confidence and create opportunities for more effective risk-management partnerships, he said.

Insurance pool arrangements

The initiative establishes a national insurance mechanism bringing together the public and private sectors under the supervision of the Insurance Authority.

It is intended to strengthen the domestic insurance market’s ability to handle war risks associated with maritime transport and mitigate the effects of volatility and rising reinsurance costs in global markets.

The initiative also aims to enhance Saudi Arabia’s competitiveness as a logistics hub at a time when more flexible tools are needed to manage the risks facing trade and transport.

As part of its implementation, the Saudi Reinsurance Company, known as Saudi Re, said that the Insurance Authority had selected it to lead and structure the pool’s arrangements, with participation from insurers operating in the domestic market.

Saudi Re will manage the pool’s technical operations and reinsurance arrangements. Beneficiaries will be able to obtain coverage through participating insurers under approved terms and conditions.

Initiative’s objectives

The Insurance Authority has identified four main objectives for the pool: enhancing the insurance market’s preparedness and capacity to absorb marine insurance risks; supporting the continuity of trade and supply chains; limiting the effects of sharp volatility and higher reinsurance costs in global markets; and strengthening Saudi Arabia’s competitiveness as a major logistics hub.

The pool will cover cargo transported by land, sea and air, as well as marine hull insurance against covered damage and risks.

It will also cover charterers’ liability and provide protection and indemnity coverage, offering broader protection to parties involved in transport and trade.

Eligible beneficiaries include exporters and importers; vessel owners and operators; shipping, freight and maritime transport companies; businesses involved in cargo movements, logistics and supply chains; and Saudi insurers participating in the pool.

International models

Saudi Arabia is not alone in adopting such a mechanism. Other countries have established national pools to address rising war risks and difficulties in obtaining coverage from traditional insurance markets.

India offers a recent example. This year, it launched a marine insurance pool with a total capacity of $1.5 billion, including a $1.4 billion sovereign guarantee, to cover war risks affecting vessels and cargo linked to Indian interests.

India’s experience demonstrated the scale of demand for such coverage. The scheme issued more than 1,600 policies within weeks of beginning operations, while war-risk insurance premiums fell by about 35% to 40% from the peaks recorded during the escalation of regional tensions.

The trend reflects a shift in how countries manage maritime war risks — from relying entirely on global insurance and reinsurance markets to developing domestic capacity that can help keep trade moving when coverage becomes more expensive or private insurers’ appetite for risk declines.

For the first time since World War II, a far-right party is within reach of power at state level in Germany, after coming first in Saxony-Anhalt on Sunday.

The Alternative for Germany (AfD) won 44 percent of the vote, stopping short of an overall majority but making clear its wide political significance.

On election night, AfD’s leader in the state called on other political groups to cooperate. “As a democrat, I will reach out to all those who wish to work with us to bring about a fundamental political turnaround,” Ulrich Siegmund said.

Yet, forming a government will prove difficult. The AfD has been classified as “far-right extremist” by the domestic intelligence agency and other political groups remain wary of striking an alliance.

The AfD has dismissed accusations of extremism and mainstream parties have been unable to halt its surge in the polls over recent months. Latest polling indicates the party, which stands for strong restrictions on immigration, restoring ties with Russia, cutting support to Ukraine and quitting the euro, is Germany’s most popular at national level.

The Saxony-Anhalt election could be a harbinger of a historic return of the far-right in the 2029 national election, when forecasts say the AfD stands a realistic chance of finishing first.

What happened in Saxony-Anhalt?

Siegmund, the charismatic 35-year-old who attracted thousands to his campaign rallies, said AfD “made history”.

“The people have made it absolutely clear that they finally want political change and, above all, they have shown that they want it with ⁠us,” he told supporters.

The AfD achieved its best-ever election result in Saxony-Anhalt with 44 percent of the vote, leaving all other parties far behind. The incumbent centre-right Christian Democrats (CDU), led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz, scored less than half of that share with 17 percent.

The AfD is projected to gain 39 of the 83 seats in the state parliament in Magdeburg, leaving it three short of the 42 needed for an absolute majority.

That means the party must find allies, but all other mainstream parties refuse to work with the far-right, a strategy of non-cooperation known as the “firewall”. The AfD has so far never participated in a governing coalition in Germany’s 16 states nor in its federal government.

While he now appears willing to strike deals with other parties to come to power, previously Siegmund signalled unwillingness to find middle ground with other political groups. Leading up to the vote, he stated that he was only interested in governing alone to bring about fundamental political change in Germany.

How did AfD fare in recent elections?

The election takes the AfD one step closer to advancing its agenda, while also reflecting the growing unpopularity of Germany’s ruling coalition.

In Saxony-Anhalt, the party more than doubled its vote share — from 21 percent in the last election. By contrast, the CDU’s vote halved from 37 percent to 17 percent, its worst result ever in the east-central German state.

Federal elections last year similarly resulted in a landmark performance by the AfD, which emerged as the largest opposition faction in the Bundestag, the German federal parliament in Berlin. The party came second with 21 percent of the vote, securing its highest-ever showing.

In state elections in Baden-Wurttemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate earlier this year too, the AfD more than doubled its seats — though it still finished third. In 2024, the AfD emerged victorious in the Thuringia state election and second in the Brandenburg state election — both were firsts for the party.

The AfD’s electoral gains in Saxony-Anhalt mirror growing dissatisfaction among voters — especially in the former East Germany — about the stagnant economy, high unemployment and domestic security, which the party largely pins on immigration.

What challenges lie ahead for AfD?

Since its formation in 2013, the AfD has been embroiled in various scandals and has faced major controversies, including alleged foreign espionage links, secret deportation plans and internal nepotism.

The party went from a fringe Eurosceptic group to the country’s most powerful opposition force in little more than a decade, becoming too extreme even for the European Parliament’s far-right Identity & Democracy group. It kicked the party out in May 2024 after lead AfD candidate Maximilian Krah stated that not everyone in the SS – Adolf Hitler’s infamous Nazi paramilitary organisation – was a criminal.

Krah has also been under investigation by German prosecutors for alleged illegal payments, bribery and money laundering linked to China and Russia. The German parliament last year decided to lift the far-right legislator’s immunity to help investigators.

AfD politicians have also come under fire for employing family members, including in Saxony-Anhalt, where several parliamentarians are reported to have employed relatives.

Bundestag President, Julia Klockner, banned seven AfD employees from entering the German parliament over security concerns, after they failed internal background reliability checks due to their ties to right-wing extremist networks and past criminal convictions.

Senior AfD figures also faced a backlash for attending a secretive meeting to discuss mass deportation plans for people with a migration background.

What are the AfD’s prospects for the national election in 2029?

Pollsters are unanimous in forecasting the AfD as the largest party in Germany in the next national election in 2029, with around 28 percent of the vote.

That would mark a major transformation in the German political landscape from 2025, when the CDU and its ally the Christian Social Union together won 28.5 percent of the vote.

Yet even that outcome would not necessarily give AfD the ability to govern. If other parties maintain a “firewall” policy, that could prevent the far-right party from forming a coalition government.

Still, the Saxony-Anhalt election has been received by some politicians as a call for change. “Politics begins with considering reality,” Cem Ozdemir, head of government in the southwestern state of Baden-Wurttemberg and a member of the Green Party, wrote on X.

“That means the AfD is the election winner in Saxony-Anhalt. And that must mean for all democratic forces that nothing can remain as it is, and we must fundamentally reconsider our politics and our political style.”

THINK Travelodge stays are just for a quick pitstop? Think again.

Britain’s popular budget hotel chain actually has many hotels in some of the most spectacular corners of the UK, putting amazing adventures right at your doorstep.

From waking up at the foot of Ben Nevis to sleeping a stone’s throw from the oldest occupied castle in the world, we’ve hunted down 10 of the most breathtaking Travelodge stays across the country.

With rooms starting from just £25 a night, here are the epic mountain, island, and seaside getaways that prove you don’t need to fork out for a fantastic UK getaway.

Travelodge Fort William

Imagine waking up at the foot of Ben Nevis, the highest mountain in the UK, without paying a penny of premium for the privilege.

This Travelodge is in the proper Highlands, with Glen Nevis on your doorstep and Loch Linnhe glimmering nearby.

STAY NOW

The 50 best staycation destinations revealed and famous beach town tops the list

STAY CLOSE

Brits say why staycations are better than holidays abroad – pubs make the list

Plus the Glenfinnan Viaduct (yes, the Harry Potter one that the Hogwarts Express chugs over) is just up the road.

Did you know that Fort William is the Outdoor Capital of the UK?

This means you’re steps from world-class walking, climbing and mountain biking with a stay at this budget base.

Most hotels wouldn’t dream of charging this little for views like this, but that’s where the reliable Travelodge steps in.

Book a room at Travelodge Fort William from £27 per night.

Travelodge Burford Cotswolds

Burford is one of the UK’s most idyllic villages, with its honey-coloured stone cottages and pretty high street that tumbles down to the River Windrush.

You’d expect to pay boutique B&B prices for a base this pretty, but here you’re staying in the heart of the Cotswolds for less than a train ticket.

With rolling countryside, beautiful churches and chocolate box charm surrounding you on every side, it’s the kind of setting people would pay a fortune to photograph.

With a stay at this Travelodge, you simply walk out the front door straight into it.

Book a room at Travelodge Burford Cotswolds from £39 per night.

Travelodge Windsor Central

Staying here puts you three minutes’ walk from Windsor Castle, the oldest and largest occupied castle in the world. You can even see it from some of the rooms.

Here you’re a genuine stone’s throw from royal history, plus Windsor & Eton Central station is right next door for an easy hop into London.

Staying this close to a royal residence for under £30 a night is most certainly a bargain.

In fact, even the ticket to the castle costs more than your hotel (£32 for adults when booked online). But if you want to keep it free, the town’s cobbled streets and riverside walks are all on your doorstep.

Book a room at Travelodge Windsor Central from £26.99 per night.

Travelodge Kendal

Kendal is your gateway into the Lake District, England‘s largest national park packed with dramatic landscapes. Here, fells, lakes and stone walls can be seen within minutes of checking in.

History lovers can wander over to Sizergh Castle or Kendal Castle, both a short walk away.

This is a national park that pulls in visitors from across the globe, yet you can base yourself here for less than the cost of a meal out.

It’s an unbeatable base for anyone wanting a slice of that classic Lakes scenery.

Book a room at Travelodge Kendal from £37 per night

Travelodge Porthmadog

This stay drops you right at the edge of Snowdonia National Park, with Mount Snowdon itself and the pretty village of Portmeirion both within easy reach.

Porthmadog is also home to a historic narrow-gauge steam railway, a proper slice of Welsh heritage.

Castles, coastline and mountains all sit within a short drive, making it one of the most scenically-stacked locations on this list.

Few budget stays put you this deep inside a national park. At £25 a night, it’s one of the best-value bases in Wales.

Book a room at Travelodge Porthmadog from £25 per night

Travelodge Stratford-upon-Avon

Sleeping in Shakespeare’s hometown is an amazing experience, whether you’re in a fancy hotel or budget – so you might as well save the money and go for the affordable option.

Stratford-upon-Avon’s thatched cottages, the Royal Shakespeare Theatre and the famous playwright’s birthplace are all within walking distance of this hotel.

Warwick Castle, one of England’s most spectacular medieval fortresses, is only a short drive away too.

And with stays from £29 a night, history buffs and theatre fans are getting some serious bang for their buck here.

Book a room at Travelodge Stratford-upon-Avon from £29 per night

Travelodge Blackpool South Shore

This hotel looks straight out over Blackpool’s famous seafront, with views of the Tower and all three piers from the promenade.

Soak up the British seaside holiday nostalgia with visits to the beach, arcades, fairground, and by tucking into a chippy tea for dinner.

From the action-packed tower to the rides at Pleasure Beach, you’ve got a ton of entertainment within walking distance.

Plus you get jaw-dropping views of Blackpool‘s famous skyline, which has been newly-transformed by Aviktas, the theme park’s massive new gyro swing ride.

Book a room at Travelodge Blackpool South Shore from £40.99 per night

Travelodge Ryde, Isle of Wight

With a stay at this seaside Travelodge, you’ve got a long sandy beach, Victorian pier and scenic seafront all within easy reach.

There’s even hovercraft and ferry terminals in Ryde to make it super easy to get there from Portsmouth or Southsea.

The Isle of Wight has a totally different pace to the mainland, with secret sandy coves and sleepy, postcard-perfect villages. And Ryde makes for the ideal budget-friendly base.

For £25 a night, an island staycation suddenly feels a lot more accessible.

Book a room at Travelodge Ryde from £25 per night

Travelodge Hayle, Cornwall

Hayle sits right on Cornwall’s dramatic north coast, with the golden sands of Hayle Towans and the wider St Ives Bay just minutes away.

This stretch of coastline looks less like your typical British beach and more like somewhere abroad, with its turquoise water and wild dunes.

St Ives itself, with its museums and galleries, pretty harbour and historic lighthouse, is only a short hop down the road.

Cornish staycations usually come with a hefty price tag, but this is a rare budget way in.

Book a room at Travelodge Hayle from £40 per night

Travelodge Llandudno

Llandudno combines Victorian seaside charm with a breathtaking mountain backdrop – and there’s an impressive historical site on your doorstep here, too.

Days here are best spent strolling the elegant pier, or riding the cable car up the Great Orme headland for spectacular views over Snowdonia’s peaks.

This hotel is only 13 minutes’ drive from Conwy Castle, one of the UK’s best-preserved medieval castles built in the 13th century.

It’s rare to stay somewhere with such impressive landscapes and historical sites sandwiched together, but its even more rare when you can stay there for as little as £35 a night!

Book a room at Travelodge Llandudno from £35 per night

Sept. 2 (UPI) — Patagonia, an outdoor apparel company, announced Wednesday it sued the Trump administration for cuts dramatically shrinking the size of Bears Ears National Monument in Utah.

This is the second time Patagonia has sued the administration, the company said. In 2017, during Trump’s first term, it became the first company to sue a sitting president over public land after the president issued orders shrinking Bears Ears by 85% and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, also in Utah, by nearly half.

The case was not decided by the time of the 2020 election, and President Joe Biden restored both monuments to their original size in 2021.

On July 13, Trump issued orders to shrink them again — Bears Ears by about 91% this time and Grand Staircase-Escalante by about 90%. This amounts to nearly 3 million acres of land that will lose monument-related protections, the company said in a press release.

“Slashing Bears Ears and dismantling the Bears Ears commission is a betrayal of Tribal sovereignty and needlessly throws away years of effort to create the first Tribal co-management structure of a national monument in U.S. history,” Ryan Gellert, Patagonia CEO, said in a statement. “Patagonia worked with the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition, scientists, conservation groups, outdoor industry advocates and more to establish the monument in 2016, and we are committed to defending it today and into the future.”

President Barack Obama designated the Bears Ears monument in late 2016, following a proposal by five Tribal entities: the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation and the Pueblo of Zuni. A coalition of these groups co-manages the monument with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management.

Patagonia says the U.S. Antiquities Act gives presidents the power to designate national monuments but not to undo them. However, the Trump administration, as well as others including Republican Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, say the monuments violate that act, which they say limits the designation to the smallest parcel of land necessary for the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.

The Trump administration argued that term “objects of historic or scientific interest” in the Antiquities Act has been stretched to include landscapes and biodiversity — and should not.

When signing the new orders in July, Trump criticized the size of the monuments, claiming that the public cannot hunt, fish or “virtually not even walk” on the land. However, the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Land Management explicitly say people can hike, hunt and fish in both monuments, as well as take part in other forms of outdoor recreation.

The Center for Western Priorities said in July that Trump’s orders could open the land for sale or lease oil, gas, mining or logging companies within 60 days.

WASHINGTON — A new National Park Service report backs President Trump’s proposed arch, despite what it says are adverse effects to the sightline between a host of landmarks in Washington, including the Washington Monument and Lincoln and Jefferson memorials.

The report released Friday says the 250-foot-tall arch is likely to disrupt the historically significant layout of dozens of sites near its planned location adjacent to Memorial Bridge.

Many of Washington’s monuments, buildings and sites have been carefully planned over decades to reflect significant moments in the nation’s history and to evoke symbolism through sightlines that connect them to other sites. The arch will disturb the sightline between more landmarks than anticipated, the report said.

But the Park Service report says “the same characteristics that make Memorial Circle sensitive from a preservation perspective are also the characteristics that make it the historically appropriate location for the undertaking.”

The project’s effects cannot be “fully avoided without either relocating the Arch away from the historically identified site or eliminating the principal commemorative feature, both of which would fail to meet the undertaking’s purpose and need,” the report said.

“For this reason, alternative locations outside Memorial Circle are not reasonable avoidance alternatives,” the report said.

The 133-page report by the Park Service supports Trump’s plans for the controversial arch and could play an important role in bolstering the administration’s case in its fight against a legal challenge filed by three veterans and a group of historians.

The proposed towering arch, which last month received initial approval from a key federal commission, would impact the “integrity” of dozens of historic properties because it would change “character-defining visual and spatial relationships” between them.

One of the most obvious elements the report cited is that the arch would break alignment between the Lincoln Memorial, Memorial Bridge and Arlington House that was formerly Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee’s home. That alignment was “intended to physically and symbolically unite North and South through a coordinated monumental composition extending across the Potomac River,” the report said.

The Lincoln Memorial Arlington House connection was one of dozens of historic sites and structures listed as being impacted directly by the proposed structure. It added that the National Mall, the U.S. Capitol, Washington Monument, Jefferson Memorial, Georgetown Historic District, Old Naval Observatory, Key Bridge, National Cathedral and other sites also would be affected.

Nicolas Sansone, an attorney with Public Citizen Litigation Group representing the plaintiffs, said the report again “confirms what we’ve been saying all along: the project will have an enormous impact and transform that National Mall.”

The report underscores the legal challengers’ claim that a project of this size and importance “is a decision for Congress to make” and should not be rushed through by executive decree, Sansone said.

Daly writes for the Associated Press.

Dolly Parton, the singer and songwriter from Locust Ridge, Tenn., who willed herself into being the very symbol of country music stardom, has died in Nashville.

Parton died peacefully Tuesday, her nephew Bryan Seaver announced in a press release shared with The Times. Seaver also announced her death in a video shared to the singer’s Instagram page. She was 80.

The fabled entertainer died after a series of health issues that led her to postpone several performing commitments. In September 2025, she missed the announcement of a Dollywood attraction to recover from a kidney stone. Later that month she delayed her residency at Caesars Palace — her first residency on the Las Vegas Strip in more than 30 years — due to unspecified “health challenges.”

Over the course of a flamboyant 50-plus-year career as a songwriter, recording artist, actor and businesswoman, Parton reinvented the American success story through a combination of grit and wit, faith and sex appeal, virtuosity and plainspokenness, empathy for the human condition and plastic surgery.

She seized on the roles that American culture allowed for women in the spotlight — waif, trollop, fallen woman, country girl in over her head — and played them to the hilt, achieving artistic and financial heights few female performers have ever reached. By the time of her death, she was said to be one of the few things that Americans of most every persuasion could agree on.

One of the most honored musicians in modern history, Parton earned 10 Grammy Awards, two Academy Award nominations, a Primetime Emmy, 10 Country Music Assn. awards, and in 1999 she was enshrined in the Country Music Hall of Fame.

In 2005 President George W. Bush presented Parton with the National Medal of the Arts, and a year later she was given a Kennedy Center for the Arts Award for her lifetime contribution to the arts. Parton logged some 25 gold or platinum records and 25 No. 1 songs on the country chart. Parton also won a Liseberg Applause Award, the biggest prize in the theme park industry, for her fabled tourist attraction Dollywood.

Parton’s rags-to-riches tale reads like a classic country music story-song. But before it became mythical, it was only incredibly hard.

Dolly Rebecca Parton was born in Locust Ridge, Tenn., in the Great Smoky Mountains, on Jan. 19, 1946. Her father was a tobacco sharecropper and she was the fourth of 12 children. In her autobiography, “Dolly: My Life and Other Unfinished Business,” Parton related how her parents were so poor they paid the doctor who delivered her with a sack of cornmeal.

Raised in a one-room cabin with no electricity, she listened to the Grand Ole Opry on a battery-powered radio. When she was 7 she started writing songs; a year later she picked up the guitar. At 10 she was singing on a Knoxville radio and TV program, “Cas Walker Farm & Home Hour.”

The Parton family was musical, and there were always banjos, fiddles, mandolins and guitars around the cabin. Her voice, a birdlike soprano with an animated trill, hadn’t changed much from her youth: “I sound like a little girl singing all these Lord-awful songs,” she told “Fresh Air’s” Terry Gross in 2001.

On a Friday night in 1964, Parton became the first in her family to graduate from high school. The next afternoon she was on a bus heading for Nashville, targeting a career in country music.

Bob Hope gets an adjustment to his reindeer costume as he and Dolly Parton prepare to tape a 1988 Christmas special on a cruise ship docked in Miami.

(Kathy Willens / Associated Press)

Women had little real power in Nashville at the time, and though rural women were a growing part of the country music audience, they were marginalized as artists. Parton signed to the Monument label, but felt that they wanted a pop singer more than they wanted her. An early breakthrough came when singer Bill Phillips heard a demo version of her “Put It Off Until Tomorrow”; not only did he want to record the song, but he recorded it with Parton singing harmony on it. The song went to No. 6 on the country chart in 1966.

In 1967 she recorded Curly Putman’s “Dumb Blonde,” her first charting song as a singer and a savvy choice that spoke to her as both an image and as flesh and blood, as she sang:

Just because I’m blond
Don’t think I’m dumb
‘Cause this dumb blond ain’t nobody’s fool

Nashville noticed. That year, country music star Porter Wagoner was looking for a new “girl singer” for his popular TV show, after Norma Jean left. Parton got the gig, and for weeks, legend has it, was greeted by the studio audience shouting “Norma Jean” when Parton opened her mouth. It was the kind of challenge she lived for. Carefully deferential to the star, Parton carved out a foothold for herself.

They were a complicated team. Tall, gaunt and calculating, Wagoner’s angles had angles, but somehow standing next to her, his pompadour dwarfing her considerable bouffant, it worked. At their peak, they had a weekly TV viewership of over 3.5 million, and recorded numerous hit duets, “Holding on to Nothin” (1968), “If Teardrops Were Pennies” (1973) and “Please Don’t Stop Loving Me” (1974) among them.

On her solo recordings at the time, Parton included a raft of songs about poor children in trouble. These gothic, occasionally autobiographical compositions, including “Coat of Many Colors,” “My Blue Ridge Mountain Boy,” “Evening Shade,” “Daddy Come and Get Me” and “Down From Dover,” would have been more than enough to make her, if not a star, at least a country music legend. But the kind of attention even her lesser work with Wagoner enjoyed continued to elude her own material.

Dolly Parton and Kenny Rogers laugh together backstage at an April 2010 show honoring her “Islands in the Stream” singing partner.

(Rick Diamond / Getty Images)

By 1973, Parton realized that if she was going to be her own star she would have to be on her own. Wagoner fought and threatened, and finally, Parton wrote a song as a way to help him understand both her gratitude and her need for independence, “I Will Always Love You.” He liked the song, but it didn’t convince him. Wagoner sued her for $20 million over breach of contract and settled for $1 million.

But Parton had won her freedom, and she made the most of it. Her album from that year, “My Tennessee Mountain Home,” was a reintroduction to her audience, an autobiographical cycle of songs telling the story of a singer leaving home to make it on Music Row. And in 1974, “Jolene” became her chart-topping breakthrough.

The title was the name of a red-haired, green-eyed young fan Parton met signing autographs, and the story of a woman begging a rival to leave her man alone. Parton said she made it up after discovering a bank teller had a crush on her husband. With a beveled chord progression and a haunting repetition of the name, it became perhaps her most requested song, and was covered by many, including the White Stripes, Candi Staton, Reba McEntire and Olivia Newton-John.

“I wanted to be seen, I wanted to be recognized, I wanted to be a star,” she explained. The last part was now coming into focus.

In 1976 she hosted a short-lived variety TV series, “Dolly!” Her name was her brand, and so, too, was her profile: the full bosom and tiny waist, platinum wig and baubles like sprinkles on an ice cream cone, 5 feet tall standing in five-inch heels. She was a disarming contradiction: manufactured and utterly sincere.

“A country girl’s idea of what glamour was,” she explained.

“I didn’t have any money to have stuff and I’ve often joked about it, but it’s the real truth that I patterned myself after what they considered the trash in our hometown.” She took shame and made it a flag, one big enough for all sorts of Americans to settle beneath.

Dolly Parton checks out an exhibit honoring her life and career at the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum in May 2025.

(Jason Kempin / Getty Images)

Building on her fame, in the mid-’70s Parton decided to reinvent herself by reaching beyond the confines of country music. She signed with L.A.-based talent manager Sandy Gallin, who had made Mac Davis a country crossover star and would soon work with Cher and Michael Jackson.

Parton laid off her longtime Traveling Family Band and sought out musicians and songs that were more purely pop. Hits that followed included “Here You Come Again” (No. 20 on the pop chart, 1977), “Heartbreaker” (No. 37, 1978) and duets with Kenny Rogers like “Islands in the Stream” (No. 1, 1983).

The pop move was muttered over and seen by gatekeepers as a rejection of Southern-based authenticity. It was the era of “Urban Cowboy” and purity was being policed. “I love country music. It’s my first love,” she told the SoHo News. “But it was confining. You can only go so far in a circle.”

The movie “9 to 5” from 1980 settled her broadening stardom; acting alongside Jane Fonda and Lily Tomlin in a comedy about three office workers who get even with an abusive boss, Parton charmed viewers. It was her first acting role, and Roger Ebert called her “a natural born movie star.” She wrote and sang the movie’s theme song, which topped Billboard’s pop and country charts.

Dolly Parton and her “9 to 5” castmates Jane Fonda, left, and Lily Tomlin assemble at a 1980 news conference to promote the movie.

(Wally Fong / Associated Press)

Parton would go on to act in “The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas” (1982), “Rhinestone” (1984), “Steel Magnolias” (1989), the “Hannah Montana” TV series (she was Miley Cyrus’ godmother in real life too), and in many more films and TV shows. But her biggest cinematic moment came with a song she’d written years before; “I Will Always Love You” was sung by Whitney Houston in the 1992 film “The Bodyguard,” turning her air kiss to Porter Wagoner into a No. 1 hit for 14 weeks.

In the mid-1980s, Parton suffered a number of setbacks. She experienced depression. “I was just broken down,” she said later. In 1982, abdominal pain and bleeding forced her to cancel a tour, and in 1984 she had a partial hysterectomy. There were bouts of binge eating, and when she hit bottom she considered suicide. A series of conversations with God were instrumental in her recovery, Parton said.

Underscoring her connection to her origins while also illustrating how far she had gone, in 1986 she bought an old amusement park in Pigeon Forge, Tenn., and reinvented it as Dollywood, a booming theme park, resort and theater. Other businesses included Sandollar Productions, a film and TV company. In the 1990s Parton formed her own label, Blue Eye Records.

Success meant she could settle into being Dolly. A trio of beloved bluegrass albums, “The Grass Is Blue,” “Little Sparrow” and “Halos & Horns,” around the turn of the millennium reestablished her as a performer with extensive roots in rural America. She recorded with everyone from Linda Ronstadt and Emmylou Harris to Ladysmith Black Mambazo. Her 2019 cover of John Hiatt’s “Faith,” made with Swedish duo Galantis, topped the EDM charts.

She embraced her Christian and LGBTQ+ fans, and perhaps no American artist had more of each. Inclusivity mattered to Parton. She was an icon to the LGBTQ+ community. In 2002 at the House of Blues in Los Angeles, Parton replaced the name Jolene with “drag queen” and sang her famous song as a roster of drag performers looked on.

Dolly Parton at the 57th Academy of Country Music Awards in 2022.

(John Locher / Associated Press)

Just two years later, in 2004, the Library of Congress presented Parton with the since-retired “Living Legend Medal,” which sought to recognize those that made significant creative contributions to American life.

Singer and songwriter Brandi Carlile called Parton “an angel on my shoulder and also the devil on my other shoulder.”

“When I was 15 years old I read the back of Dolly Parton’s book when she became the first country artist ever to speak out in support of LGBTQ people. And I can tell you that as a queer kid from a small town, getting love from Dolly is second only to God.”

Parton has been honored in musical tributes by Carrie Underwood, Alison Krauss and Shania Twain. “Jolene” became the subject of the short story “Jolene: A Life,” by E.L. Doctorow. In 2019 WNYC and Jad Abumrad presented “Dolly Parton’s America,” a nine-segment podcast devoted to, and with the cooperation of, Parton; it examined her persona and impact on American life.

That same year Netflix presented “Dolly Parton’s Heartstrings,” an anthology series in which each episode presents a fictional narrative built around a Parton song; the series features appearances by Kathleen Turner, Delta Burke and Melissa Leo.

Dolly Parton and President Carter embrace as First Lady Rosalynn Carter looks on before a White House luncheon in October 1979.

(Georges / Associated Press)

Her influence was so vast she has even been proposed as a field of academic study, and scrutinized in the 2018 academic study from Leigh H. Edwards, “Dolly Parton, Gender, and Country Music.”

She was married to the same man, Carl Thomas Dean, for over 50 years. They met on the day she arrived in Nashville in 1964, as she stood outside a laundromat. Parton and Dean were rarely seen in public together, and renewed vows in 2016. Dean died at age 82 in March 2025.

“Carl and I spent many wonderful years together,” Parton said in a statement at the time. “Words can’t do justice to the love we shared for over 60 years. Thank you for your prayers and sympathy.”

Parton remained a source of interest and fascination, and though few if anyone could really claim to know her, many thought they did. As she once put it: “I look one way and am another. It makes for a good combination.”

Ukrainians have observed a national holiday meant to instil patriotism during the fifth year of their war against Russia.

On Ukrainian National Flag Day on Sunday, participants raised the flag, observed a minute of silence for those killed in the war, sang the Ukrainian national anthem and listened to patriotic and folk songs performed by a military orchestra.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy attended ceremonies in the capital, Kyiv.

Addressing military personnel, Zelenskyy said the flag “symbolises what is most precious” to the thousands of soldiers defending “our entire Ukraine”.

Ukraine’s National Flag Day was established as a national holiday on August 23, 2004, one day before its Independence Day.

A federal judge in New York has vacated a Trump administration policy that suspended the processing of visas from 75 countries, including Afghanistan, Iran, Russia and Somalia, whose nationals the Trump administration deemed likely to require public assistance in the United States.

U.S. District Judge Jeannette Vargas, an appointee of President Biden, described the policy Friday as “contrary to law and in excess of statutory authority.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio exceeded his authority by issuing the policy, which “runs afoul” of the Immigration and Nationality Act by mandating “the refusal of visas to eligible applicants without any basis in law,” the judge ruled.

Power lies with consular officers, judge says

Vargas said the policy also undermines the congressional requirement that puts consular officers at the forefront of any visa decision.

“Congress imbued these officers with exclusive authority and discretion to determine if an immigrant is eligible for a visa based upon review of specific and detailed criteria set forth in the statute,” she wrote. “The Policy, which categorically prohibits the issuance of immigrant visas based upon the nationality of the applicant, represents a direct abrogation of this statutory scheme.”

The policy was challenged by two nonprofit organizations along with 11 individuals, including six whose family members had been refused visas. The remaining five are outside the country and had filed “employment-based petitions” to come to the United States.

‘This case is about keeping families together,’ advocate says

“We welcome this ruling because, at its heart, this case is about keeping families together,” said Anna Gallagher, the executive director of CLINIC, a national nonprofit that provides training, resources and support to a network of immigration legal service providers and was one of the plaintiffs.

“Catholic social teaching calls us to uphold the dignity of every person and recognize the family as the foundation of society,” she said in a statement. “This decision affirms both those values and the rule of law, allowing families to once again move forward toward reunification.”

Another plaintiff is African Communities Together, a Harlem-based nonprofit. One of its leaders called the ruling “a tremendous victory for the rule of law.”

“This unlawful and racist ban caused immeasurable harm, cruelly keeping families and loved ones apart,” Diana Konate, deputy executive director for policy and advocacy, said in a statement. “Today, we are elated to tell our community members: this ban is no more.”

Trump expands anti-immigration agenda

President Trump has imposed a growing list of immigration and travel bans mostly for people from Africa, Asia and Latin America. The State Department said Saturday that the Trump administration is “protecting the American people by upholding the highest standards of screening and vetting of visa applicants,” and that it would not comment on pending litigation.

At the time the policy was issued, the State Department said it had instructed consular officers to halt immigrant visa applications from the 75 countries in accordance with a broader order in November that tightened rules around potential immigrants who might become “public charges.”

Relying on Council of Economic Advisors data, the State Department said that more than 30% of households with immigrants from these countries received some form of public assistance.

A separate notice sent to all U.S. embassies and consulates said that non-immigrant visa applicants also should be “fully vetted and screened” for the possibility that they might seek public benefits in the United States.

The cable, a copy of which was obtained by the Associated Press, noted several times that the applicant must prove they won’t apply for public benefits while in the U.S., and that consular officers who suspect the applicant might apply should require them to fill out a form proving their financial bona fides.

The ruling is the latest example of the courts upending Trump’s immigration agenda.

In June, a federal judge struck down a Trump administration policy that made it harder for immigrants from dozens of countries to enter and stay in the United States — affecting elements including asylum, work permits, green cards and citizenship applications. That judge said the policy threw countless immigrants’ lives “into indeterminate legal limbo,” and accused the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services of ignoring the law.

Casey writes for the Associated Press.

BILLINGS, Mont. — The 250th anniversary of U.S. independence was just months away when National Park Service employees received a surprising directive from Washington: Maintenance projects approved for this year at sites across the nation were being relegated to a new “low priority” list.

Work wanted by the White House was taking precedence, including repairs to the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool, according to documents obtained by the Associated Press and three officials from the park service and Interior Department who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly.

The reflecting pool repairs and other projects tied to President Trump’s Freedom 250 initiative landed on a separate list for White House priorities, the documents show. Many of the administration-backed projects have advanced, though the Reflecting Pool repairs were botched.

Meanwhile, almost all of about 1,500 maintenance and other projects on the low priority list as of last month are expected to go undone, the officials said. That will worsen a repair backlog at national parks that doubled over the last decade to more than $24 billion even as visitor numbers surged.

The shelved projects, many already approved, span more than 200 sites and range from roof repairs at Golden Gate National Recreation Area to computer upgrades at Alaska’s Katmai National Park and bulk purchases of toilet paper and garbage bags at Yellowstone National Park.

Because of their low priority designation and with the fiscal year ending on Sept. 30, it’s unknown when they will move forward unless park staff can find a workaround, two of the officials said.

Park service employees “were told to not expect anything on the low priority list to be contracted,” one of the officials said.

“The first priority was White House priorities,” the official said. “Anywhere that is 250th-related they would have been diverting resources, some it probably planned but a lot of it pushed by the administration.”

The Interior Department said many entries on the low priority list had been “mis-prioritized and were corrected.” It declined to say how many or which ones, or how much parks are spending on projects outside Washington. Agency officials declined to answer questions about the Reflecting Pool.

Congress has pushed to fix maintenance backlog

The park service has a third list for “high priority” projects that includes more than 2,000 items, many with contracts awarded or in process, the documents show.

“In any year, the National Park Service must prioritize projects most in need,” Interior spokesperson Katie Martin wrote in a statement. “The National Park Service has not only been focused on beautifying the district for the 250th celebrations in our nation’s capital but has also been working on many deferred maintenance projects throughout the country.”

The 1,500 low priority projects had a combined cost estimate of more than $400 million.

Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), the ranking member of the Senate’s National Parks Subcommittee, said the administration’s pursuits around Washington “are more aesthetic than strictly necessary,” even as they siphon resources from sites elsewhere in the U.S.

“I don’t object to setting priorities,” King said in an interview. “I object to the White House priority list being tacked onto the top of that pyramid.”

He added it could lead to “the deterioration of America’s gems” as things like sanitation upgrades and basic maintenance don’t happen.

Congress during both Democratic and Republican presidencies has pushed to address the backlog. The bipartisan Great American Outdoors Act in 2020 included $6.5 billion for maintenance and repairs through 2025. A legislative extension is pending.

Testing the park service’s mission

The priority designations came from park service headquarters in Washington, according to documents obtained by AP and one of the unnamed officials.

The park service appears to be moving forward on at least $80 million in White House priorities, including $52 million awarded, the documents indicate. Much of that work was championed by Trump and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, such as the reflecting pool repairs and the rehabilitation of other parks in the capital with an eye toward the 250th celebrations.

Trump announced his plans to paint the Reflecting Pool blue in April, aiming to address longstanding problems at the site before July 4. But the $16-million initiative faced immediate problems, including peeling sealant and a fierce return of green algae.

Not all of the administration’s priorities advanced: A $70-million line item for “turf maintenance” over five years at parks in the Washington, D.C., area is among more than $80 million in work marked as “canceled” in the Interior Department data.

The park service’s mission has been tested under Trump as its employees navigate new realities. It lost at least one-quarter of its permanent workforce under Trump.

Remaining employees have been ordered to revise exhibits that Trump said advanced “improper ideology,” and demolish the East Wing of the White House, which is under park stewardship, for the creation of a ballroom. Trump also reduced Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments in Utah as Republicans reshape public lands management.

Contracting officers in short supply

Pressure to deliver on administration demands for Freedom 250 was compounded by staffing cuts that made it harder to execute contracts, the unnamed officials said.

Prior to Trump’s second term, the parks had 275 contracting officers. They’ve since been consolidated into the Interior Department, which nevertheless saw its contracting workforce drop more than 20%, public records show.

About $140 million has been obligated or spent by the park service in Washington, D.C., this year, according to public data. That includes the reflecting pool work and the rehabilitation of fountains across the district.

Interior spokesperson Martin said the Trump administration is eyeing different revenue sources for maintenance including endowments and park pass sales.

Those sales rose more than $2 million, to $16.7 million, in the first quarter of 2026 compared with a year earlier, she said.

Brown writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is weighing President Trump’s claim that his new White House ballroom is urgently needed to protect him, his staff and guests from attacks by drones, terrorists and snipers.

On Friday, with a lower-court order about to go into effect halting construction on the controversial project, Chief Justice John G. Roberts decided that the court needed more time. He issued a temporary order pausing the case and allowing construction to continue while the justices decide on a pending legal challenge.

Last week, Trump’s lawyers described the East Wing ballroom as an “integrated military complex” that is “vitally required by national security.” They argued that a judge’s order blocking further construction threatened the safety of the president and must be overturned. They also said the project is nearly two-thirds completed.

At issue is whether the president acting on his own may build a huge new ballroom complex that is expected to dwarf the historic Executive Mansion.

It is a confrontation over the boundaries of executive power at a moment when Trump has repeatedly tested the ability of courts, Congress and independent institutions to constrain his agenda.

Trump bulldozed the historic East Wing before the courts had resolved whether the administration had the authority to proceed, leaving opponents to argue the project could become effectively irreversible before judicial review was complete.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued in December and argued that the president had overstepped his authority.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon agreed and ordered a stop to the above-ground construction — that is, on the ballroom. He said the work on the underground bunker may proceed.

The U.S. court of appeals affirmed his order by a 2-1 vote on Aug. 7 but put the decision on hold until Friday. Roberts’ order did not explain the reason for the delay, or how soon the court might rule.

In a fast-track appeal to the Supreme Court, Trump administration lawyers sought to refocus the case as one about national security and the president’s safety.

“Given the current unprecedented levels of danger … every day the President does not have access to the vital security features of the military complex presents unacceptable risk,” Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer said Wednesday in his final brief to the court.

Construction continues on the White House East Wing ballroom on Aug. 20.

(Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)

The Constitution and federal law say new buildings may not be erected on public property in the District of Columbia “without the express authority of Congress.”

But acting on his own, Trump ordered the East Wing of the White House torn down in October and work began on a new and much larger building to replace it.

He said the new ballroom could provide safe and secure seating for 1,000 dinner guests. He did not ask Congress to weigh in or approve the massive project.

In defense, Trump administration lawyers pointed to an annual appropriation from Congress that funds “the care, maintenance, repair, alteration, refurnishing” and other such improvements at the White House.

They also said private donations would pay most of the $400-million cost of the new ballroom. One estimate placed the cost of the ballroom and the bunker at $600 million, with taxpayers covering half, the Washington Post reported.

The president, his family and White House employees would have secure underground space, Sauer said, while a “totally secure ballroom space” would provide a new level of protection for guests and foreign dignitaries.

Otherwise, they would be seated outside in tents on the lawn, Trump said, which was neither appealing nor safe.

President Trump speaks to the media as the construction of a new helipad on the South Lawn of the White House continues on Aug. 19.

(Alex Wong / Getty Images)

His solicitor general also argued it was too late to stop the project.

“A 250-person crew is working 20 hours a day, seven days a week to keep the project ahead of schedule and under budget,” he wrote on Aug. 13. “Today, the project is 65% complete in its entirety, and moving quickly toward total completion.”

Trump’s signature construction project has fueled accusations from his political opponents that he is abusing his power to build a lavish space for entertaining guests as ordinary Americans struggle with affordability.

In April, Republicans in Congress sought to put federal money behind the project, despite Trump’s earlier insistence that private donors would pay for the ballroom.

The effort never became law, faced with bipartisan opposition to a bill that would tie them to the unpopular project, leaving the administration to proceed with a privately financed effort whose legal authority was already being challenged in court.

The Society for the Rule of Law and a group of former White House lawyers warned the court against accepting Trump’s broad claims of power.

“Under the executive’s view, the President could bulldoze the entire White House and replace it with a new building of his own design, including a skyscraper. No other President has asserted such transformative power,” they wrote in a friend-of-the-court brief.

“The invocation of national security is not a magic incantation that suspends the rule of law,” they added.

The biggest hurdle facing the challengers may be the issue of standing.

The court’s conservatives are often skeptical of lawsuits if it is not clear the plaintiffs have or will suffer a distinct injury that goes beyond their opposition to a government policy.

In this case, the National Trust said its historians and preservationists will be disturbed to walk by the White House grounds if there is a massive new structure that is not in keeping with the historic Executive Mansion.

Construction continues on the East Wing ballroom at the White House on Aug. 10, 2026, in Washington, D.C.

(Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)

“The subjective displeasure of an offended observer does not amount to a concrete injury,” Sauer said.

The D.C. Circuit judges were also split on the threshold issue of standing.

Judges Patricia Millett, an Obama appointee, and Bradley Garcia, a Biden appointee, ruled the suit may proceed because the plaintiffs suffered injuries to their “aesthetic, cultural and historical interests.”

Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, dissented and said the preservationists walking by the White House would not suffer the kind of concrete injury that gives them standing.

Activist group says the ‘twisted’ Hong Kong judicial system had long ago decided that the pair were guilty.

A Hong Kong court has found two pro-democracy activists guilty on national security charges in a trial widely viewed as exemplifying the erosion of freedom of expression in the Chinese city.

Lee Cheuk-yan, 69, and Chow Hang-tung, 41, former leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, were found guilty of “incitement to subversion” for their role in organising candlelit vigils to mark Beijing’s deadly 1989 Tiananmen crackdown, in a Hong Kong court on Friday. The two had pleaded not guilty and were charged in 2021.

The pair could face up to 10 years in jail. Sentencing is expected at a later date.

Prosecutors argued that the pair “endanger[ed] national security in the name of human rights”.

Chow, a human rights barrister who represented herself, told the court in May that the law itself was on trial.

Friday’s verdict was “no surprise”, said Mark Clifford, president of the Committee for Freedom in Hong Kong Foundation.

Hong Kong’s “twisted” judicial system had already decided the pair were guilty in 2021, he said. He described Lee and Chow as “true Chinese patriots” who were silenced because they “spoke truth to power” and “held up a mirror to the Chinese Communist Party”.

Hong Kong’s crackdown

For three decades, the candlelight vigil organised by the alliance was the only large-scale public commemoration of the Tiananmen crackdown, drawing tens of thousands of people annually to mourn the victims in China. The event was banned in 2020 during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, weeks before Beijing imposed the security law on Hong Kong to quell the 2019 massive antigovernment protests.

The alliance’s leaders have been behind bars since they were charged.

Chow and Lee “exposed the Chinese government’s fears of the memory of its own atrocities”, Elaine Pearson, Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said, urging governments around the world to hold Beijing to account for erasing Hong Kong’s freedoms.

Earlier this year, Jimmy Lai, 78, a media mogul and high-profile rights campaigner in Hong Kong, was found guilty on national security charges and sentenced to 20 years behind bars.

Led ‘like a dog on a lead’

In a personal blog published in the days leading up to the verdict, Chow detailed her treatment by correctional services, in which she described being led “like a dog on a lead”, shackled at the wrists, waist and ankles.

She described a new method of restraint, with specialised handcuffs, as the source of significant pain during her long detention: “One can only ‘choose’ which part of the body shall suffer in turn” due to the bodily contortions forced by the restraints she has been held in.

Chow is one of the few high-profile political prisoners detained in Hong Kong to continue to speak out publicly against the authorities.

In June 1989, China’s government sent tanks and soldiers to crush a pro-democracy movement that had installed itself in Beijing’s central Tiananmen Square. Hundreds, possibly thousands, of people were killed by soldiers, and many were injured. Beijing has since sought to censor mention of the incident in China.

Lee and Chow were also leaders of the now-defunct Hong Kong Alliance (HKA).

The HKA was founded in May 1989 to support students holding pro-democracy rallies. Weeks later, the Communist Party crushed pro-democracy protests in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square with troops and tanks. Estimates of the death toll range from a few hundred to many thousands.

Over the next three decades, HKA called on authorities to accept responsibility for the crackdown, free dissidents and introduce democratic reform.

The Alliance’s leaders were charged in 2021 and have been behind bars since.

Rights group Amnesty International has said the case “relies on vague, overly broad and arbitrary definitions of ‘subversion'”.

Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director, said Chow and Lee had “not committed any recognisable crime”.

“Chow Hang-tung and Lee Cheuk-yan are prisoners of conscience who should never have been prosecuted in the first place. They must be released immediately and unconditionally”, she added.

In a separate case, Chow was arrested in June 2021 for “inciting” the public to take part in that year’s vigil and later found guilty.

However, Hong Kong’s top court overturned that conviction in 2022, with a judge ruling the police hadn’t properly justified the vigil’s ban.

Chow Hang-tung spoke to the BBC in 2021, weeks before her arrest on 4 June 2022.

“I am prepared to be arrested. That is how Hong Kong is now,” she had said.

“I am willing to pay the price for fighting for democracy”.

A wonderful Oval Office perk is what Thomas Jefferson dubbed “The President’s Own.” At the president’s beck and call is the United States Marine Band, created by an act of Congress in 1798.

But for an acquisitive current occupant of the White House, the oldest continuously active musical organization hasn’t seemed enough. In his appropriating the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, also created and officially named by Congress, the president obtained the National Symphony Orchestra. Unlike its “President’s Own” sibling, which is supported by the Defense Department annual allotment of some $400 million for military bands, the NSO is administered, funded (between a third and half of its $35-million budget) and lately threatened by what are now the whims of the Kennedy Center.

The NSO appeared at the Hollywood Bowl on Tuesday night, however, with a collective sigh of relief. A week earlier the Kennedy Center Board, without congressional input or legal approval, approved an imminent, two-year closure of the venue for repairs and remodeling, with little word about the homeless or economic future of its artist affiliate. By early August, no new NSO season, which would begin in September, had been announced.

But Tuesday morning, the NSO, in fact, did lay out a full and musically substantial season, the 10th for its music director, Gianandrea Noseda. Not taking a chance on the courts preventing a Kennedy Center closure, the NSO will become next season a peripatetic ensemble performing in various venues in and around D.C., as well undertake a national tour in the spring. Uncertainty remains, but for now all is as well as can be expected.

The NSO, however, offered little of what to expect. I can only find one program next season as unimaginative as Tuesday’s at the Bowl. The orchestra looks forward to several premieres of new works by lively composers and a variety of significant guest conductors, including the venturesome Teddy Abrams (who will lead the Los Angeles Philharmonic’s season-opening gala) and eclectic former NSO music director Leonard Slatkin (who is also the former L.A. Phil principal guest conductor for the Hollywood Bowl). Noseda’s only other bland program will be the one he brings on tour to The Soraya in April.

Hearing the NSO at the Bowl, moreover, is an act of guess work. With the new immersive sound system, orchestra impact becomes a matter of technology, giving individual instruments paranormal prominence and turning full orchestra glory into a sensual sound bath. Still, with its smooth strings, creamy brass, pungent winds and friendly percussion, Noseda’s NSO came across as a gracious orchestra meant to please, and, consequently, a seemingly marvelous anomaly in an otherwise divisive present-day D.C.

But that offered few favors for Leonard Bernstein’s Symphonic Dances from “West Side Story” or Gershwin’s “An American in Paris,” where the Bowl has regularly hosted far more idiomatic, swinging performances. Dvorak’s “New World Symphony” in the second half was, on the other hand, satisfyingly full-bodied. While Noseda sometimes practices likability to a fault, his sense of drama is ever sure, and it is hard to get enough of the lyrical sweetness he conveys. As an encore, Noseda led the overture to Bernstein’s “Candide” with real flair.

But why commonplace “Candide” and “West Side Story,” when Bernstein wrote “Slava! A Political Overture,” for the NSO as tribute in 1977 to its Russian music director, Mstislav Rostropovich? Might not the NSO make a point with “Three Mediations” from “MASS,” Bernstein’s multimedia masterpiece that controversially opened Kennedy Center in 1974. Bernstein also wrote a major late work for the NSO, “Songfest.” Bernstein, himself, conducted the Los Angeles Philharmonic in the West Coast premiere at the Bowl in 1983, which had special significance because his collaborator on “Songfest,” Tom Cothran, who happened to have grown up in Pasadena.

For his part, Noseda has done an exceptional job in championing major Black composers at home and on record. Carlos Simon has been the NSO’s composer in residence for the last five years, and Noseda has revived and recorded an essential album of works by George Walker. In October, Noseda and the NSO will release a recording of two symphonies by William Grant Still, who lived in L.A. Deeply evocative of a post-Dvorak new world, they are beautifully played on the new recording and would have been ideal for the Bowl.

The NSO has given up on the Kennedy Center, but must we? There are many questions that have not been considered. The current plan for infrastructure improvements and slapdash redecorating at the cost of $250 million. In fact, the facility’s playhouse, opera theater and concert hall are due for major renovations. But that requires significant planning, the hiring of a major architecture firm with concert hall experience, a first-rate acoustician and, ideally, four times the allotted budget.

This is clearly a long-term job for Congress and consultants who would do well to study the approach of the Salzburg Festival. It has been planning for several years to rehabilitate its large concert hall (which is of similar vintage to the Kennedy Center), which will require five years and a cost of around $600 million. It is also carefully examining alternate performance sites to be used during construction.

The Kennedy Center is a memorial, and before another new idea is allowed out, let the Kennedy Center board visit Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool for a moment of reflection on how and why to bring the NSO, America’s Own, back home. In the background, the U.S. Marine Band could offer its kin moral support by playing in the background Ives’ mysteriously transcendental “Unanswered Question.”

COLUMBIA, S.C. — Sen. Darline Graham stumbled in a Tuesday night debate over an elementary question about foreign policy, a signature issue of her late brother. It was a high-profile misstep a week before she faces a runoff election in her bid to hold onto the South Carolina seat to which she was appointed last month.

Graham, a political novice, was asked whether the U.S. has a national security interest in Taiwan and the South China Sea — a longstanding contention of both Democratic and Republican administrations. She struggled to answer before admitting “national security is not my thing.”

“I’m not that informed on national security,” she added.

Her rival in next week’s runoff for the GOP nomination, Rep. Ralph Norman, suggested the answer showed Graham was unqualified for the role.

“By her choice, she’s running for the United States Senate. It’s a six-year term,” Norman said. “You need to get fully versed in what issues you’re going to be dealing with. This isn’t a ‘get training on the job.’ You can’t do that.”

It was a moment that drew a stark contrast to Graham’s brother, Lindsey, who died unexpectedly July 11. It also gave Norman, an established conservative politician, a fresh avenue of attack as he tries to overcome President Trump’s endorsement of Graham in her first campaign. The Republican president is set to visit South Carolina on Friday to campaign for her.

During his decades in the Senate, Lindsey Graham was known for his foreign policy involvement, making countless foreign trips, sometimes as part of a group of U.S. lawmakers meeting with international leaders and observing contentious areas firsthand.

There were multiple trips to Taiwan, including in 2022, when he led a delegation for a two-day visit that included meetings with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and the island’s defense minister.

Darline Graham had been asked, “Are Taiwan and the South China Sea national security issues for the United States and if so, why or how?”

Graham avoided a direct response, and instead mentioned her brother’s wealth of experience and her desire to lead differently.

“My brother was in the Air Force for 33 years, so I will do everything I can to support the military,” said Graham, who often read during the debate from a legal pad on which she had notes, its pages draped over the front of her lectern. “My dad was in the Army. I’m not a polished politician up here; national security is not my thing, not my area of expertise, but I do support the military.”

As interim senator, Graham is surrounded by many of her brother’s Capitol Hill staff, many of whom worked with him for years on issues foreign and domestic. She’s repeatedly thanked them for getting her up to speed on legislative issues and has pointed to her several weeks on the job as a productive time in which she’s gotten legislation passed, including a Russia sanctions bill named for her brother.

In the wake of her brother’s death, Graham has been asked multiple times about how she would either further or shift away from his intense focus on national security, an attitude that was at the essence of his Senate portfolio.

Asked after the debate by reporters if she wanted another crack at her answer to the moderators’ question, she doubled down, saying she was more focused on South Carolinians’ everyday concerns.

“They’re worried about their pocketbooks more than they’re worried about the South China Sea, quite honestly,” Graham said. “So that’s going to be my biggest focus.”

Graham added that she had spoken multiple times during the debate about the overall national security threat posed by China.

“I realize national security is very important,” Graham said. “I probably said 10 times up there tonight how bad China is, how they’re a national threat to us.”

Taiwan has often been a flash point for aggression from China and international efforts to support its right to self-rule. The U.S. maintains a policy of strategic ambiguity over whether it would defend Taiwan militarily if the mainland invaded, but has committed to bolstering the island’s defense for generations.

Claimed by China as part of its territory, Taiwan sits along a South China Sea global trade route, virtually all of which China claims despite a 2016 arbitration ruling based on the 1982 U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea that invalidated Beijing’s expansive claims.

During a visit to Manila this week, Adm. Frank Bradley, commander of the U.S. Special Operations Command, said that American special operations forces are ready to step up warfighting-readiness exercises with counterparts in the Philippines and other countries in Asia to further strengthen a security alliance and help deter a major conflict in the region.

Kinnard and Junkroski write for the Associated Press.