Nations

Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and the Faroe Islands back calls for Infantino’s resignation amid FIFA crisis.

Six Nordic football associations have delivered a united blow to FIFA President Gianni Infantino, declaring they have lost confidence in his leadership while demanding sweeping governance reforms at world football’s governing body.

The six Nordic FIFA members – Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and the Faroe Islands – met in Helsinki and issued a rare joint statement on Sunday, backing calls for Infantino’s resignation from three major regional confederations.

They also supported demands for an independent investigation into his proposal to sell a stake in events like the World Cup to private equity investors, a plan that was quickly abandoned in the face of a global backlash.

“The six Nordic football associations have lost confidence in FIFA’s president and are concerned about the organisation’s governance and decision-making at the highest level,” they said in a statement.

“The Nordic football associations stand united with UEFA and support the measures that the organisation and its national member associations have jointly proposed.

“We expect FIFA to provide binding guarantees that the organisation’s governance or competitions will never again be opened up to private ownership.”

FIFA did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

On Friday, Denmark’s football association pledged to find a credible alternative to Infantino in March’s presidential election.

Infantino is under pressure from three confederations to resign: UEFA, the AFC and CONCACAF.

The sport’s regional powerhouses in Europe, Asia, and North and Central America and the Caribbean have also discussed a potential vote of no confidence against the FIFA chief.

“We also support the demand made by AFC, CONCACAF and UEFA that a fully independent external investigation into the events surrounding the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal be established,” the Nordic associations added.

“We also call on FIFA to initiate a comprehensive and independent review of its governance framework to determine whether it ensures the independence, checks and balances, transparency and accountability that were intended when FIFA adopted its reform programme in 2016.”

Infantino, who is seeking a fourth term until 2031 in next year’s election, is in the Dominican Republic this weekend, where he has met with officials of the Caribbean Football Union (CFU).

CONCACAF President Victor Montagliani had asked Infantino to stay away from a youth football tournament in the country, saying his presence would overshadow the event.

“This meeting of the presidents of CFU takes place in the environment of [an] under-14 youth tournament in the region, which actually is one of those tournaments that can take place thanks to the FIFA Forward programme,” Infantino said.

“So even more so a reason to be proud to be here and happy as well because it’s important to engage, to have a dialogue, to express views and opinions.”

The warning comes as US President Donald Trump threatens to isolate Iran economically, to weaken its government.

Iran has threatened to treat nearby countries as enemies and target their interests if they join a United States campaign to cripple its economy.

Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, issued the warning in a Saturday interview with state broadcaster IRIB.

“We’re telling all nearby countries not to join the US economic war. Otherwise, we will consider them as enemies,” Rezaei told IRIB.

His remarks come on the heels of escalating economic threats from the administration of US President Donald Trump.

On Wednesday, Trump announced his government would undertake the “most crushing economic operation” yet against Iran, as part of ongoing hostilities between the two countries.

The US and Israel have been locked in a war with Iran since February 28, when the two allies launched an initial volley of attacks against Tehran.

In addition to threatening Iran’s economy this week, Trump pledged “tremendous economic consequences” for any country that gives Iran “any type of lifeline”.

His Treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, echoed his threats the following day, saying, “You’re either with us or against us.”

In Saturday’s interview, Rezaei described Iran’s regional strategy as a three-stage sequence, which would start with efforts to de-escalate tensions with neighbouring countries.

“First we negotiate. Then, we try to separate them from America with pleasant language, because we are not really looking to expand the war,” he said.

Any countries that continue to side with the US would then be given time to reconsider, he said. “But in the third stage, we will definitely act.”

While the US has not stopped its military operations against Iran, Rezaei suggested that the Trump administration was betting that economic pressure would fracture Iranian society, forcing the war to come to an end.

“They hope that, if possible, they can break our unity with economic pressure and a group of protesters will take to the streets, and in a way, they will come to the aid of American F-35s,” he said, referring to a kind of military aircraft.

Negotiations to end the conflict have stalled in recent months, following the failure of a June 17 memorandum of understanding (MoU) that called for an “immediate and permanent termination of military operations”.

Control over the Strait of Hormuz, a major shipping lane off the coast of Iran, has become an enduring sticking point between the US and Iran.

Iran quickly moved to shut down traffic through the strait early in the war, sending the price of goods like oil and fertiliser skyrocketing.

Countries in the Middle East that were previously reliant on the strait for exports have started to pursue substitute trade routes.

But Rezaei warned that Iran would target those alternative oil-shipping routes out of the Gulf if regional states took part in the US’s plans of economic warfare.

Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Saturday also decried the incoming US measures as an assertion of “extraterritorial sovereignty” over United Nations member states.

Tehran has also reportedly considered widening its target list beyond the Middle East, with media outlets reporting it could strike US allies in Europe who have supported Trump’s operations.

The Indomitable Lionesses outshine their opponents to claim first final victory on their fourth attempt in Morocco.

Cameroon claimed their first Women’s Africa Cup of Nations (WAFCON) title when they thumped surprise package Malawi 3-0 in the final, with Marie Ngah’s first-half double helping seal victory on Sunday.

Cameroon had lost three finals but made it fourth-time lucky against a Malawi side making their debut at the continental championship. Ranked 153 in the world and 32nd on the African continent, Malawi had a fairytale run to the decider.

The two finalists had already sealed their place at the Women’s World Cup in Brazil next year, along with fellow semifinalists Morocco and Algeria. The latter finished third after winning the bronze medal fixture on penalties on Saturday.

Under pressure, FIFA chief Gianni Infantino was all smiles as he handed the Indomitable Lionesses their medals in the presence of Confederation of African Football President Patrice Motsepe, with several players requesting photographs with the Swiss.

Infantino has long enjoyed the support of many on the African continent as he bids for re-election next March, despite revelations of his now-abandoned plans to sell a stake in future World Cups, which drew worldwide condemnation.

Cameroon dominated the first half and led 3-0 at the break after a superb performance against an outgunned Malawi.

Ngah reacted quickest to a loose ball in the box to give them the lead from close range after 20 minutes and they doubled the advantage on the half-hour mark as Naomi Eto added a second.

Malawi were clinging on and hoping to make it to halftime without any further damage but Ngah scored her second in the third minute of added time from Eto’s pass.

Cameroon are the fourth different winners of the Women’s Africa Cup of Nations since it was first played in 1998.

Nigeria have a record 10 titles, while Equatorial Guinea have two and South Africa one.

New Delhi, India – The vapour heat treatment (VHT) facility in Rehmanpur village of Lucknow, the capital of the northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh – used to sterilise fruit and vegetables – was preparing for the busiest time of the year when Japanese quarantine inspectors turned up in March.

Export documents had been cleared, shipping schedules finalised, and growers in the western states of Maharashtra and Gujarat reserved their best Alphonso and Kesar mangoes for export to Japan, one of Asia’s premium markets.

Everything appeared set for the season to begin when production ground to a halt. Japanese inspectors reviewing the fumigation, disinfection and certification procedures raised concerns about the whole process, prompting Japan to suspend imports of the fruits.

However, on March 31, the plant protection authorities in Yokohama sent a formal letter, saying all Indian mango shipments bearing inspection certificates issued on or after March 25 would be barred until inspectors could confirm that operational standards had improved.

It was the first major disruption in India-Japan mango trade in nearly two decades. In 1986, imports of the fruit were barred over fruit fly concerns. Restrictions were lifted in 2006 after the country built VHT infrastructure, strengthened pest surveillance and agreed to annual inspections.

Japan ‘gave us credibility’

The 2026 halt now affects six approved varieties of mango – Alphonso, Kesar, Langra, Banganapalli, Chausa and Mallika – covering the peak export window of April through to June.

Japan imported roughly $1.54m worth of fresh and processed mango products from India between 2025 and 2026. It might appear to be a modest sum, but the Japanese market holds huge significance for the rest of the global trade. Japan pays premium prices for mangoes and the country’s approval signals quality to the rest of the world.

The suspension came at an already challenging time for mango farmers in India. Sustained heatwaves through the Konkan belt had destroyed much of Maharashtra’s Alphonso crop. Geopolitical disruptions in West Asia had pushed freight costs higher, and exporters who had spent years establishing relations with the Japanese suddenly faced cancelled contracts and inventories rotting in storage.

Vikram Shah, a Mumbai-based exporter who shipped about 2.5 tonnes of mangoes to Japan in 2025, highlighted the importance of its market.

“Japan was never our biggest market in terms of quantity, but it was the one that gave us credibility,” Shah told Al Jazeera. “We spent six years building trust with buyers there. I travelled to Osaka twice, sat with importers, visited their cold storage facilities and learned exactly what they expected from us. Relationships like that take years to build and can disappear in a single season.”

Rajesh Patil, an Alphonso grower in Ratnagiri, Maharashtra, said his family had cultivated mangoes on a three-acre (1.2-hectare) orchard along the Konkan coast for two generations. The Japanese market, he said, consistently delivered far higher returns than domestic auctions, leading him to invest heavily in meeting Japan’s stringent import standards.

“We upgraded the orchard because Japan rewarded quality,” Patil said. “I spent nearly ₹80,000 [$840] on grading and handling equipment, attended pest-management training sessions, and changed the way we harvest and pack fruit,” he told Al Jazeera.

“The Japanese market paid almost twice what I could earn locally. When you make those investments, you expect the system supporting exports to be as reliable as the fruit you grow.”

China objects to rice

On April 17, China revoked the import licences of three Indian rice exporters after the General Administration of Customs rejected their consignments, claiming traces of genetically modified organisms (GMO).

The exporters disputed the finding, pointing out that their shipments received GMO-free certification before their departure and that the Indian government also said all domestic paddy and rice fields are free of genetic modification.

Rice makes up more than 20 percent of India’s agricultural exports, with a record-breaking $12.5bn of it shipped in the last financial year (2025-26). The three suspended exporters now face an uncertain path back into China, rattling their community.

Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA), under India’s Ministry of Commerce and Industry, notified the companies and, on June 8, published a list of laboratories approved for GMO tests on China-bound shipments.

SK Singh, an agricultural scientist in New Delhi, told Al Jazeera the dispute exposed weaknesses in India’s testing system.

“Our labs built expertise in pesticide residue and aflatoxin testing because that’s what most markets wanted,” he said. “China’s demand for GMO verification calls for a different scale of capacity.”

The exporters’ certificates came from accredited labs even if the certification network remains uneven, he added.

Only a handful of facilities, concentrated in New Delhi and Hyderabad in the southeastern state of Telangana, run the required protein analysis, forcing exporters in northern Punjab and Haryana states to ship samples hundreds of kilometres away.

Fragmented supply chain

There were other warning signs before the crisis hit mangoes and rice.

Hong Kong suspended several Indian spice products over pesticide residues, and testing found quality deviations in nearly 12 percent of the samples. The European Union also raised the inspection frequency on Indian cumin to 30 percent in January 2025, following 312 spice alerts on its rapid alert system in 2024.

Ananya Bose, a food safety scientist in Kochi in the southern state of Kerala, traced the problem to a fragmented supply chain.

“A farmer sells to an aggregator, who sells to a trader, who supplies a processor. Somewhere in that chain, the record of what was sprayed disappears,” she said. “The trail is detailed until the first sale, then it effectively ends.”

Bose has pushed for mandatory digital pesticide records, since regulators abroad expect traceability from field to shipment, a standard many states still treat as optional.

These setbacks may read as isolated incidents, but they expose a gap between India’s agricultural strength and the traceability, food safety and certification standards that Japan, the EU, the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada now demand. Those standards are tightened by consumer pressure for transparency, climate-driven pest concerns, food-security strategy and the COVID pandemic.

At the same time, competitors have moved faster, with Thailand building a nationwide traceability programme, Vietnam investing in farmers’ training, and Brazil and Chile pouring money into cold-chain systems.

India’s progress has lagged with just 207 registered pack houses, 72 percent of them concentrated in Maharashtra. Moreover, scarce cold storage facilities and logistical costs eat up roughly 15 percent of export value, almost double that of advanced nations. Small farmers owning less than 2 hectares (5 acres) of land make up more than 86 percent of India’s cultivators, making standardisation difficult at scale.

“India built its strategy around producing more, while premium markets reward proving quality along the way,” agricultural economist Anil Gupta told Al Jazeera.

Gupta pointed to some real gains: recognised laboratories grew from 22 to 89 over the past decade, and approved export certificates climbed from roughly 61,000 to more than 170,000.

“The progress is measurable, but so is the scale of the challenge,” he said. “These improvements mark a beginning, well short of the finish line.”

Ujjwal Kumar Ghosh, a senior official in the government’s Department of Commerce, has called for tighter controls on antibiotic residues, pesticides and aflatoxins in spices, tea, fruits and vegetables. He said funds have been set aside to upgrade laboratories, though without a timeline.

“The government is strengthening the system from testing to inspection and traceability. We are tightening controls on antibiotic and pesticide residues and aflatoxins, expanding laboratory capacity, introducing risk-based inspections and using digital systems and rapid screening to identify problems faster. The objective is to help exporters meet stricter global food-safety standards while protecting India’s access to international markets,” said Ghosh.

India still holds just 2.4 percent of global agri-exports despite ranking as the world’s second-largest agricultural producer, with processed exports stuck near 17 percent, against 25 percent in the US and 50 percent in China.

And growers are facing the fallout.

Gujarat’s Kesar mango farmers lost their strongest Japanese buyer. A basmati rice farmer in Haryana’s Karnal said local prices had already dropped 8 percent. And a turmeric processor in Kerala’s Erode said residue testing cost him 15,000 rupees ($157) last quarter, almost 10 percent of his profit.

Agriculture still employs about 42 percent of India’s workforce while producing less than a fifth of the national output.

“This is about far more than a few rejected shipments,” Gupta said. “The countries that succeed will consistently meet the standards global buyers demand.”

Indian farmers have long proven they can grow for the world. The task now is building systems that convince the world to keep buying.

I do not recall my first encounter with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) because I was just a baby. In the months after I was born, medics gave me my first vaccines in an UNRWA-run clinic. Since then, the agency has been present in almost every part of my life. It has become a core piece of my identity as a Palestinian refugee.

And so, as I read in the news statements by US officials that UNRWA needs to be banned from Gaza, as I hear that Israel is preparing to raid an UNRWA compound in occupied East Jerusalem, which houses schools and clinics, or that the Israeli High Court is likely to reject an appeal against anti-UNRWA laws, my heart is aching.

I realise it is difficult for non-Palestinians to understand why the attacks on UNRWA are such an emotional issue for us. For the rest of the world, it is just another humanitarian body providing services in a conflict zone. But for us, UNRWA is so much more. Let me explain.

Fifty-two years before an UNRWA nurse gave me a measles shot in a medical facility in the Daraj neighbourhood of Gaza City, UNRWA employees approached my grandfather, Ahmed Abo Aisha, who was just six years old at that time.

It was 1950, a year after UNRWA was created by the UN to deal with a refugee disaster it played an active role in creating. Two years earlier, during the Nakba of 1948, my grandfather and his family had fled on foot from their hometown of Bir al-Sabea, as Zionist militias advanced. My great-grandfather, Ibrahim Abo Aisha, a well-known livestock merchant, thought they were coming back, so he locked up the home, leaving behind title deeds, birth certificates, all his livestock and possessions. As a result, the family had no documents to prove their existence.

“Imagine, Nour, I didn’t know my real date of birth. When UNRWA came, they designed a certificate for me and wrote in it a random date of birth so that I could live with a documented existence,” my grandfather told me recently.

Thanks to this document, my grandfather was able to obtain an official identity card issued by the Egyptians when he was 16.

But ensuring he had an identity document was by far not the only thing UNRWA did for my grandfather. It issued his family a “kart al-moun” – a family registration card – that would serve as the only legal and political proof of their refugee status. The card allowed them to benefit from the various services UNRWA gradually set up.

In the following months, UNRWA proceeded to build tent camps, accommodating hundreds of thousands of refugees who had been sleeping out in the open air.

Little by little, it transformed what was an expanse of desert land around the historical city of Gaza into refugee camps: from Jabalia and Shati in the north, through Nuseirat, Bureij, Maghazi, and Deir el-Balah in the centre, and on to Khan Younis and Rafah in the south. It supplied each camp with schools and clinics to create a community for refugees.

My grandfather was soon enrolled in a primary school run by UNRWA. When he had children of his own – including my father – he also enrolled them in an UNRWA school.

By the time our generation came of school age, UNRWA had built and was running nearly 200 schools across the Gaza Strip. I watched as my two older sisters started school and wanted so badly to go, as well. I used to take their blue and white uniforms and put them on, as they laughed at me.

When I turned five, it was finally my turn. I was ready for pre-school. My mom took me to get the necessary vaccinations at an UNRWA clinic. I remember walking into that building – everything painted in blue and white. I remember the blue window in front of which my mother lined up, holding the “kart al-moun”.

After the vaccination, we went to buy my school uniform. It was a dress with blue and white stripes. I vividly remember my overwhelming excitement when I wore it on my first morning at Al-Daraj Co-educational School B.

From day one, the teachers distributed notebooks, pens, and bags to us, all stamped with the same blue and white logo. We had a free nutritional meal every day during the school break. Every semester, we got cash assistance distributed inside the classrooms, which helped our parents cover the cost of school materials and uniforms.

As refugees, we were not allowed to enrol in the regular schools in Gaza, but that was no loss for us. UNRWA schools provided the best primary education in the Strip. It is where I started learning English; it is where I learned how to tell the world my Palestinian story.

UNRWA became the pillar of Palestinian education. It laid the foundation for Gaza to become one of the most literate places on Earth despite being under occupation and a debilitating siege.

UNRWA also provided us with free healthcare. We got regular free checkups at its clinics, free basic lab tests, and free medication for common and chronic diseases.

We also received guaranteed food assistance. Each refugee family was given a “kapona” (a coupon) every three months that could be exchanged for flour, rice, sugar, milk, lentils, and cooking oil.

UNRWA was also a source of job security for thousands of Palestinians who were employed in its various structures.

The omnipresence of UNRWA in almost all aspects of our daily refugee lives made it inevitably an integral part of our identity. My grandparents still keep their original kart al-moun as a document of belonging and proof of their rights. We still keep in our minds the first lessons in UNRWA schools where we learned about Palestine, patriotism and love for our homeland. UNRWA, as an institution, still keeps the memory of the crime the UN perpetrated against the Palestinian people by deciding to give away our land against our will.

By virtue of its existence, this body reminds the world daily of our existence as refugees, of the moral obligation it has to address our suffering and of the inalienable right we have to return. It is hard not to see how UNRWA and the Palestinian cause are two sides of the same coin.

And that is why Israel and its allies are fighting so hard to destroy it. Their efforts to dismantle this institution are really aimed at erasing the Palestinian refugee question. They want UNRWA gone and our right to return renounced. But we will not give them up. The world must not either.

In 1948, after the Nakba, some 200,000 Palestinians poured into Gaza. Today, 78 years later, there are 2 million of us displaced Palestinians. Back then, the international community decided that it needed to create a special body to deal with the huge refugee problem. Today, that body, UNRWA, is the only one that can help deal with the displacement and dispossession of almost the entire population of the Gaza Strip.

If the international community wants to cope with the disaster that Israel’s genocidal war has left behind in Gaza, it must support UNRWA and stop efforts to dismantle it. We, the Palestinians, for our part, will continue to fight for the survival of a body that has been an essential component of our human and political existence.

July 31 (UPI) — Fourteen nations have backed the formation of a Saudi-led coalition to protect shipping routes from Houthi attacks in and around the Red Sea, drawing more countries into the Iran-U.S. war.

The kingdom’s defense ministry announced their support for the multinational defensive maritime alliance Thursday following a meeting in Riyadh attended by the defense ministers and representatives of 43 countries.

According to a statement, the alliance is aimed at “strengthening maritime security, protecting freedom of navigation, securing international trade routes and energy supply routes and safeguarding shared maritime interests in the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden.”

“The alliance is exclusively defensive in nature and does not target any state, alliance or international organization,” it said.

The statement said participation in the alliance’s activities and operations “will remain a sovereign decision” for each state, meaning any member country can opt out of specific missions.

It also identifies Saudi Arabia its founding state and the alliance’s leader and says thee kingdom will host its permanent headquarters.

A second statement added that other countries that had participated in the meeting “expressed support for the initiative and are in the process of completing the necessary domestic procedures and approvals to join the joint statement.”

The 14 countries are Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Bangladesh, Nigeria, Sudan, Djibouti and Somalia, the Saudi Press Agency reported.

The alliance was formed after the Iran-backed, Yemen-based Houthis early last week announced a maritime blockade targeting Saudi vessels traveling through the Red Sea via the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, accusing Riyadh of conducting an “unjust and oppressive siege on our people.”

The blockade threatens energy shipments that exit ports along the western side of the oil-rich nation at a time with Iran is exercising a similar blockade of commercial vessels at the Strait of Hormuz near Saudi Arabia’s eastern side.

The move is expected to further strain energy supplies, potentially causing fuel prices to surge and trigging an international energy crisis. Yemen’s Houthi forces have already claimed to have attacked Saudi oil tankers in the region for allegedly violating its maritime ban.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres toured the notorious former ‘Assad prison’ in Sednaya during the first visit by a serving UN chief to Syria since 2009. Known as the Assad regime’s flagship prison, Sednaya was dubbed Syria’s ‘slaughterhouse’ where thousands were tortured and killed.

The UN’s Guterres condemned violations of Syria’s sovereignty as he visited and called for sanctions to be lifted.

The head of the United Nations has condemned the persistent violation of Syria’s sovereignty, as Israel’s forces reportedly carried out new incursions into its neighbour’s territory.

Israeli soldiers advanced towards villages in southwestern Syria on Sunday, setting up a checkpoint at Al-Ardah, while shelling was also heard nearby, Syria’s state news agency SANA reported. Leaflets were dropped warning residents against attempting to obstruct the advance of Israeli vehicles.

The incursion came as United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, on a visit to Syria, condemned Israel’s violations.

“Syria’s sovereignty, independence, unity & territorial integrity must be fully respected,” he wrote in a social media post. “Violations by Israel of the 1974 Disengagement of Forces Agreement are unacceptable & must stop.”

Speaking at a press conference on Sunday, he said that the UN is set to submit a comprehensive report to the UN Security Council on the issue at the end of the month.

‘Security zone’

Israel has conducted increasingly regular incursions into Syrian territory since the fall of the regime of ousted President Bashar al-Assad in December 2024.

In the immediate aftermath, it seized control of the UN-controlled buffer zone separating the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights from the rest of Syria, saying the 1974 disengagement agreement with Syria had collapsed.

Since then, Israel has carried out regular attacks, raids and searches, and established military checkpoints further within Syria.

Israeli officials say they intend to remain in southern Syria, in what they call a “security zone”.

Syria’s Foreign Minister Asaad Hassan al-Shaibani called for Israel’s withdrawal from the buffer zone on Saturday, saying its continued military operations and occupation are a “direct threat to the security of the region”.

In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera’s Al Muqabala, Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa said Damascus was working to reach a security agreement with Israel, involving a group of countries.

“If the security agreement with Israel succeeds, it will pave the way for comprehensive peace without conceding Syria’s right to the occupied Golan [Heights],” he said.

He said that Syria has “no interest” in entering a confrontation with Israel.

Guterres’s visit to Syria is the first by a UN chief to the country since 2009. He is expected to visit the UN Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), which has been deployed to the buffer zone since 1974.

On Sunday, he described the country as being at a “moment of opportunity” to recover from its 13-year war, and build a more stable, inclusive and prosperous future.

The UN chief urged the removal of all sanctions imposed on the country during the era of al-Assad, who was deposed by forces led by al-Sharaa in 2024 after over a decade of civil war.

“I welcome steps that have eased sanctions, and opening new possibilities for economic recovery, but all these sanctions must be removed immediately,” Guterres said.

Western countries including the United States have begun lifting economic sanctions, but investors remain cautious. The World Bank has estimated the country’s post-war reconstruction could cost $216bn.

“The United Nations stands with the people of Syria at this pivotal moment. And I came carrying the strongest possible appeal to the international community, an appeal to spare no effort to support the Syrian people and to support the Syrian government,” Guterres said.

EXPLAINER

The UN General Assembly voted 144-10 to grant Turk a new four-year term, despite objections from the US, Israel and Russia.

Volker Turk has been elected as United Nations human rights chief for another four-year term, despite strong objections from the United States, Russia and Israel.

The United Nations General Assembly vote on Friday means Turk, who has served in the role since 2022, will become the first person to serve two full terms as the UN rights chief since the position was created in 1993.

Who is Turk and why has his reappointment caused controversy?

Who is Volker Turk?

Turk, an Austrian lawyer, joined the United Nations in 1999 and went on to work in the organisation’s refugee agency. This included posts in Malaysia, Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

He later worked in senior roles at UN headquarters in New York, including as assistant secretary-general for strategic coordination under UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. The two are believed to have a close relationship.

In his role as UN rights chief, Turk has been highly critical of both Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He has also been vocal on conflicts and rights abuses in Afghanistan, Sudan, Bangladesh, Myanmar and Nicaragua.

How was he reappointed?

The UN General Assembly overwhelmingly backed a proposal by Guterres to give Turk another four-year term with 144 votes in favour, 10 against and 13 abstentions.

Earlier, the assembly shot down a US proposal to delay the vote until the end of next week as well as a Russian bid to extend Turk’s term until the end of the year only.

How has Turk angered the US, Russia and Israel?

The role of UN human rights chief is inherently controversial because it requires public criticism of governments of UN members for alleged rights violations.

Turk’s outspoken criticism of policies in Israel, Russia and the US has put him at odds with all three countries.

Turk has repeatedly criticised Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, its deadly assault on Lebanon, and a “shameful” lack of accountability for its rights abuses in the occupied Palestinian territory.

Turk has also described Russia’s war in Ukraine as “senseless” and a “blatant affront to the UN Charter and the whole body of international law”.

On the US, he has raised concerns about the war on Iran and the “dehumanisation” of immigrants under President Donald Trump, citing routine “abuse and denigration of migrants and refugees”.

Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs criticised Turk’s record, saying that under his leadership the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has “erased the atrocities of October 7, misused funds, and betrayed UN neutrality in favor of corrupt political radicalism”.

Russia’s ⁠Deputy Ambassador to the UN Dmitry Chumakov accused Turk of bias and making unfounded allegations against Russia.

What objections were raised to Turk’s reappointment?

Guterres, whose own term is due to end at the end of this year, has faced criticism for how he managed the reappointment. Critics say the vote was rushed and the selection of a rights chief should have been left to his successor.

The UN secretary-general, whose term expires in December, sent letters to regional groups at the UN earlier this month informing them of his intention to reappoint Turk, and held the vote just weeks later.

The US Department of State criticised the vote for being rushed and said it was “another example of the UN’s inherent corruption and incompetence”.

The US also accused Turk of turning “a blind eye to real atrocities and instead pursued a radical ideological agenda”. US Deputy Ambassador Jeff Bartos claimed before Friday’s vote that reappointing Turk would prove that the General Assembly “is dysfunctional”.

Israel’s Foreign Ministry called Guterres’s push for a second term for Turk a “moral failure,” saying that the choice should be left to his successor.

UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric said Guterres had followed UN rules and engaged “in a very transparent manner” in appointing Turk, including by holding prior consultations with member states and regional groups.

What other criticism has Turk faced?

Turk’s critics say he could have done more to publicly follow up on a report issued by his predecessor, former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, that said China’s detention of Uighurs and other mostly Muslim ethnic groups in Xinjiang may amount to crimes against humanity.

Turk also has stopped short of joining independent UN rights experts who have accused Israel of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza.

Turk’s office said he had used both private engagement with Beijing and his public advocacy to support human rights in China.

Austrian lawyer Volker Turk set to become first UN rights chief to complete two four-year terms since post was created.

Volkur Turk, the outspoken United Nations human rights chief who has been a vocal critic of Israel’s actions in Gaza and across the wider region, has won a vote to serve a second term in his role.

UN member states voted 144-10, with 13 abstentions, on Friday to keep Turk in his post as UN human rights chief. His term was set to expire on October 11, but he will now serve for an additional four years.

If he finishes his second term, he will be the first UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to do so since the post was created in 1993. The United States, Israel, Russia, North Korea and six others opposed his re-election.

Turk said he was “deeply grateful” to be re-elected.

“Human rights are the antidote to today’s turbulence and defeatism. I will give my all for the rights of everyone, everywhere,” he wrote in a social media post.

The rights chief has angered many in Israel by criticising the country’s genocidal war on Gaza, its attacks on Lebanon, and the “shameful” lack of accountability for rights abuses in the occupied Palestinian territory.

A lawyer by training, Turk has spent almost his career working in the UN, including posts in the UNHCR, the UN’s dedicated body for refugees.

He has repeatedly urged Israel to comply with international humanitarian law, and said the state is accountable for any violations of human rights that it commits.

The European Union’s delegation at the UN welcomed Turk’s reappointment, saying it looks forward to working with his office to “promote and protect human rights worldwide”.

US and Israeli criticism

Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs had criticised Turk’s record, saying that under his leadership the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has “erased the atrocities of October 7, misused funds, and betrayed UN neutrality in favor of corrupt political radicalism”.

Israel has been accused by leading rights groups and UN experts of rampant rights abuses, including carrying out a genocide in Gaza.

Jeff Bartos, the US representative for UN Management and Reform, said that the UN human rights system has been losing credibility for decades, that Turk “led it to its deathbed” as Friday’s vote “kicked the bucket”.

The US has been Israel’s top ally and weapons provider.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres faced criticism for how he managed the vote on Turk’s second term.

Guterres, whose term expires in December, sent letters to regional groups at the UN earlier this month informing them of his intention to reappoint Turk, and held the vote just weeks later.

The US Department of State called the rushed vote “another example of the UN’s inherent corruption and incompetence”, saying Turk “turned a blind eye to real atrocities and instead pursued a radical ideological agenda.”

The Court of Arbitration for Sport has set a date for a hearing over Senegal’s appeal against being stripped of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations title.

Hosts Morocco were declared the tournament winners after the Confederation of African Football (Caf) overturned the result of the final in January, which Senegal won 1-0.

The Senegalese players walked off the field after Morocco were awarded a stoppage-time penalty with the match goalless.

Following a delay of about 17 minutes, the players returned and Brahim Diaz’s penalty was saved before Senegal’s Pape Gueye scored an extra-time winner.

Senegal lodged their appeal with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) on 25 March, seeking to set aside Caf’s decision and reinstate them as tournament winners.

Caf deemed that Senegal had forfeited the final and awarded Morocco a 3-0 victory.

Caf and the Royal Moroccan Football Federation (FRMF) did not agree to expedite the procedure so there will now be a hearing on 8 October.

According to a Cas statement, that follows the standard timeline.

Caf and the FRMF did not request that the hearing is made public so it will take place behind closed doors at the Cas headquarters in Lausanne, Switzerland.

Cas cannot state when a final decision will be announced but it will not be on the day of the hearing.

Ben Earl has called for a change to the Nations Championship format after England’s “brutal” schedule in the summer leg of the inaugural competition.

England had to play three Tests in three different continents on successive weekends and accumulated 25,000 miles of travel.

Victory over Argentina on Saturday keeps Steve Borthwick’s team in the hunt for a place in the final on 29 November at Twickenham’s Allianz Stadium.

However, four long haul and four short haul flights in the past four weeks have contributed to players losing sleep and a reduced training schedule.

“It’s been brutal, there’s no two ways about it,” England number 8 Earl said.

“We’ve been speaking about it – why would we not all be playing in one country? So you just don’t travel, you go to one nation and have that festival feel.

“I’m not paid to make those decisions but it has been tough. It’s been tough coming at the end of what’s been quite a long season anyway for most of us.

“It’s been back and forth, coming back to England, seeing your families and then going away again.

“It has seemed a bit weird but it’s just something we’re going to have to get used to because I think it’s just the beginning.”

The competition resumes later in the year for the autumn leg with England next in action against Australia on 8 November.

Wales finished a first season under Tandy with a record of three wins, against Japan, Italy and Fiji, from 12 Tests.

They are 11th in the world rankings – bizarrely moving up a place courtesy of the Azzurri’s heavy loss in Australia – as they count down to next year’s World Cup, when they face England, Tonga and Zimbabwe in the group stages.

“The squad has developed, particularly with our performances against Scotland and Ireland during the Six Nations, and then the win over Italy,” said Morgan.

“We were pleased with the victory over Fiji at the start of the summer as well because we know how difficult they are to beat.

“We just have to keep developing and we’ve been doing that as a squad. There are still plenty of lessons to learn, but the more we play together, the more experience we gain and the more we can improve.”

Morgan, who is now officially a Gloucester player after his summer move from Ospreys, missed eight Tests after suffering a shoulder injury against Argentina in Tandy’s first game.

The British and Irish Lions flanker says that Wales are leaving no stone unturned in their bid to close the gap as quickly as possible.

“We’re a very close group and everyone wants to get better,” said Morgan, who was captain for Tandy’s first game.

“I’m proud of the effort they’ve put in, not just over these last three weeks but throughout the whole season.

“It’s clear that everyone wants to learn, improve and continue developing together as a squad.”

Wales play four Nations Championship fixtures in November against Japan, New Zealand and Australia in Cardiff before facing another southern hemisphere opponent at finals weekend in Twickenham.

After the South Africa game, Rassie Erasmus said Scotland were a top-three nation in the world, presumably behind his own side and France.

With Rassie you never know what sort of agenda might lie behind his public comments – there’s usually something – but it was an eyebrow-raiser nonetheless.

In the wake of Fiji, Schoeman – two tries this summer – went down a similar road when asked if he felt Scotland were closing the gap on the world’s best sides.

“No, I don’t feel we’re closing the gap,” he added. “I feel we are a top-three, top-five team in the world. We’ve proven that – Argentina away, France, England, we play [and beat] the top dogs.

“South Africa, Ireland, All Blacks, we haven’t had too much love there. That’s maybe the games we want to target, to go against the best. Just to go full toe-to-toe with them for a full 80-minute performance.”

Top three is a big stretch, but there are moments in games when you think Scotland have it within them to lay the ghosts of Ireland and New Zealand to rest.

They’ll get a crack at the Kiwis in the autumn and will play Ireland in the spring, both at Murrayfield.

As much as the Nations Championship has been a try-laden fun-fest, the real battle and barometer of progress remains the Six Nations.

Scotland are trending in the right direction but summer and autumn have always been an unreliable guide to their true worth.

Enjoy the quality of some of their rugby over the last three weeks, but put it in context, too. The Six Nations and World Cup remain where it’s at.

Argentina wore replicas of the country’s 1986 Fifa World Cup kit for their match against England at rugby union’s Nations Championship.

Argentina wore the dark blue kit during their 2-1 quarter-final victory over England at the tournament – which they later won – in a match made famous by Diego Maradona’s ‘Hand of God’ goal, before he scored a brilliant second.

Argentina’s rugby side, known as the Pumas, usually wear the country’s traditional white and light blue striped sporting kit.

“Memories that span generations and remain alive in the collective memory. Today that legacy dresses up again,” Los Pumas posted on X.

The sporting rivalry between the two countries was fuelled last week as Argentina came from behind in dramatic fashion to beat the Three Lions 2-1 and reach the 2026 World Cup final.

Following the match, Argentina players held up a banner reading ‘Las Malvinas son Argentinas’, which translates as ‘The Falklands are Argentine’.

Fifa is deciding whether to punish Argentina for the banner that references the Falkland Islands – a British overseas territory in the south west Atlantic Ocean that remains the subject of a sovereignty dispute between the UK and Argentina.

Before the Nations Championship match against Argentina, England switched hotels in Buenos Aires to avoid their return home being wrecked by World Cup celebrations should Argentina’s football team beat Spain in Sunday’s final.

The Nations Championship match is taking place at the Estadio Unico Madre de Ciudades in Santiago del Estero, with Steve Borthwick’s side aiming for their sixth successive win over Argentina.

Last weekend, England thrashed Fiji 73-8 to end a five-match losing run while Argentina beat Wales 35-21 last weekend after losing 47-38 to Scotland in their Nations opener.

South Africa: Fassi; Williams, Kriel, de Allende, Arendse; Moyo, Reinach; Steenekamp, Marx, Sadie, C Wiese, van Heerden, de Villiers, PS du Toit (capt), J Wiese

Replacements: Venter, Wessels, Louw, Dixon, van Staden, Jantjies, Libbok, Willemse.

Wales: Murray; Rees-Zammit, Llewellyn, B Thomas, Mee; Edwards, Tomos Williams; Carre, Lake (capt), D Lewis, Teddy Williams, Beard, Mann, J Morgan, Wainwright

Replacements: Elias, N Smith, Warren, F Thomas, Reffell, Botham, Morgan-Williams, Hawkins.

Yellow card: Warren 65

Referee: Andrew Brace (IRFU)

Assistant Referees: Pierre Brousset (FFR) & James Doleman (NZRFU)

TMO: Olly Hodges (IRFU)

FPRO: Richard Kelly (NZRFU)

Kashmir clashes have killed 31 since June, leading UN rights chief Volker Turk to appeal for calm

The United Nations human rights chief has called for an independent investigation into deadly unrest in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.

On Friday, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, urged Islamabad to launch “prompt, thorough and impartial investigations” into all civilian and security force deaths. At least 31 people have been killed in clashes since last month, in the run-up to regional elections at the end of this month.

The unrest has involved the Jammu Kashmir Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC), an umbrella group of traders and activists.

While the movement initially formed to protest against rising food prices and utility tariffs, the current flashpoint centres on a legal dispute over legislative seats reserved for Kashmiri refugees. The JAAC demands the abolition of those seats, arguing they allow non-residents to alter local political outcomes.

UN officials expressed alarm over Pakistan’s decision to classify the JAAC as a proscribed “terrorist” organisation under domestic anti-terrorism laws.

The global body warned that utilising anti-terror mechanisms to criminalise peaceful assembly and enforce widespread internet blackouts raises severe freedom of association concerns.

The crisis has amplified the long-running diplomatic feud between nuclear-armed neighbours India and Pakistan, which have both claimed the disputed Himalayan territory in full since their independence in 1947.

According to the Pakistani newspaper Dawn, the crisis hit a deadly new peak on July 14 during intense clashes in the Poonch division, where security forces attempted to clear roadblocks ahead of a planned JAAC “long march” to Muzaffarabad. The escalation resulted in nine deaths – seven civil activists and two law enforcement officers.

Defending the state actions during the violence, Poonch Divisional Commissioner Waheed Khan told Reuters that protesters had blocked a security convoy and attacked officials. “Police and security officials responded in self-defence.”

In New Delhi, the Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said in an official statement released on Wednesday that the unrest was a “direct consequence of Pakistan’s decades-long systemic exploitation” of the region.

Turk has appealed for immediate calm, pushing for “meaningful and inclusive political dialogue” over security-led measures to defuse deep-seated grievances regarding regional autonomy and inflation.

Khartoum, Sudan – A senior Sudanese minister says more than three years of a devastating war in the country have “profoundly reshaped” its demographic makeup.

Minister of Human Resources and Social Development Mutasim Ahmed Saleh told Al Jazeera Arabic that his ministry was working with several partners to strengthen population policies and link them to social protection programmes.

Sudan has been embroiled in a brutal civil war between its army and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) paramilitary since April 2023. The war is estimated to have killed about 200,000 people and displaced more than 11 million, creating what the United Nations calls the world’s largest humanitarian crisis.

The war has also affected Sudan’s demographics.

Before the war, the North African country’s population was expected to exceed 64 million by 2035, according to official data. In 2020, the population stood at about 44.4 million, with forecasts of a growth rate of about 2.39 percent – one of the highest rates globally.

The war has not only displaced millions of people internally in South Darfur, North Darfur and Central Darfur states, it has also forced tens of thousands of others to seek asylum in neighbouring countries, including Egypt, South Sudan and Chad.

Saleh said the most significant demographic changes caused by the war included a general increase in poverty levels, a large segment of citizens losing their income, the deterioration of basic services in a number of areas, and a decline in the labour market and human capital.

To mark World Population Day on July 11, the minister said his government would work for the people – “the focus and ultimate aim of the state’s attention” – and strengthen social protection programmes.

Saleh said his ministry, through the National Population Council and with other state partners, would strengthen Sudan’s population policies and link them to social protection, the voluntary return of refugees, the reintegration of displaced people, and human resource development to contribute to rebuilding the country’s human capital as the “cornerstone of national recovery and sustainable development”.

He said that investing in people was “the real investment in Sudan’s future”.

“The more we succeed in restoring population stability and empowering citizens economically and socially, the closer we come to building a more stable, just and prosperous homeland,” Saleh said.

Population imbalance

Experts say Sudan is distinct in its demographic structure – it has a large youth population, with about 70 percent of the population under the age of 30, according to data from the last census conducted in 2008.

They say that its large youth population gives Sudan a demographic dividend that could drive economic development. But Saleh’s ministry said young people have faced challenges such as limited access to education, scarce job opportunities and widespread poverty, even before the conflict turned them into one of the worst-affected groups.

Khalid Saad, director of the Sudanese Center for Development Communication, told Al Jazeera that Sudan’s population crisis did not begin with the war.

Despite the country’s vast territory and abundant natural resources, it has suffered for decades from a clear imbalance in population distribution, he said.

“The war came to deepen this imbalance, redraw the demographic map through displacement and asylum, empty some areas of their populations, burden other cities with numbers beyond their capacity to absorb, while large numbers of people have returned to areas retaken by government forces,” he said.

Saad said the likely return of people does not mean the end of the demographic crisis, because returnees often go back to areas that have lost a large part of their economic infrastructure.

“The challenge therefore remains in rebuilding an environment that ensures their stability and prevents renewed displacement,” he said.

The war, Saad added, raises questions that still require precise answers: the actual scale of human losses; how the war has affected mortality rates; how it has changed patterns of marriage and childbearing; the impact of displacement and migration on birth rates and age structure; and how the emigration of skilled professionals will affect the size of the workforce in coming years.

Answers to these questions form the basis for any economic or social planning in the post-war phase, he said.

Data released by the National Population Council also points to a demographic imbalance.

Sudan’s urban population rose to about 17.9 million in 2020, with Khartoum alone accounting for about 42 percent of the country’s urban population, indicating a pattern of internal migration driven by uneven development.

The International Organization for Migration said that about 4.1 million people have returned to their areas of origin across Sudan. The vast majority — more than 80 percent — returned from within Sudan to nine states, led by Khartoum, Gezira and Sennar.

According to the organisation, the number of internally displaced people has fallen by 23 percent compared with the highest level recorded in January 2025, when the number of people displaced within Sudan stood at nearly 12 million.

Sudan has entered its fourth year of conflict amid a complex political and military landscape, with little hope of a resolution. Infrastructure has collapsed, and essential services remain disrupted.

Meanwhile, local and international warnings are mounting over a worsening humanitarian crisis, driven by shortages of food and medicines, and the difficulty of delivering aid to affected or besieged areas.

WASHINGTON — The world has largely viewed the U.S. more favorably than China for years, but those opinions have flipped in Beijing’s favor this year, according to a new poll by the Pew Research Center, a remarkable shift driven in part by tensions between the Trump administration and U.S. allies.

More people have favorable views of China than the U.S. in 25 out of the 36 countries and territories that were surveyed, including Canada and Mexico. The poll was conducted from February to May, a period when the United States and Israel launched a war against Iran.

In only six countries do people still see the U.S. more positively than China, according to the findings released Wednesday.

Views in 22 out of the 36 countries and territories also are more favorable of Chinese leader Xi Jinping than President Trump, including in Canada, Mexico and major European powers including France, Germany and the U.K. However, people in many of the countries have low confidence in both men.

It marks the first time in the roughly 20 years Pew has been tracking global opinions that China has been viewed more positively than the U.S., said Laura Silver, associate director of Pew’s Global Attitudes Research and one of the researchers on the study. Views of Beijing and Washington have been very similar at some points in the past but have not been significantly more favorable for China until now, she said.

The shift follows the COVID-19 pandemic becoming a distant issue and as global views of the U.S. have soured, Silver said.

“There was just an actual relationship between the outbreak of the war and the sense that the U.S. is just not contributing to peace and stability and that people have less confidence in Donald Trump,” she said.

Trump’s demands to control Greenland, the American military raid that captured Venezuela’s then-leader Nicolás Maduro, and the U.S. handling of the Israeli-Hamas war in Gaza also have led to low approval in many countries, Silver said.

“The U.S. has done a lot in terms of global engagement in recent months to years that is not being perceived positively internationally,” she said.

Aside from benefiting from the fading memory of the pandemic, China appears to have gained from comparison with the U.S., Silver said.

“By comparison, we know that China is seen to be a more reliable partner in many places. It’s more likely to be seen to contribute to global peace and stability,” the researcher said.

Notably, those in some U.S. allied countries have drastically shifted their views in recent years, such as Canada. In the new survey, only 33% of Canadians have positive views of the U.S., down from 57% in 2023. Over the same period, their favorable opinions of China rose from 14% to 44%.

Trump slapped a barrage of tariffs on Canadian goods last year, and even claimed that Canada could be the “the 51st state.”

Major European countries — including France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands and Italy — all have switched their opinions toward the world’s two largest economies.

People in the U.K., where about 6 in 10 held positive views of the U.S. in 2023, now view China and the U.S. similarly. Three years ago, the spread was 32 percentage points in Washington’s favor.

Of the six countries where people have more favorable views of the U.S., Israel leads the way. About 8 in 10 Israelis view the U.S. positively, compared with 19% for China.

The other five countries are Japan, India, South Korea, the Philippines and Poland. Still, even their views of the U.S. have dimmed over recent years.

The U.S. is still ahead of China when it comes to government respect for personal freedoms, though the gap is shrinking, the Pew report says.

While China’s standing has improved somewhat, the narrowed divide is “driven largely by the fact that people in nearly every country surveyed have become less likely to say the U.S. government respects its people’s personal freedoms” since 2021, when Pew last asked the question.

For the new study, Pew surveyed more than 42,000 people across 35 countries plus the West Bank and east Jerusalem, with margins of error ranging from 2.3 to 5.5 percentage points depending on the country.

Tang writes for the Associated Press. AP journalists Linley Sanders, Emily Swanson and Kevin S. Vineys contributed to this report.

Fit-again wing Robert Baloucoune returns to the Ireland line-up for Saturday’s much-anticipated Nations Championship game against New Zealand in Auckland.

Baloucoune, who won the Six Nations Rising Player award after starring in Ireland’s Triple Crown campaign earlier this year, missed the wins over Australia and Japan with a hamstring issue.

Head coach Andy Farrell recalls a host of key players after fielding a heavily rotated in last week’s 36-20 victory over Japan, with the return of captain Dan Sheehan, prop Tadhg Furlong and fly-half Sam Prendergast among nine changes.

Tom O’Toole, Tadhg Beirne, James Ryan, Jack Conan, Stuart McCloskey and Jimmy O’Brien are the six players retained in the line-up.

Having beaten the Wallabies and Brave Blossoms, Ireland aim to round out the southern hemisphere leg of their Nations Championship campaign with a statement win at Eden Park (08:10 BST).

The All Blacks, who beat France and Italy in their first two games, have not lost at the Auckland venue since 1994, a run of 52 Tests.

July 14 (UPI) — New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed an executive order Tuesday putting a moratorium on building large data centers for one year.

Hochul, a Democrat, signed the executive order pausing environmental permits and said that the delay would give the state legislature time to create new laws that protect the electrical grid, environment and communities.

The order is the first statewide ban in the United States.

“As data center development threatens to hike up utility bills, deplete our natural resources, and create uncertainty for New Yorkers, it’s my responsibility to take action and lead,” Hochul said in a statement. “New York will lead the way in creating the strongest standards in the nation for data center development, ensuring that when companies succeed because of New York, New Yorkers succeed, too.”

The order will temporarily block the state from approving permits for data centers that use 50 or more megawatts of power. During that time, the state will create a regulatory framework for assessing how the projects affect the environment.

The ban won’t delay projects that already have the needed permits.

Hochul also called on lawmakers Tuesday to repeal sales tax exemptions for data centers.

New York has fewer data centers than some other states, such as Texas and Virginia. But some projects have sparked local battles around the state.

Though states once courted the artificial intelligence companies’ investment, sentiment has since soured. Data centers use an enormous amount of electricity and are adding a huge burden to the electrical grid.

A May Gallup poll showed that more Americans would rather live near a nuclear power plant than a data center.

In Monterey Park, Calif., voters recently blocked data center construction permanently. But in April, Maine Gov. Janet Mills vetoed legislation that blocked construction of data centers because she said it could block a project in a town that supported a local data center.

The Seminole Nation passed a complete moratorium that bans development on its tribal land.

Hochul’s team didn’t say how many proposed data centers the moratorium would affect, but Cleanview lists 25 proposed facilities in the state, and a planned 300-megawatt facility near Ithaca has seen protests and backlash from locals, The Washington Post reported.

Lawmakers in New York recently passed a bill that called for a one-year moratorium but Hochul’s action allows the governor to move quickly while she reviews the legislation, the office said.

“This is an important victory for the thousands of New Yorkers who demanded that their government take action to put a pause on hyperscale data centers,” said Mitch Jones, managing director for policy and litigation at environmental group Food & Water Watch.