rejects

FIFA rejects Iran’s request to move World Cup matches from US to Mexico | World Cup 2026 News

The 2026 World Cup matches will be played as per schedule announced last year, the football organisation says.

The world’s top football organisation, FIFA, has said the 2026 World Cup matches will take place per the schedule announced last year, shutting down Iran’s hopes of having its matches moved from the United States to Mexico due to the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran.

“FIFA is in regular contact with all participating member associations, including Iran, to discuss planning for the FIFA World Cup 2026,” the organisation’s statement said. “FIFA is looking forward to all participating teams competing as per the match schedule announced on 6 December 2025.”

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Following the outbreak of the war on February 28, Iran’s participation in the games has been cast in doubt.

Last week, US President Donald Trump said Iran was welcome to come to his country for its matches, but added: “I really don’t believe it is appropriate that they be there, for their own life and safety.”

In response to Trump’s comments, Iran’s football team said in a post on social media that “no one can exclude Iran’s national team from the World Cup”.

More recently, on Monday, Iranian football chief Mehdi Taj said on social media that “when Trump has explicitly stated that he cannot ensure the security of the Iranian national team, we will certainly not travel to America”.

“We are currently negotiating with FIFA to hold Iran’s matches in the World Cup in Mexico,” Taj said.

Iran’s Ambassador to Mexico Abolfazl Pasandideh also condemned on Monday Washington’s “lack of cooperation regarding visa issuance and the provisions of logistical support” for the Iranian delegation.

The 2026 World Cup is set to be played in three countries for the first time ever: the US, Mexico and Canada.

The first game is scheduled for June 11, and will be played between South Africa and Mexico.

But when asked if Mexico could host Iran’s games, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said on Tuesday that the country was prepared to host its first-round matches.

“Mexico maintains diplomatic relations with every country in the world, therefore, we will wait to see what FIFA decides,” Sheinbaum said.

Iran was the second Asian team, after Japan, to qualify for the World Cup, securing its place almost a year ago after topping its qualifying group.

They are currently scheduled to play New Zealand and Belgium in Los Angeles, and Egypt in Seattle.

Source link

UK court rejects bid to reinstate ‘terrorism’ charge against Kneecap rapper | Courts News

Irish rapper Liam O’Hanna welcomes ruling in case he says was ‘never about any threat to the public, never about terrorism’.

British prosecutors have lost an appeal seeking to reinstate a “terrorism” charge against a member of Irish rap group Kneecap accused of waving a Hezbollah flag during a gig in London.

London’s High Court on Wednesday rejected prosecutors’ attempts to challenge a lower court’s decision to throw out the case against Liam O’Hanna in September due to a technical error.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The decision means the case will not proceed. In a statement, the Crown Prosecution Service said the High Court had “clarified how the law applies” to such cases and that it accepted “the judgement and will update our processes accordingly”.

O’Hanna – also known as Liam Og O hAnnaid (his name in Gaeilge, the Irish language) and by the stage name Mo Chara (“My Friend”) – was charged in May of last year with displaying a Hezbollah flag during a November 2024 concert in London, in violation of the United Kingdom’s 2000 Terrorism Act.

Kneecap’s members –  who rap in Gaeilge and English and have been outspoken in their condemnation of Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip – have called the attempted prosecution a “British state witch-hunt”.

BELFAST, NORTHERN IRELAND - MARCH 11: Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, aka Mo Chara, of the band Kneecap speaks during a press conference following a High Court ruling which upheld the decision to drop the terrorism case against him on March 11, 2026 in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Irish language hip-hop group Kneecap called on supporters to attend the press conference in Belfast on Wednesday as the High Court in London ruled on the Crown Prosecution Service's (CPS) appeal on an earlier decision to throw out terror charges against rapper Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh. Ó hAnnaidh, who performs with Kneecap under the stage name Mo Chara, was charged with a terror offence after allegedly displaying a flag in support of Hezbollah at a gig at the O2 Forum in Kentish Town in November 2024. The charge was dropped on a technicality in September 2025, which the CPS has appealed. (Photo by Charles McQuillan/Getty Images)
Liam O’Hanna (Liam Og O hAnnaid) welcomed the ruling during a news conference in Belfast, Northern Ireland [Charles McQuillan/Getty Images]

O’Hanna welcomed the ruling on Wednesday, saying during a news conference in Belfast that the case was “never about me, never about any threat to the public and never about terrorism”.

“It was always about Palestine, about what happens if you dare to speak up, about what happens if you can reach large groups of people and expose their hypocrisy, about the lengths Britain will go to cover up Israeli and US war crimes,” he said.

Cheered by supporters at the event, O’Hanna was joined by Kneecap bandmates JJ O Dochartaigh and Naoise O Caireallain – better known by their respective stage names, DJ Provai and Moglai Bap.

“Your own High Court ruled against you,” O’Hanna added, addressing the UK government.

“The pathetic thing about this whole process is that you falsely tried to label me a terrorist when it is the British government ministers that are arming and assisting a genocide in Gaza, the destruction of Lebanon, and the senseless slaughter of schoolkids in Iran.”

Source link

ICC rejects bias claims from stranded South Africa, West Indies cricketers | ICC Men’s T20 World Cup News

Frustrated players say they were left in the dark for days over their travel while England flew out within two days.

Cricket’s governing body has rejected suggestions of unequal treatment after the West Indies and South Africa squads were stranded in India for more than a week following their exit from the T20 World Cup, while England flew out in less than two days.

The International Cricket Council (ICC) has been accused of giving preferential treatment to one team over the other two amid the travel chaos resulting from airspace closures and rerouted flights because of the war in the Middle East.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

However, the ICC said on Wednesday it “rejects any suggestion that these decisions have been driven by anything other than safety, feasibility and welfare”.

“We understand that players, coaches, support staff and their families who have completed their ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2026 campaigns are anxious to return home,” it said in a statement.

Cricket West Indies said on Tuesday its squad had waited nine days for a charter flight that was “repeatedly delayed”, calling the uncertainty “increasingly distressing”.

West Indies ‌players were leaving India on commercial flights in batches 10 days after their scheduled departure, which led to frustrated players airing their thoughts in social media posts.

The ICC said nine West Indies players and staff members were already travelling to the Caribbean, with the remaining 16 booked on flights departing India within 24 hours.

Indian media reported that a charter flight for the West Indies and South ⁠Africa Twenty20 World Cup teams scheduled to fly to Johannesburg before continuing on to Antigua was cancelled earlier on Tuesday.

Meanwhile, South Africa, who have been stranded in ⁠India since March 4, will begin to fly home on Wednesday, with the entire contingent ⁠departing in the next 36 hours, the ICC said.

England flew home ‌less than two days after being beaten in the semifinals, prompting criticism of the ICC from the South African and West Indian camps.

Darren Sammy, head coach of West Indies, began venting his frustration on social media on the fifth day since his team’s exit from the T20 World Cup.

“I just wanna go home,” he wrote on X, followed by another tweet requesting an update after being left in the dark for five days.

Three days after South Africa were knocked out, in the first semifinal, their players Quinton De Kock and David Miller said the team had heard nothing from the ICC regarding their departure while England, who were eliminated a day later in the second semifinal had already left.

“England are leaving before us somehow?! Strange how different teams have more pull than others,” De Kock wrote in an Instagram story.

Miller, commenting on a post announcing England’s departure, said: “It doesn’t take the ICC long to organise England charter. WI have been waiting for 7 days for a charter and SA coming on 4 days now. And yet we still wait.”

The ICC said the criticism was “incorrect” and that there was no comparison between arrangements for South Africa and the West Indies and those made for England, “which arose from separate circumstances, routing options and different travel conditions”.

“Throughout this period, the ICC’s overriding ⁠priority has been the safety and welfare of everyone affected,” the sport’s global governing body said.

“We will not move people until we are satisfied that the travel ‌solution in place is safe, and that commitment will not change.”

Source link

T20 World Cup: ICC rejects claims of “bias” over travel issues caused by Iran war

Windies coach Daren Sammy has been vocal on social media throughout the issue. On Thursday he posted “I just wanna go home”. “At least an update, tell us something,” he also said.

After England’s departure was confirmed, South Africa batter Quinton de Kock said “Funny, we have heard nothing! Strange how different teams have more pull than others.”

West Indies, South Africa and England were all scheduled to depart India via the Gulf – a situation made difficult by the Iran war and subsequent air strikes across the region.

England departed via Egypt on Saturday. West Indies and South Africa will finally travel together on a chartered plane on Monday.

“The safety and well-being of players, support staff, officials, and our own workforce remain our absolute priority as we respond to the evolving situation affecting air travel across parts of the Middle East,” the ICC said.

“The current disruption to multiple airspaces has created a highly complex and fast-moving logistical challenge.

“For instance, the England team and their staff were able to fly out from Mumbai without restriction due to the route’s airspace being unaffected and flights operating as usual.

“The ICC categorically refutes any claims of bias in this or other instances, and has been fully accommodating of specific demands and conditions put forth by teams.

“The ICC’s logistics and events teams have been working continuously with governments, aviation authorities, airlines and charter providers to secure safe travel options for all participating teams and tournament personnel.

“Furthermore, they and the ICC chief executive have maintained regular dialogue with the members’ representative ICC directors, board chairs and CEOs to assure all involved of their teams’ safety and the impact of the rapidly-changing situation.”

Source link

Senate rejects resolution to limit hostilities in Iran

Senate Republicans blocked a war powers resolution Wednesday designed to withdraw U.S. forces from hostilities in Iran, as the Trump administration accelerates its military campaign in a conflict that has killed hundreds, including at least six American service members.

The motion failed in a vote of 47-53.

In addition to pulling out military resources from the Middle East, the measure — introduced by Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Tim Kaine (D-Va.) — would have required Congress’ explicit approval before future engagement with Iran, a power granted to the legislative branch in the Constitution.

The House, where Republicans also hold an advantage, is scheduled to weigh in on a similar measure Thursday. Even if both Democratic-led measures were to succeed, President Trump was widely expected to veto the legislation.

“We are doing very well on the war front, to put it mildly,” President Trump said at a White House event on Wednesday afternoon. The president, who has come under scrutiny for offering shifting explanations on the war’s endgame, said that if he was asked to scale the American military operation from one to 10, he would rate it a 15.

Democrats dispute that Trump possesses the authority to wage the ongoing operation in Iran without explicit congressional approval.

Acknowledging the measure was unlikely to succeed, they framed the vote as a strategy to force lawmakers to put their support for or opposition to the war on record.

“Today every senator — every single one — will pick a side,” Schumer said. “Do you stand with the American people who are exhausted with forever wars in the Middle East, or stand with Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth as they bumble us headfirst into another war?”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and most of his Republican colleagues have maintained that the president carried out a “pre-emptive” and “defensive” strike in Iran, giving him full authority to continue unilateral military operations.

Republicans saw the vote as the “last roadblock” stopping Trump from carrying out his mission against the Islamic Republic.

“I think the president has the authority that he needs to conduct the activities and operations that are currently underway there. There are a lot of controversy and questions around the war powers act, but I think the president is acting in the best interest of the nation and our national security interests,” Thune said at a news conference.

Senators largely held to party loyalties, with the exception of Kentucky Republican Rand Paul, who broke ranks to support the measure, and Pennsylvania Democrat John Fetterman, who opposed it.

The vote comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Wednesday that the war against Iran is “accelerating,” with American and Israeli forces expanding air operations into Iranian territory. He pointed to evidence released by U.S. Central Command of a submarine strike on an Iranian warship, and also lauded other strikes throughout the region as civilian casualties in Iran surpassed 1,000 on the fourth day of the conflict, according to rights groups.

“We’re going to continue to do well,” Trump said Wednesday. “We have the greatest military in the world by far and that was a tremendous threat to us for many years. Forty-seven years they’ve been killing our people and killing people all over the world, and we have great support.”

Republicans blocked a similar war powers vote in January after the president ordered U.S. special forces to capture and extradite Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas on drug trafficking charges.

GOP leaders argued that the outcome of that mission equated to a quick success in the Middle East, despite an uncertain timeline from the Department of Defense.

In the House, lawmakers will vote on a separate war powers effort Thursday. That bill is led by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), the two lawmakers who authored the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

“Instead of sending billions overseas, we need to invest in jobs, healthcare, and education here,” Khanna said on X.

In addition to that proposal, moderate Democrats in the House have introduced a separate resolution that would give the administration a 30-day window to justify continued hostilities in the Middle East before requiring a formal declaration of war or authorization from Congress.

Source link

Newsom rejects ‘MAGA-manufactured outrage’ and racism allegations on book tour

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday sharply criticized “fake MAGA-manufactured outrage” over his comments about his low SAT score in Atlanta Sunday during his national book tour.

Conservative commentators, Trump loyalists and right-wing media outlets accused the California governor and potential 2028 presidential candidate of disparaging Black Americans when he was discussing his struggles with dyslexia.

“First MAGA mocked his dyslexia and now they’re calling him racist for talking about his low SAT scores,” said Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for Newsom, in a statement. “The governor has said this publicly for years — including with [the late conservative commentator] Charlie Kirk and dozens of other audiences.”

During a conversation with Atlanta Mayor Andre Dickens, who is a Black politician, Newsom was asked what he wanted the audience and readers to know about him. The governor, in a long-winded response, said he wasn’t trying to impress anyone, but “press upon you I’m like you.”

“I’m no better than you,” Newsom said. “I’m a 960 SAT guy.”

The governor continued to discuss his dyslexia and struggle to read.

Right-wing personalities pounced.

President Trump’s political operation accused Newsom of calling “black people dumb.” Former Fox News personality Megyn Kelly declared that the comment would “haunt him forever,” and Republican Sens. Tim Scott of South Carolina and Rick Scott of Florida belittled the governor. Rapper Nicki Minaj, an outspoken Trump supporter, criticized him too.

“@GavinNewsom Thinks a 960 SAT Makes Him ‘Like’ Black Americans. Let That Sink In,” Fox News commentator Sean Hannity posted on the social media platform X.

Newsom offered a profanity-laced retort to Hannity, accusing him of long ignoring President Trump’s racist remarks and social media posts, then feigning outrage at Newsom’s remarks.

“You didn’t give a shit about the President of the United States of America posting an ape video of President Obama or calling African nations shitholes — but you’re going to call me racist for talking about my lifelong struggle with dyslexia?” Newsom posted on X. “Spare me your fake fucking outrage, Sean.”

Gardon pointed out that Newsom was speaking to a mixed-race audience during the conversation with Dickens.

Dickens also rejected the allegations that Newsom was being racist.

“Take it from someone who was actually in the chair asking the questions: context matters more than a headline,” Dickens said on Instagram. “The conversation around his new book included him speaking about his own academic struggles, including not doing well on the SAT. That wasn’t an attack on anyone. It was a moment of vulnerability about his own journey.”

Sunday’s event wasn’t the first time Newsom has mentioned his SAT score. The governor has cited his performance on the test many times in conversations about his dyslexia and issues with self-esteem growing up, including during an interview with The Times about his new memoir “Young Man in a Hurry” earlier this month.

“Come on, I’m a 960 SAT guy, governor of the fourth largest economy in the world,” Newsom told The Times. “I’m a guy, you know, with sweaty hands as described in the book, you know, who can’t read a speech, and I’m governor. I’m talking to you. Come on, the whole thing is sort of fascinating.”

Newsom used the low score as an example of the grit and resilience he learned from his mother.

The governor is accustomed to sparring with Republicans on social media. Ring-wing furor over his remarks, whether justified or politically motivated, is likely to continue as he flirts with a 2028 presidential run.

“We’ve gotten so used to loud, chest-pounding politics that when someone speaks about shortcomings, people try to twist it into something else,” Dickens, said in his post on Instagram. “Let me be clear though. This is Atlanta. We don’t need anyone to tell us when to be offended. And history has shown… when we are, you’ll know.”



Source link

Court rejects appeals in ‘Hong Kong 47’ case

Defendant Lawrence Lau Wai-chung (C) arrives to the West Kowloon Magistrates’ Court in Hong Kong, China, on Monday, February 23, 2026. The court rules today on the appeals of 12 activists and politicians convicted under the national security law for participating in a 2020 primary election. Also, Lau will hear about the government of Hong Kong’s appeal of his acquittal. Photo by Leung Man Hei/EPA

Feb. 23 (UPI) — A Hong Kong court has rejected the appeals of 12 pro-democracy lawmakers and activists seeking to overturn their convictions in connection with a 2020 unofficial election primary that Beijing-aligned officials said was intended to undermine the city’s existing political system.

The dozen people are members of the so-called Hong Kong 47, who were sentenced in November 2024 to between 51 and 120 months in what is still the largest case so far brought under the city’s draconian National Security Law.

Eleven of the activists were convicted during the trial, while one pleaded guilty.

The court on Monday rejected their appeals. For some, they have already served their sentences and been released from prison.

Lawrence Lau Wai-chung, a barrister and democracy activist, had been acquitted in the case, but the government had appealed the decision. The court on Monday upheld that decision.

The defendants were charged with conspiracy to commit subversion under the National Security Law that Beijing imposed on Hong Kong in connection with their unofficial primary.

Held in July 2020 amid the fraying of democratic norms in Hong Kong, the activists used the primary to coordinate candidates and win a pro-democracy majority in the city’s legislature, which prosecutors said they planned to use to veto budget bills to force the resignation of Hong Kong’s chief executive.

The primary was held following protests that erupted in Hong Kong in 2019 against extradition that grew into a broader pro-democracy movement following allegations of excessive force used by police against the protesters.

In response to the protests, China imposed a new national security law on Hong Kong in July 2020, and police arrested dozens of pro-democracy figures on Jan. 6, 2021, with 47 charged with conspiracy to commit subversion in late February of that year.

The government accused them of seeking to use the legislature, under the guise of democracy, to threaten Hong Kong’s political system.

Their convictions were widely condemned by democratic nations, including Britain, Canada and the United States. Washington vowed to impose visa restrictions on officials responsible for their sentencing.

Source link

Greenland rejects Trump’s offer to send US hospital ship to Arctic island | Donald Trump News

US President Donald Trump writes on Truth Social that a ‘great hospital boat’ is going to Greenland as he mocks its healthcare system.

Greenland said “no thanks” to US President Donald Trump’s plan to send a hospital ship to the Arctic island after he repeatedly threatened to seize the Danish autonomous territory for “national security” reasons.

Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen said in a post on Facebook on Sunday that Trump’s proposal to send the US medical vessel had been “noted”.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

“But we have a public healthcare system where treatment is free for citizens. It is a deliberate choice,” Nielsen said, reiterating Greenland remained open to dialogue and cooperation.

“But talk to us instead of just making more or less random outbursts on social media,” he added.

The historically strong bilateral ties after World War II between NATO allies Denmark and the United States have come under severe strain in recent months as Trump ratcheted up talk of a possible US takeover of the mineral-rich and strategically located Arctic island.

Danish Defence Minister Troels Lund Poulsen told Danish broadcaster DR that the population of Greenland “receives the healthcare it needs”.

“They receive it either in Greenland or, if they require specialised treatment, they receive it in Denmark,” he said. “It’s not as if there’s a need for a special healthcare initiative in Greenland.”

On Saturday, Trump said in a post on his Truth Social account – with an AI-generated image of the US Navy vessel the USNS Mercy – that it was on its way to Greenland to treat those being medically neglected.

“We are going to send a great hospital boat to Greenland to take care of the many people who are sick, and not being taken care of there. It’s on the way!!!” Trump wrote.

Trump has repeatedly expressed his interest in the US taking control of Greenland, citing it as a way to secure US national security. However, Greenland and Europe rejected the US desire to take the Arctic island and have upheld Greenlandic sovereignty.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said she was “happy to live in a country where access to healthcare is free and equal for all”.

Greenland is a place “where insurance or wealth does not determine whether one receives dignified treatment,” she added in an apparent criticism of the US healthcare system, which is not universal.

Threats to take Greenland ebbed after Trump struck a “framework” deal with NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte in January to ensure greater US influence.

Source link

China rejects US gunboat diplomacy

China adopts a stance rejecting the US militarization of the Middle East, viewing the increasing American bases and military buildup in the region as a strategy of containment and undermining Chinese influence. Beijing seeks to achieve regional balance through counter-diplomacy, both economic and security, and sees the American escalation as a threat to global stability, prompting it to strengthen its partnerships to protect its interests in the region. The Chinese perspective on the militarization of the region is that the American strategy in the Middle East is an extension of the policy of deterrence and containment, which extends from the Pacific to broader spheres of influence. China views American bases, such as Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan, and other US military bases in Kuwait and the UAE, as an indirect tool to undermine Chinese economic and geopolitical stability. China considers the American military bases in the Middle East as instruments of hegemony and an attempt to contain and diminish its influence. Therefore, Beijing seeks to strengthen its military, diplomatic, and economic presence in the region as a strategic alternative, expanding its influence through its Belt and Road Initiative.

China adopts an approach that opposes the American military presence in the Middle East, prioritizing economic stability to serve its interests. This opposition manifests itself in several ways: supporting parallel security partnerships with Iran and Saudi Arabia, pressuring host countries like the UAE to prevent American expansion, and pursuing civil-military integration in strategic ports. The Egyptian researcher will attempt to identify and present specific examples of China’s rejection of the American military presence in the Middle East, such as China’s obstruction of the UAE’s F-35 deals. Beijing exerted pressure and raised security concerns that led to the stalling of negotiations for the UAE to acquire American F-35 fighter jets, due to Washington’s apprehension about the growing Chinese presence at the UAE’s Khalifa Port. Another example is China’s intensification of joint military exercises with Washington’s and Israel’s adversaries: China has increased its naval and air military exercises with Iran, a direct rival of the American presence in the region, thus posing a strategic challenge to American hegemony. China has also tried to secure oil routes away from Washington’s protection: China seeks to secure its oil interests through independent partnerships in the Strait of Hormuz and Gulf ports, reducing the Arab states’ need for American security protection and reinforcing Beijing’s vision of rejecting American “hegemony.” With (China’s criticism of the US “offensive strategy”): Chinese diplomacy criticizes the excessive US presence and instead calls for diplomatic solutions and “civil-military integration” through infrastructure investment, thus undermining traditional US bases. Here, China uses “soft power” and economic investments in ports, such as those in Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Iran, as tools to diminish the strategic importance of US military bases.

The Chinese perspective is that US bases are used to restrict its movement in vital maritime routes and are viewed as tools of deterrence within the context of great power competition. Therefore, China seeks to secure its economic interests by ensuring its oil and gas import routes and protecting its projects, which has led it to strengthen its military presence, including its base in Djibouti, to match its economic influence. With China offering a “developmental and security alternative”: By enhancing its influence through massive investments and security and technology partnerships, such as developing Huawei’s 5G digital infrastructure and China’s defense partnerships with Egypt, Iran, and the Gulf states, to serve as an alternative to direct military presence. Here, China seeks to achieve “absolute security” by protecting its supply chains and projects without directly engaging in managing regional crises in the American manner, preferring instead to project geoeconomic influence.

Here, China adopts a stance rejecting the US militarization of the Middle East, deeming it an “adventure” that threatens stability and pushes the region toward the brink. Beijing instead seeks to enhance its influence through diplomacy and economics, with Chinese efforts aimed at undermining the American military presence and supporting regional stability through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative. The most prominent features of China’s rejection of the US militarization of the Middle East are China’s opposition to the “militarization” of the region and China believes that US strategies based on military bases and deterrence, particularly against Iran, increase instability. (China’s focus on finding a diplomatic and economic alternative): China focuses on comprehensive economic partnerships, such as the Belt and Road Initiative, and prioritizes diplomacy to resolve conflicts, making it appear as a strategic alternative to the US “gunboat diplomacy.” The US “gunboat diplomacy” is a declared strategy of President Trump to counter Beijing’s influence in the Western Hemisphere. To counter this, China is focusing on partnerships and economic interests. From the Chinese perspective, regional stability ensures secure energy supplies and massive infrastructure investments in the region.

This coincides with China’s exploitation of the American retreat in the region. China seeks to capitalize on the relative decline in American strategic interest to act as a balancing power, without direct involvement in crisis management, but with an increasing role in maintaining regional equilibrium. Conversely, China fears that American policies will lead to its encirclement and the curtailment of its economic influence, prompting it to strengthen its military ties with certain regional actors as a form of indirect response.

Therefore, China rejects the principle of American militarization of the Middle East. China seeks to find alternatives to American hegemony by strengthening its diplomatic and economic presence, especially given the recent escalation of American military activity. Chinese military analyses indicate that the recent American military buildup, including aircraft carriers and air forces in the region, increases the likelihood of widespread regional conflicts. To that end, China promotes the concept of “common security,” directly rejecting American military involvement that puts pressure on China’s traditional allies in the region, such as Iran.

Concerned circles in Beijing view the American militarization of the Middle East as a perpetuation of a “Cold War mentality.” This is evident in China’s rejection of the ongoing military alliances established by Washington, which Beijing considers attempts to contain its rising influence and force regional states into alignment, a situation Beijing describes as “American hypocrisy.” The Chinese alternative to American militarization in the region is centered on its strategy of “development over militarization.” China seeks to market itself as a “peaceful partner” focused on development and infrastructure, capitalizing on the partial American retreat to expand its diplomatic and economic influence. Beijing adopts a policy of “cautious neutrality,” committing to “non-interference” in regional conflicts and avoiding replacing the American role as the region’s policeman militarily, preferring instead to focus on its strategic interests in the Indo-Pacific. While fully aware that the militarization of the region impacts China’s energy security, China prefers to address this through diplomacy and economic partnerships rather than direct military presence. China aims to protect its interests by deepening its economic engagement, thereby prompting a gradual US withdrawal, especially as China continues to present itself as a “responsible power” in the Global South.

Source link

PPP leader rejects Yoon break, deepens party rift

Jang Dong-hyuk, leader of the People Power Party, speaks at a press conference at the National Assembly in Seoul on Feb. 20 regarding the first-instance verdict against former President Yoon Suk-yeol. Photo by Asia Today

Feb. 20 (Asia Today) — People Power Party leader Jang Dong-hyuk rejected calls to sever ties with former President Yoon Suk-yeol on Thursday, intensifying internal divisions within South Korea’s main conservative party ahead of local elections.

At a press conference at the National Assembly, Jang said Yoon’s life sentence in a first-instance ruling does not negate the principle of presumption of innocence.

“This is still a first trial,” he said. “The presumption of innocence must apply to everyone without exception.”

Jang dismissed demands from within the party to formally break with what critics call the “Yoon Again” faction. He argued that forces seeking to distance the party from Yoon are instead fueling division.

“Division is the worst form of incompetence,” he said. “Those who exploit the president’s name for their own interests, and those who use calls for severance to split the party, are the ones we must decisively cut ties with.”

His remarks appeared aimed at the pro-Han Dong-hoon faction and a group of younger lawmakers who had urged the leadership to declare a clear break from Yoon following Wednesday’s verdict.

Rep. Lee Sung-kwon criticized Jang’s stance, saying it showed a refusal to accept the judiciary’s decision. “By shifting responsibility for unconstitutional emergency rule onto others, he cannot call himself the leader of a conservative party before the people,” Lee said.

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon also weighed in on social media, warning that politics centered on the slogan “Yoon Again” would fail to persuade centrist voters and younger generations.

Former party leader Han Dong-hoon issued a sharper rebuke, writing online that Jang was “merely a host for the Yoon faction” and calling for him to be removed to save the conservative movement.

The controversy has exposed differences within the party leadership. Floor leader Song Eon-seok said a day earlier that the party “deeply regrets” the guilty verdict against a former president it produced and apologized to the public, reaffirming that no one stands above the law.

A party official said views appear to be divided even between the party leader and the floor leader, complicating efforts to present a unified message.

With tensions rising, lawmakers are expected to convene a general meeting as early as next week to discuss the party’s direction. Observers warn that continued infighting could weigh on the party ahead of the June 3 local elections.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260220010006110

Source link

Jaylen Brown rejects Beverly Hills’ apology after event shutdown

Boston Celtics star Jaylen Brown is not satisfied with an apology he received from the city of Beverly Hills on Thursday, days after police shut down an event he was hosting in the city’s Trousdale Estates neighborhood.

The apology was not for shutting down the event. Instead, it was for including what the city called “inaccurate information” in its initial statement about the event.

Brown told ESPN’s Andscape he is considering legal action against the city after it “embarrassed my brand and my team” and then continued “to tell untruths in [its] apology statement.”

The promotional event for Brown’s performance brand, 741, was held last weekend at the home of Oakley founder Jim Jannard on the eve of the NBA All-Star Game at Intuit Dome. It was scheduled to include a panel discussion featuring National Basketball Players Assn. president Andre Iguodala followed by an after-party with around 200 invited guests.

In an X post after his event was stopped, Brown wrote, “300k down the drain.” On Thursday, in response to the city’s statement, Brown wrote on X: “You targeted me and my @741Performance event based on biased information then you give a half a— apology after the damage is already done.”

The Times reached out to the city of Beverly Hills on Friday for a response to Brown’s comments concerning the incident, including his mention of possible legal action. A representative referred The Times to the statement released the previous day.

The city’s first statement, issued Sunday, said that “an event permit had been applied for and denied by the City due to previous violations associated with events at the address” and “organizers still chose to proceed with inviting hundreds of guests knowing that it was not allowed to occur.”

On Thursday, the city issued a second release saying that upon further internal review it had determined that “no permit application was submitted nor denied for the event and the residence does not have any prior related violations on record.”

The release included a statement from city manager Nancy Hunt-Coffey, who apologized for the inaccurate information but asserted that the city still had reason to shut down the event.

“The City’s previous statement about the weekend event at the Trousdale home was inaccurate, and on behalf of the City, I would like to apologize to Jaylen Brown and the Jannard family,” Hunt-Coffey said.

“The City has a responsibility to its residents and neighborhoods to ensure adherence to established regulations for events held at private residences. These are designed to support the safety and welfare of neighbors and attendees. City staff observed circumstances that are believed to be City code violations and for that reason alone, the event was ended.”

Brown was far from satisfied with the apology.

“The city has now stated the event was shut down because officials believed codes were being violated,” he said in a statement released by Jalen Brown Enterprises Inc. “A private gathering cannot lawfully be terminated based on assumption alone, particularly when no official ever entered the residence to observe conditions or verify any alleged violation.

“This was a private, invitation-only gathering at a private home among friends and partners, not a public or commercial event requiring a permit. … No proof of any alleged violation was ever produced to the homeowner, our team, or legal counsel. Without observation, documentation or confirmed violations, enforcement action based on belief alone raises serious due-process concerns.

“Jalen Brown Enterprises Inc. supports lawful compliance and cooperative engagement with municipalities wherever we operate. However, this private residential gathering was interrupted without substantiated cause, resulting in significant financial and reputational harm.”

“We remain open to a constructive resolution with the city of Beverly Hills.”

Brown had more to say on the matter after the Celtics’ 121-110 win over the Golden State Warriors on Thursday night in San Francisco.

“This is All-Star Weekend at 7 p.m. I just wanted to enjoy myself. And I feel like that got taken away, and I got embarrassed to some degree,” said Brown, who was named an All-Star starter for the first time this year. He added, “I feel like that apology, you know, even in the statement they put out, they included some stuff that wasn’t true, even in an apology. So I don’t think that apology was acceptable.

“I lost a lot of money … and then people were making assumptions, like we didn’t go through the proper protocols. So that’s just all around a bad look, leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I’m extremely offended. My team is offended still. I’m not sure what the conclusion is going to be. All I know is that, that was some bulls—.”

Brown said he heard about the city’s most recent statement on his way to the game and that it fueled his third triple-double of the season (23 points, 15 rebounds, 13 assists).

“I wasn’t even thinking about the game,” said Brown, who will be back in Los Angeles when the Celtics play the Lakers on Sunday. “I was pissed. I was still pissed.”

Source link

Supreme Court rejects Trump’s tariffs as illegal import taxes

The Supreme Court ruled Friday that President Trump’s sweeping worldwide tariffs are illegal and cannot stand without the approval of Congress.

The 6-3 decision deals Trump his most significant defeat at the Supreme Court.

Last year, the justices issued temporary orders to block several of his initiatives, but Friday’s ruling is the first to hold that the president overstepped his legal authority.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., speaking for the court, said Congress has the power to impose taxes and tariffs, and lawmakers did not do so in an emergency law that does not mention tariffs.

“The President asserts the extraordinary power to unilaterally impose tariffs of unlimited amount, duration, and scope. In light of the breadth, history, and constitutional context of that asserted authority, he must identify clear congressional authorization to exercise it,” he wrote.

“And until now no President has read the International Emergency Economics Act to confer such power. We claim no special competence in matters of economics or foreign affairs. We claim only, as we must, the limited role assigned to us by Article III of the Constitution. Fulfilling that role, we hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs,” Roberts wrote.

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch in a concurring opinion stressed the role of Congress.

“The Constitution lodges the Nation’s lawmaking powers in Congress alone,” he said.

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito and Brett M. Kavanaugh dissented.

Trump claimed his new and ever-shifting tariffs would bring in trillions of dollars in revenue for the government and encourage more manufacturing in the United States.

But manufacturing employment has gone down over the past year, in part because American companies have been hurt by higher costs for parts that they import.

Critics said the new taxes hurt small businesses in particular and raised prices for American consumers.

The justices focused on the president’s claimed legal authority to impose tariffs as responses to an international economic emergency.

Several owners of small businesses sued last year to challenge Trump’s import taxes as illegal and disruptive.

Learning Resources, an Illinois company which sells educational toys for children, said it would have to raise its prices by 70% because most of its toys were manufactured in Asia.

A separate suit was filed by a New York wine importer and Terry Precision Cycling, which sells cycling apparel for women.

Both suits won in lower courts. Judges said the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 cited by Trump did not mention tariffs and had not been used before to impose such import taxes.

The law said the president in response to a national emergency may deal with an “unusual and extraordinary threat” by freezing assets or sanctioning a foreign country or otherwise regulating trade.

Trump said the nation’s long-standing trade deficit was an emergency and tariffs were an appropriate regulation.

While rejecting Trump’s claims, the lower courts left his tariffs in place while the administration appealed its case to the Supreme Court.

Source link

US immigration judge rejects Trump bid to deport Columbia student Mahdawi | Donald Trump News

Mahdawi, a Palestinian student activist, faced deportation proceedings amid a protest crackdown under the Trump administration.

An immigration judge in the United States has ruled against an attempt under President Donald Trump to deport Mohsen Mahdawi, a Columbia University student arrested last year for his protests against Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

The decision, issued on February 13, became public as part of court filings on Tuesday from Mahdawi’s lawyers.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

The filing was submitted to a federal appeals court in New York, which has been considering a challenge from the Trump administration against Mahdawi’s release from custody.

In a public statement released through the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Mahdawi thanked the immigration court for its decision, which he framed as a strike in favour of free-speech rights.

“I am grateful to the court for honoring the rule of law and holding the line against the government’s attempts to trample on due process,” Mahdawi said. “This decision is an important step towards upholding what fear tried to destroy: the right to speak for peace and justice.”

But the ACLU indicated that the immigration court’s decision was made “without prejudice”, a legal term that means the Trump administration could refile its case against Mahdawi.

Raised in a Palestinian refugee camp in the occupied West Bank, Mahdawi is a lawful permanent resident who has lived in Vermont for 10 years.

He enrolled at Columbia, a prestigious Ivy League university, to study philosophy. But he was also a visible member of the campus’s activist community, founding a Palestinian student society alongside fellow student Mahmoud Khalil.

Columbia became a hub for pro-Palestinian protests in 2024, and Trump campaigned for re-election, in part, on cracking down on the demonstrations.

Khalil became the first student protester to be detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in March of last year, less than three months into Trump’s second term.

Then, on April 14, Mahdawi was arrested at a meeting set up by the government, allegedly to process his citizenship application.

ICE detained him in “direct retaliation for his advocacy of Palestinian rights”, the ACLU said in a statement at the time.

The Trump administration attempted to transfer Mahdawi out of state to Louisiana, but a court order ultimately blocked it from doing so.

Mahdawi was ultimately released on April 30, after US Judge Geoffrey Crawford accused the Trump administration of doing “great harm” to someone who had committed no crime.

Human rights advocates have described the Trump administration’s attempts to deport foreign-born student activists as a campaign to chill free speech.

 

After his release last year, Mahdawi walked out of the court with both hands in the air, flashing peace signs as supporters greeted him with cheers.

As he spoke, he shared a message for Trump. “I am not afraid of you,” Mahdawi said to Trump.

He also addressed the people of Palestine and sought to dispel perceptions that the student protest movement was anything but peaceful.

“We are pro-peace and antiwar,” Mahdawi explained. “To my people in Palestine: I feel your pain, I see your suffering, and I see freedom, and it is very soon.”

Mahdawi’s arrest comes as part of a wider push by the Trump administration to target visa holders and permanent residents for their pro-Palestine advocacy.

Trump has also pressured top universities to crack down on pro-Palestine protests in the name of combating anti-Semitism. In some cases, the Trump administration has opened investigations into campuses where pro-Palestinian protests were prominent, accusing them of civil rights violations.

Last July, Columbia University entered into a $200m settlement with the Trump administration, with a further $21m given to end a probe into allegations of religious-based harassment.

The university, however, did not admit to wrongdoing.

Source link

Imran Khan’s sister rejects Pakistan gov’t claim jailed ex-PM’s vision fine | Imran Khan News

Islamabad, Pakistan – The sister of former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan has told Al Jazeera that the family has rejected a government board’s claims that the cricketer-turned-politician’s eyesight has improved since a court report last week said he had lost most vision in one eye.

A government-appointed medical board examining the jailed ex-leader reported a significant improvement in his eyesight after weeks of controversy over his deteriorating vision. Its medical report, seen by Al Jazeera, claims that Khan’s vision in his right eye has improved from 6/36 to 6/9. His left eye remains at 6/6 vision with the use of glasses.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

In ophthalmic terms, 6/6 vision means the person’s eyesight is fine. A 6/9 reading means the person can see at 6 metres (20 feet) what someone with normal vision sees at 9 metres (30 ft).

The assessment was carried out on Sunday by a two-member board comprising doctors Nadeem Qureshi and Muhammad Arif Khan. The specialists conducted a detailed examination at Adiala jail in Rawalpindi, where the 73-year-old founder of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party has been imprisoned since August 2023.

But Khan’s family said it had “no trust” in the authorities.

His sister, Aleema Khan, described it as “extremely concerning and unacceptable” that the government had resisted allowing Khan’s personal doctor and a family representative to be present during the examination and treatment.

“Without the physical presence of both his personal doctor and family representative, we categorically reject any claims made by the government regarding his examination, treatment or medical condition,” Aleema told Al Jazeera.

Aasim Yusuf, chief medical officer of the Imran Khan-founded Shaukat Khanum Memorial Hospital and one of Khan’s personal physicians, said in a video message that he had held a 40-minute conversation with the two doctors who examined Khan on February 15.

In the video, shared by the PTI on social media, Yusuf said the visiting doctors briefed him on the treatment and future plan of care, adding that according to their latest assessment, “Khan had shown significant improvement as a result of treatment and his vision had improved significantly as well”.

“I would be extremely happy if I was able to confirm that this was the case. Unfortunately, because I have not seen him myself and have not been able to participate in his care or to talk to him, I am unable to either confirm or deny the veracity of what we have been told,” Yusuf said.

Disputed diagnosis

The latest examination comes after reports last month that authorities had taken Khan late at night to a government facility for a medical procedure without informing his family. Following the outcry, Pakistan’s Supreme Court appointed Barrister Salman Safdar as amicus curiae to meet Khan and assess his condition.

In a seven-page report filed last week, Safdar painted a troubling picture. He wrote that Khan had suffered rapid and substantial vision loss over the past three months and that despite repeated complaints of persistent blurred and hazy vision, “no action was taken by the jail authorities to address these complaints”.

Safdar quoted Khan as saying that “only 15 percent” vision remained in his right eye.

PTI General Secretary Salman Akram Raja told reporters in Islamabad on Monday that the two doctors, one of whom was recommended after consultations with Yusuf, confirmed that Khan’s vision had improved.

“The two doctors who met him in jail said that Khan confirmed to them that he was unable to see the clock on the wall for a few weeks, [but] can now not only see that, but also the clock hands. According to doctors, this was an incredible improvement in his vision,” Raja said.

Aleema, however, insisted that the family could not accept any medical report until Khan’s physician examined him in person. She renewed the demand that he be transferred to Shifa International Hospital in Islamabad.

She accused the government of repeatedly misleading the family about Khan’s health.

“After our protest and Salman Safdar’s report, we were told that he would be taken to Shifa International Hospital, along with [the] presence of his physician as well as a family member, but then, abruptly, they [the government] changed the plan. How can we be suddenly denied?” she asked.

Aleema said authorities had asked the family to provide the names of doctors and relatives who could accompany Khan, only to reject each proposal.

“There have been repeated back-and-forth phone calls. We gave them the names of his personal doctors, including Dr Aasim. Another name we gave was our sister, Uzma Khan, to represent the family. But the response from the government was that no sister will be allowed to meet him,” she claimed.

She added that her brother had no underlying medical conditions, such as diabetes or high blood pressure, and described him as a political prisoner.

“Our hearts are breaking, and we are so frustrated. This is deliberate. When Salman Safdar went there and came back, he told us the story, and we cried hearing about Khan’s current situation. This is not just criminal negligence, this is outright criminal and deliberate,” she said.

Standoff over medical access

The PTI and its allies, who are holding a sit-in outside parliament, have promised to continue their protest until their demands are met, including access to Khan and his transfer to Shifa International Hospital.

Sheikh Waqas Akram, the party’s central information secretary, said the demand was straightforward and focused on securing “specialised treatment” for Khan.

“When you deny the family access, or the physicians recommended by the family, and when you break promises, how can we trust? We don’t even know what they have done with him. We believe the government is certainly hiding something,” he told Al Jazeera.

Aleema said she would hold a news conference on Tuesday outside Adiala jail and added that the family had not sought any concessions from authorities beyond medical access.

“Imran’s sons have been trying to visit Pakistan since last year and have applied several times, but their visa has not been processed. It is in limbo, they do not get a denial, nor an approval,” she said, referring to Kasim and Suleman, Khan’s two sons, who are nationals of the United Kingdom.

Sulaiman Khan and Kasim Khan, sons of jailed former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan, attend an interview with Reuters in London, Britain February 16, 2026. REUTERS/Jaimi Joy
According to Aleema Khan, sister of former Prime Minister Imran Khan, her brother’s sons, Sulaiman Khan and Kasim Khan, applied last year for a visa to travel to Pakistan, but the Pakistani government has not yet responded to their application [Jaimi Joy/Reuters]

The sons were born during Khan’s first marriage to Jemima Goldsmith. The couple divorced in 2004 after nine years of marriage. Both sons are based in London.

Government rejects negligence claims

The government, meanwhile, has defended the medical board’s work. Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar said the treatment provided to Khan had led to improvement and that the specialist team had expressed satisfaction with his progress.

Speaking at a public event on Monday, Tarar said opposition leaders and Khan’s personal doctors had been briefed.

Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Tariq Fazal Chaudhry also said the examination inside the jail was conducted “in accordance with government directives and with complete transparency”.

“The government provided every necessary facility on site to ensure no question of any negligence arises,” Chaudhry wrote on social media, adding that Gohar Ali Khan, the PTI chairman in Khan’s absence, had been kept informed.

 

Imran Khan, a former Pakistan cricket captain who led Pakistan to its 1992 World Cup victory, became prime minister in 2018.

He was removed in 2022 through a parliamentary no-confidence vote, which he said was orchestrated by the military in collusion with Washington and his political rivals. Both the military and the United States have denied the allegations.

Since his ouster, Khan has blamed Army Chief Field Marshal Asim Munir for his legal and political troubles and has repeatedly urged supporters to protest.

In June 2024, a United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded that Khan’s detention “had no legal basis and appears to have been intended to disqualify him from running [for] political office”.

Source link