security

As Washington and Tehran move towards a long-term ceasefire agreement, Gulf states will likely look for new long-term security solutions when a war in their region – which they did not start – finally ends.

It comes as United States President Donald Trump cancelled new strikes on Iran saying that a deal with Tehran was imminent, and that a “time” and “place” for signing would soon be announced.

In Tehran, officials appeared more cautious with one senior Iranian official telling Al Jazeera that the government was still reviewing a proposed Memorandum of Understanding with Washington.

Subsequent comments by Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif point to a deal being made, and what follows in the coming days could have important implications for collective regional security.

Attacks on the Gulf

The United States operates military facilities in at least 19 locations across the MENA region, including permanent bases in Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. Between 40,000 and 50,000 US troops were stationed across the region before the war on Iran started.

This US-Gulf nexus appeared to insulate states from conflicts engulfing other parts of the region, but over the past four months, Gulf states hosting US military facilities have been targeted by Iran.

“If there is a way to describe the prevailing security model in the region since the 1980s, the concept of security partnerships best encapsulates it,” said Mahjoub Al-Zuwairi, an academic and expert on Middle East politics.

“The countries of the region have chosen to align their security with broad international alliances. For decades, this model has provided a reasonable deterrent and logistical and intelligence depth that is difficult to replace.”

A security umbrella with holes

The war on Iran has exposed a paradox – while Iranian officials have repeatedly referred to their Gulf neighbours as “brothers”, they have also repeatedly targeted them during the war.

Despite the protestations of Gulf states that no attacks on Iran were launched from their soil, they have been repeatedly targeted.

At least 28 people have been killed across the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states in suspected Iranian drone and rocket attacks, since the US and Israel launched their offensive on Iran on 28 February. This has led to questions about the US-Gulf security arrangement.

“Just the war itself has pierced that sense of security, the US security umbrella is moribund at worst, or ineffective at best,” Simon Mabon, professor of international relations at Lancaster University, told Al Jazeera.

“They’ve long relied on it for their own security. Yet the presence of US forces on their territory directly meant they became targets. They can’t escape their geography [and] despite the tensions, despite the hostilities, despite the attacks, Iran isn’t going away. They have to find a way of dealing with this reality.”

The economic cost of war

The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has proven be a setback for some Gulf states working to diversify their energy-reliant economies towards tourism, services and finance, but not all have been affected equally.

Saudi Arabia was able to redirect some oil exports through its East-West pipeline to the Red Sea, while Oman – whose main ports are outside the Strait of Hormuz – has also benefited from rising energy prices.

The UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar have been more heavily affected due to their dependence on the waterway for their energy exports, but the war has encouraged new thinking on long-standing security and economic arrangements.

“There are new pipelines being set up, but the capacity of these alternatives is infinitely smaller than the Strait itself,” said Mabon. “It will take enormous investment and years of development before they can come close to replacing it.”

Moving closer to Iran?

One possible lesson from the conflict is that Gulf states may seek engagement with Iran rather than confrontation, something that Gulf states had already made some groundwork on before the US-Israel war began.

The UAE restored diplomatic ties with Tehran in 2022, and a year later, Saudi Arabia and Iran agreed to normalise relations in a deal brokered by China.

Al-Zuwairi says that the conflict could revive plans for MENA-led regional security arrangements, as envisioned in the 2019 Hormuz Peace Initiative, which proposed a Gulf security framework involving Iran, Iraq and the six GCC states.

But the distrust fostered since then – notably Tehran’s strikes on its Gulf neighbours – would make such a formation unlikely in the near future. 

“The recent war has opened the door wide to reconsidering the Gulf security system with its neighbours,” Al-Zuwairi said.

“How can Tehran propose a non-aggression pact while raining missiles on neighbouring cities? The initiative appears theoretically sound but practically bankrupt unless Iranian behaviour changes.”

Looking beyond Washington?

The solution for the Gulf could be a hybrid arrangement where ties with Washington are maintained, but other regional and domestic options are explored, including greater investment in local defence industries.

A possible blueprint for this could be the mutual defence agreement between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan last September, stating that an attack on one country would be considered an attack on both.

Yet previous instances when Gulf states felt abandoned by the US have led to divergent responses, with the UAE and Bahrain deepening ties with Israel, but a new paradigm means that a more collective action to the issue of security might be considered.

“The war has demonstrated that every guarantor, no matter how many banners it flies, primarily protects its own interests,” said Al-Zuwairi.

“The region ends up paying the price for a war it did not choose … The security of the Gulf will not be created in Washington … It will be created when Gulf countries recognise that they must build it themselves, because when fires start, it is always those closest to the flames who pay the price.”

France and Germany have announced this week that they are ditching a landmark project to jointly develop a sixth-generation fighter jet.

French President Emmanuel Macron confirmed on Monday that the project is being terminated, in what is being seen as a major blow to efforts to boost defence cooperation between European Union states, a key issue amid uncertainty cast by United States President Donald Trump over the readiness of the US to help defend its NATO allies.

Trump’s disdain for Europe’s reliance on the US has been building for years.

Since 2019, the US president has been flirting with the idea of obtaining Greenland.

His remarks about his desire for the island, a self-governing territory which is part of the Kingdom of Denmark, built to a crescendo at the start of this year, with European leaders signalling their displeasure with the idea and Trump even threatening additional trade tariffs on those countries standing in his way.

Both Denmark and Greenland have repeatedly stated that the island is not for sale.

At one point, before Trump backed down after agreeing to a “framework of a future deal” on Greenland during a January meeting with NATO’s Mark Rutte in Davos, it seemed as if the US might even try to take the island by force – a notion that would have been inconceivable before the era of Donald Trump.

The threat of military action set off alarm bells in European capitals.

In addition to all this, Trump has withdrawn much of the US’s support for Ukraine and has consistently berated his European NATO partners for not spending enough on their own defence for years, outright urging them to reduce their reliance on the US for military protection.

More recently, Europe’s refusal to join the US-Israeli war on Iran, which began with strikes on Tehran on February 28, has further irked the US president and deepened concerns that a widening transatlantic rift could weaken the continent’s security and embolden Russia.

Until this week, a counterweight to these burgeoning concerns was in hand – the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) project, a landmark pact to jointly develop a next-generation fighter jet involving France, Germany and Spain.

But disagreements over whether France’s Dassault Aviation, or Airbus, which also represents Germany and Spain, should take the lead on the project have ultimately led to its collapse.

Analysts, however, say all hope is not lost: despite the dissolution of the bellwether venture, Europeans can indeed become strategically autonomous, they say – but the road there runs through shared military integration, rather than shared political aspiration.

The FCAS hoopla does “highlight the limitation of Europe’s defence industrial landscape, where national needs sometimes clash with the broader goal of defence integration”, Giuseppe Spatafora, a policy analyst at the European Union Institute for Security Studies, told Al Jazeera.

“But we also shouldn’t overestimate its impact.”

Setback, not collapse

According to Jamie Shea, a retired NATO official and associate fellow with the International Security Programme at Chatham House, FCAS’s dissolution is certainly a setback – but does not spell the collapse of European defence integration in its entirety.

“It was the type of high-tech, innovative and future-oriented programme that Europeans need to be able to achieve successfully if they are to become strategically autonomous and break their dependence on the US for major weapons systems,” Shea told Al Jazeera.

It had been hoped that FCAS would move the needle forward, particularly in the areas of artificial intelligence (AI), space, data fusion, and the manned and autonomous systems interface space, he said.

Others would have additionally joined the project as it gained momentum, as Spain did, he added, potentially creating a domino effect in next-generation defence technologies across the continent.

But, crucially, Spatafora said, the project dates back to 2017 – a different era, before Russia’s full-scale war on Ukraine and before Trump’s return to the White House.

“Nowadays, the project might be designed differently to reflect the scenario,” he said.

“But it doesn’t affect the broader trend in Europe towards reducing dependencies on US military systems and strengthening its own defence capabilities.”

France and Germany will continue with some components of FCAS, such as its “combat cloud” feature, which will increase Europe’s cyber command-and-control capabilities, said Spatafora.

Airbus and a number of other German companies are also seeking to continue the programme in other areas, particularly software architecture and drone technology, Shea said.

“So there may be benefits for European defence and its defence technology base even if a manned fighter aircraft is not built,” said Shea.

Furthermore, there are “scores” of other joint defence projects being launched in Europe at the moment, even if they are not quite as ambitious as FCAS, he added.

Guntram Wolff, a senior fellow at the European think tank Bruegel, similarly urged against alarmism.

“I would not interpret this decision overly negatively,” Wolff told Al Jazeera.

“FCAS was a very complicated project and its military relevance may well be overstated at a moment of increasing importance of cheap autonomous systems. In part, the decision also reflects a reassessment of whether the high cost was really warranted.”

Europe, meanwhile, has other strengths it can build on, the analysts said.

The continent is strong in shipbuilding, submarines, short-range missiles and air defence – with systems like the German IRIS-T and the French-Italian SAMP/T – and has demonstrated it can build capable fighter jets, such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, Tornado and Gripen programmes have shown, Shea said.

Lessons and challenges

Europe’s main problem is underinvestment and the difficulty it has in scaling up to the level of mass production that modern warfare demands, said Shea.

This issue was brought into sharp focus this week when the UK’s secretary of state for defence dramatically resigned from government over defence funding.

He simply cannot keep the country safe on what he has been given to spend, he said. In his resignation letter to the prime minister, he wrote: “You have been unable and the Treasury has been unwilling to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats,” he wrote.

Ultimately, European nations are going to have to come together if they have any hope of matching US military might in the future, analysts say.

“It is the challenge of integrating all systems and all domains into a single battlefield management space where the US is in advance of the Europeans,” Shea said.

“Drones, which Russia and Ukraine are producing in the millions, are a case in point. Even the US suffers from weapons shortages as we have seen in the Iran war,” the former NATO official added.

Spatafora echoed the idea that the Russia-Ukraine war has lessons to offer the rest of Europe.

“The lesson of the war in Ukraine is that, in order to deter and defend itself properly, Europe needs cheap, mass-produced capabilities,” he said.

FCAS was about a very expensive capability, “so it was not really the key need for Europe’s deterrence today”, the analyst said.

The more pressing question that FCAS raises is how European nations will coordinate large projects which single countries cannot produce on their own and which could clash with the interests of numerous national industries. This is the conundrum which will likely shape the design of future EU instruments to support cooperative defence projects, said Spatafora.

Another challenge facing the continent is that major platforms like aircraft, ships or land warfare vehicles can take decades to develop, and contracts signed today will yield equipment that will not be on the battlefield before 2040, Shea said.

Europe will need to upgrade its current capabilities – recent upgrades to the Eurofighter jet and the Leopard tank are examples he cited – and look for gap-fillers elsewhere.

Spatafora argues that the FCAS collapse should not push European countries back towards reliance on American systems – or at least not more than they already have.

“The Trump administration’s approach and the depletion of stock after the Iran war have significantly reduced the reliability of US supplies,” he said.

The reliability of US guarantees, he added, depends on other assets – long-range missiles, forward-deployed troops, command-and-control infrastructure – “rather than on a next-generation fighter jet”, the analyst added.

‘Military requirements’ over ‘political ambition’

The FCAS failure is certainly good news for Russia, Shea said, “and also for the US, which will hope to sell Europe even more F-35s and maintain Europe’s traditional dependency on US military equipment”.

A rebound from the collapsed project, therefore, he argued, is necessary. But that is already in the works, analysts say, as Europe is already turning away from US dependability.

They point to the high likelihood of renewed interest in the UK-Italy-Japan Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) for a sixth-generation stealth fighter jet, in European Space Agency military space capabilities, and in EU defence financing mechanisms like the Security Action for Europe (SAFE).

Joint ventures with Ukraine, which, under fire from Russia for four years, has mastered mass production of drone technology and AI, should also help keep Europe up to speed in key areas, Shea added.

“The US has proven to be unreliable, or simply unable to remain committed to Europe, and the defence budgets are growing,” Spatfora said.

Washington will continue to remain relevant for certain capabilities – nuclear deterrence above all – but over time, European countries will seek to develop more and more on their own.

The ultimate lesson of FCAS, however, Shea argued, is that defence integration “has to be driven by military requirements rather than political ambition”.

Cooperation between France and Germany has always been difficult, he said – they have large defence companies “that do not want to play second fiddle to the other”, he said.

A more promising model, he said, is the joint UK-Norway agreement to produce a new destroyer-class warship, with BAE Systems as the main contractor and smaller Norwegian companies participating.

“Both countries operate in the North Atlantic and the Baltic Sea and share exactly the same concept of what the ship should be,” explained Shea.

“So it is this model of bottom-up, natural cooperation rather than top-down political cooperation that Europe needs to pursue.”

June 10 (UPI) — President Donald Trump signed a bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration enforcement agencies through 2028 after months of battles to prevent it from happening.

“This morning I’m thrilled to sign the Secure America Act to immediately and fully fund the Department of Homeland Security through the end of my term, so we won’t have to be talking about it anymore,” the president said in the Oval Office.

The Senate passed the $70 billion funding package on Friday, and the House approved it on Tuesday.

Democrats fought the funding for months, refusing to agree to the bill unless there were reforms to the organization after two American citizens — Renee Good and Alex Pretti — were killed by federal agents in Minneapolis earlier this year. But the measure was passed via reconciliation, which only requires a majority vote instead of 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster.

“We’ll give the heroes of ICE and Border Patrol — and that’s what they are, they’re heroes, what they have to go through to keep us safe — the support and resources they need to defend our borders, protect our homeland and to keep America safe,” the president added He also gave House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., credit for passing the bill with a slim majority in the House.

“Despite Democrat efforts to shut down ICE and Border Patrol, Republicans have now fully funded these agencies through President Trump’s entire second term to the tune of nearly $70 billion,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., in a statement. “Thanks to President Trump, our border has gone from its weakest point to its most secure point in less than two years.”

June 8 (Asia Today) — Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s government is moving forward with talks to revise Japan’s three core security documents, with defense spending, nuclear policy and artificial intelligence emerging as central issues.

The documents are Japan’s National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy and Defense Buildup Program. They set the direction for diplomacy and defense policy for about the next decade, as well as defense spending and major equipment plans for five years.

Japan first adopted a National Security Strategy in 2013 under former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Former Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s government revised all three documents in 2022.

Asahi Shimbun reported Monday that the Takaichi government’s review centers on eight issues: defense spending, Japan’s three non-nuclear principles, AI and drones, the defense industry, nuclear-powered submarines, ties with the United States, perceptions of China and economic security.

The largest issue is defense spending. The Kishida government’s 2022 documents called for raising defense-related spending to about 2% of gross domestic product by fiscal 2027. Takaichi’s government is seeking to reach that level in fiscal 2025 and then pursue another revision.

Asahi reported that the Trump administration has called on allies to raise defense spending to 3.5% of GDP, or 5% including related costs. If Japan applied the 3.5% target, annual defense spending could exceed 20 trillion yen, or about $125 billion.

Japan’s three non-nuclear principles are also under discussion. The principles commit Japan not to possess, produce or allow the introduction of nuclear weapons. The current National Security Strategy says Japan will maintain them.

Takaichi has questioned the realism of the principle barring the introduction of nuclear weapons, citing Japan’s reliance on U.S. nuclear deterrence. An Asahi poll conducted from March to April found that 75% of respondents supported maintaining the principles, compared with 21% who said they should be reviewed.

AI and drones are another major focus. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and conflicts in the Middle East have raised the importance of low-cost drones, AI-based information processing, cyberattacks and cognitive warfare. Japan is considering expanding drone procurement, building domestic supply chains and using AI in defense.

The defense industry is also expected to be included in the review. Takaichi’s government views the sector as one of 17 priority areas in its growth strategy. Japan revised its defense equipment transfer guidelines in April, expanding the path for exports of weapons with lethal capabilities.

Government and ruling party officials are also discussing whether the state should own ammunition and other military supply plants while allowing private companies to operate them.

Whether Japan should introduce nuclear-powered submarines is another key question. China and Russia operate nuclear-powered submarines and North Korea is believed to be pursuing them. South Korea has also announced plans to deploy nuclear-powered submarines in the late 2030s.

Some Japanese officials and experts have argued for next-generation submarines that can remain submerged for long periods and travel long distances. Development costs, staffing and consistency with Japan’s Atomic Energy Basic Act remain challenges.

Relations with the United States and Japan’s view of China are also expected to shape the wording of the revised documents. The Trump administration is demanding greater defense burden-sharing from allies. If U.S. foreign policy priorities shift, Japan may need to adjust security plans that assume heavy reliance on Washington.

The 2022 documents described China as Japan’s “greatest strategic challenge.” Attention is now focused on how Japan will describe China after increased Chinese aircraft carrier operations, airspace incursions and concerns about a possible Taiwan contingency.

Economic security is expected to be treated as a separate pillar. Tensions in the Middle East, risks involving the Strait of Hormuz, dependence on energy and food imports and possible supply-chain disruptions are broadening Japan’s security debate. The Japanese government is emphasizing what it calls “collective autonomy” with allies and like-minded countries to maintain supply chains.

The Takaichi government is aiming to complete the revision by the end of the year. Asahi said the review could affect not only defense policy but also Japan’s national direction and public burden.

— 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=20260608010002583

NEW YORK — Donald Trump is set to be the first sitting U.S. president to attend an NBA Finals game, bringing strict security measures that will require New York Knicks fans to navigate an extensive safety perimeter around Madison Square Garden and an expected lengthy wait to get inside the building.

The security for Game 3 between the Knicks and San Antonio Spurs and the scene around the arena more closely resembled New Year’s Eve in Times Square, and for fans, it might seem more akin to a trip to the airport. They were asked to get to the game two hours early and will be required to provide a ticket to get past various checkpoints along with passing through a TSA-style magnetometer.

Trump’s appearance led the New York Police Department and Secret Service to establish a multi-block security perimeter around the arena, cancel a watch party outside and institute a no-bag policy for ticket-holders. Fans had gathered around the Garden to watch games during this playoff run, during which the Knicks have won 13 games in a row to reach the final for the first time since 1999 and move two victories from their first NBA title since 1973.

“The NYPD in coordination with the Secret Service made the decision for Game 3, where we have a presidential visit, that we could not support watch parties right outside of the Garden,” Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said at a news conference Monday. “We are looking forward to bringing back watch parties for Game 4. But I think New Yorkers are used to presidents coming to town, and they understand that that generally means lockdowns of areas and that’s what you’re going to see tonight at the Garden.”

Trump has attended several major sporting events in his time as president, and the security measures have created major hassles for fans.

Thousands of fans missed the start of last year’s U.S. Open men’s singles final between Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner because of lengthy security lines. Even though the U.S. Tennis Association pushed back the start of the match by a half-hour, many fans still couldn’t get in because added measures meant that they had to go through screening not only when they arrived at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center but again in front of the steps into Arthur Ashe Stadium, where Trump watched from a suite.

Asked his thoughts on Trump attending, Knicks center Mitchell Robinson said: “Cool, I guess. We can still get out there and play (no matter) who’s here and who’s not.”

Mayor Zohran Mamdani and other dignitaries are also expected to be at the game Monday night.

It was already hard enough for Knicks fans to get inside Madison Square Garden because of astronomical ticket prices. The get-in price for a ticket is higher than the average cost of monthly rent in New York, surging over $6,000. The best seats are tens of thousands of dollars. Mamdani said he bought his ticket for about $1,000 directly from Madison Square Garden.

The difficulty of seeing the game in-person has prompted fans to crowd bars, streets and watch parties all over the city. The watch party near the Garden has become a major event all through the playoffs, but with Trump attending, that event will be moved a few blocks away outside the security perimeter, at Bryant Park.

“We improvise,” said Knicks guard Jose Alvarado, who is a New York native. “We’re New Yorkers. We’re going to find a way to watch a game, and that’s what we’re doing.”

Whyno writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Brian Mahoney contributed to this report.

NEW YORK — Donald Trump was booed loudly by fans inside Madison Square Garden when he was shown on video screens during the national anthem prior to Game 3 of the NBA Finals on Monday night.

Trump was shown for several seconds giving a military salute. The boos ended when the U.S. flag followed him on the screens, and fans cheered when New York Knicks players were shown. Mentions of the San Antonio Spurs also elicited loud boos.

Trump is watching from Knicks owner James Dolan’s suite, along with granddaughter Kai, personal adviser Boris Epshteyn and Cabinet secretaries Lee Zeldin, Sean Duffy and Doug Burgum. He is the first sitting president to attend an NBA Finals game.

Trump’s Marine One helicopter flew from his home in New Jersey and landed near Wall Street before his motorcade made its way up through Manhattan and to the arena roughly an hour before tipoff. He encountered a handful of people making rude gestures, and outside the area, one group held signs saying “Trump must go.”

He settled into Dolan’s suite shortly afterward.

During the afternoon before Trump’s arrival, the New York Police Department and the U.S. Secret Service set up a large perimeter surrounding Madison Square Garden. Fans lined up to get inside the arena more than four hours before tip-off, in a scene more closely resembling New Year’s Eve in Times Square than the usual leadup to a basketball game.

They were required to provide a ticket or pass to get past various checkpoints, along with going through a Transportation Security Administration-style magnetometer. Secret Service personnel and police were positioned at every corner and in large numbers. Daily commuters, tourists and fans were all confounded at various times as they tried to maneuver the security.

New Yorkers forced to adjust

After traveling from his new home in Florida for the game, Knicks fan Greg Weldon said the main inconvenience he’s faced so far has been the lack of information.

“We’ve asked so many cops, Secret Service, guys with machine guns, what to do, where should we go,” he said. “Nobody knows.”

Knicks coach Mike Brown and Spurs counterpart Mitch Johnson downplayed any concept of being inconvenienced by the closures and enhanced security because of Trump.

“There’s a lot going on, and I’d much rather be a part of it than not,” Johnson said.

With security stepped up, a watch party outside was canceled, and ticket holders were not allowed to bring bags inside the Garden. Fans had gathered near the arena to watch games during this playoff run, during which the Knicks have won 13 games in a row to reach the Final for the first time since 1999 and move two victories from their first NBA title since 1973.

“We are looking forward to bringing back watch parties for Game 4,” Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said at a news conference Monday. “But I think New Yorkers are used to presidents coming to town, and they understand that that generally means lockdowns of areas and that’s what you’re going to see tonight at the Garden.”

Incidents heighten attention to Trump’s security

This is the latest major sporting event Trump has attended during his time as president, and the security measures have created major hassles for fans.

Thousands of fans missed the start of last year’s U.S. Open men’s singles final between Carlos Alcaraz and Jannik Sinner because of lengthy security lines. Even though the U.S. Tennis Assn. pushed back the start of the match by a half hour, many fans still couldn’t get in because added measures meant that they had to go through screening not only when they arrived at the Billie Jean King National Tennis Center, but again in front of the steps into Arthur Ashe Stadium, where Trump watched from a suite.

Federal law enforcement officials have been reexamining Trump’s security in light of three incidents in the past two years: a shooting at a 2024 rally in Butler, Penn.; the discovery of a man armed with a rifle as Trump played golf in West Palm Beach, Fla., later that year; and the recent shooting at the White House Correspondents’ Assn. dinner.

Asked Sunday his thoughts on Trump attending, Knicks center Mitchell Robinson said: “Cool, I guess. We can still get out there and play [no matter] who’s here and who’s not.”

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and other dignitaries were also at the game.

It was already hard enough for Knicks fans to get inside Madison Square Garden because of astronomical ticket prices. The get-in price for a ticket is higher than the average cost of monthly rent in New York, surging over $5,000. The best seats are tens of thousands of dollars. Mamdani said he bought his ticket, which he said was standing room only, for about $1,000 directly from Madison Square Garden.

The difficulty of seeing the game in person has prompted fans to crowd bars, streets and watch parties all over the city. The watch party near the Garden has become a major event all through the playoffs, but with Trump attending, that event was moved a few blocks away outside the security perimeter, at Bryant Park.

“We improvise,” said Knicks guard Jose Alvarado, who is a New York native. “We’re New Yorkers. We’re going to find a way to watch a game, and that’s what we’re doing.”

Whyno and Price write for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — A Treasury inspector general report raises concerns about Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s ability to safeguard taxpayer information after ICE and the Internal Revenue Service agreed in 2025 to share taxpayer data for the purpose of immigration investigations.

The recently released report provides the first official accounting of the scale of the IRS-ICE information transfer and documents security concerns surrounding an arrangement that has been the subject of multiple lawsuits and significant controversy inside both agencies.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found that the 2025 data-sharing agreement between ICE and the Treasury Department — which allowed ICE to submit names and addresses of immigrants in the U.S. illegally to the IRS for cross-verification against tax records — resulted in inconsistent formatting in ICE’s data and the IRS’ matching criteria, which led to errors.

The deal led the then-acting commissioner of the IRS to resign.

The report says that after the agreement was signed, ICE requested address information on more than 1.2 million people, and that the IRS ultimately provided last-known addresses for about 47,000 people.

The inspector general concluded that the IRS’ automated matching process was flawed. Inconsistent formatting in ICE’s data led to questionable matches, including in cases in which incomplete or inaccurate addresses were labeled as valid, the report says.

Representatives from the Treasury Department and the IRS did not respond to a request for comment.

The plan to cross-verify tax and immigration data is part of President Trump’s agenda to secure U.S. borders and his nationwide immigration crackdown, which has resulted in deportations, workplace raids and the use of an 18th century wartime law to deport Venezuelan migrants.

However, this is not the first time it’s been revealed that tens of thousands of taxpayers’ information was revealed to ICE.

In February, a federal judge said the IRS broke the law by disclosing confidential taxpayer information to ICE, referring to the same 47,000 disclosures that the inspector general points out.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found that the IRS had erroneously shared the taxpayer information of thousands of people with the Department of Homeland Security as part of the 2025 agreement.

No recommendations were made in the new inspector general report, according to a letter by Nancy A. LaManna, deputy inspector general for inspections and evaluations.

“However, we plan to share some concerns we identified during our review with the DHS Office of Inspector General,” her letter says.

Hussein writes for the Associated Press.

Two separate incidents of violence have left nine people injured in World Cup host cities in the United States, raising concerns over the safety and security of fans attending the tournament that starts in three days.

Six people were wounded in a stabbing on Sunday at New York’s Penn Station, the city’s mayor said, as the metropolitan area geared up to host two major sporting events, the NBA Finals and the FIFA World Cup.

Meanwhile, nine people sustained non-life-threatening injuries in a shooting near England’s World Cup base camp in Kansas City, Missouri, on Saturday.

The New York City Fire Department said a suspect was detained and the victims, including one with serious injuries, were taken to hospital.

Fire Department officials initially reported five wounded, but Mayor Zohran Mamdani said on X that “based on the information available right now, six people were stabbed and the alleged perpetrator is in custody.”

Circumstances of the attack were not immediately clear, but city Comptroller Mark Levine said on X that the suspect is “said to be an emotionally disturbed homeless person”.

All victims are expected to survive, he added.

State Governor Kathy Hochul described the attack as “an act of horrific violence”.

“New Yorkers deserve to feel safe wherever they go, and we will never stop working to make that a reality,” she said in a statement.

The incident occurred at one of the nation’s busiest rail and subway transport centres as the city prepares for two huge sporting spectacles.

Madison Square Garden, located directly above Penn Station in downtown Manhattan, will host games three and four of the NBA Finals on Monday and Wednesday between the New York Knicks and the San Antonio Spurs.

MetLife Stadium, outside the city in neighbouring New Jersey state, will host its first match of the World Cup on Saturday.

US President Donald Trump is scheduled to attend Monday’s NBA game at Madison Square Garden, saying recently that he accepted an invitation from Knicks owner James Dolan.

Security has been enhanced in the city before the two events.

New York’s official emergency notification system did not describe the incident but said people should avoid the area and “expect traffic delays, road closures, mass transit disruptions & emergency personnel near Penn Station”.

Before the stabbing, New York officials had already cancelled an outdoor watch party set for Monday outside the Garden.

Thousands of spectators descended onto the streets outside the venue on Friday for a game two watch party. New York authorities said a police officer was assaulted and 26 people were arrested as a number of fans turned rowdy.

Meanwhile, Kansas City police said there were no suspects in custody and that at least three of the shooting victims were taken to local hospitals.

The incident occurred about 6.5km (4 miles) from where England are set to train at the Swope Soccer Village. England have not arrived in Kansas City and are due to play a friendly against Costa Rica in Orlando, Florida, on Wednesday.

What security measures has the US put in place for the World Cup?

The 48-team, 104-match World Cup comes with an unprecedented security challenge for the host nations, particularly the US, which is hosting 78 matches across 11 cities.

Overseeing the sprawling security apparatus is a legion of federal agencies, state and local police departments and private entities. Their responsibilities range from securing stadiums and fan zones to escorting teams and protecting dignitaries.

Their tools include hunter drones that can shoot nets over objects in restricted airspace, bag-inspecting robot dogs, giant X-ray trucks and thousands of AI-powered cameras trained on public spaces soon to be thronged by fans.

Drones are prohibited over stadiums and fan zones, and the FBI has a “full suite of options” to thwart incursions, according to FBI Special Agent in Charge Amit Kachhia-Patel.

On match days, the FBI will activate joint operations centres in each host city, bringing together local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to monitor and investigate threats.

The tournament has the same high-level federal security designation as the Super Bowl, just below a presidential inauguration or a national political convention, ensuring federal, state and local coordination. It coincides with other major events linked to the 250th anniversary of the US’s founding.

So far, there are no credible threats, according to Andrew Giuliani, executive director of Trump’s World Cup task force, which is overseeing the multiagency effort.

The Department of Homeland Security, focused on Trump’s immigration enforcement crackdown and hit by a funding lapse only recently resolved, estimates that up to seven million people will visit the US for the World Cup.

The US Secret Service, under scrutiny after security breaches and attempts on Trump’s life, is in charge of protecting world leaders who show up to cheer on their countries. Trump has expressed interest in attending a match.

Gun violence is common in the US, where there were more than 400 mass shootings in 2025, according to the Gun Violence Archive.

Taiwan has accused China of carrying out a “provocative act” after Chinese Coast Guard vessels conducted patrols in waters east of the island. The operation followed announcements by Japan and the Philippines that they would begin formal talks on maritime boundary delimitation, a move Beijing views as involving waters linked to Taiwan.

Chinese state media described the deployment as a special maritime law-enforcement operation. Taiwan responded by dispatching Coast Guard vessels, which reportedly warned the Chinese ships away from restricted waters. Defence Minister Wellington Koo characterized the patrols as both a challenge to Taiwan’s sovereignty and an example of “cognitive warfare” aimed at reshaping perceptions of territorial control.

The incident comes amid sustained Chinese military activity around Taiwan, including frequent air and naval operations. Taiwan is also monitoring the movements of the Chinese aircraft carrier Liaoning, which is operating in the Western Pacific near waters east of the Philippines.

Why It Matters

The patrols represent more than a routine maritime operation. They signal China’s growing willingness to extend its presence beyond the Taiwan Strait and into areas east of Taiwan that have traditionally been viewed as strategically important for the island’s defence.

The move also demonstrates Beijing’s opposition to emerging regional cooperation among U.S. partners and allies. The maritime boundary discussions between Japan and the Philippines reflect increasing efforts among regional states to clarify maritime rights and strengthen coordination in contested waters.

For Taiwan, Chinese Coast Guard activities present a complex challenge. Unlike military operations, law-enforcement patrols operate within a legal grey zone that allows Beijing to advance territorial claims without triggering a conventional military confrontation. Such actions can gradually normalize China’s presence in disputed areas while increasing pressure on Taiwan’s security apparatus.

The incident further highlights the growing integration of maritime, legal, and information-based strategies in China’s approach to territorial disputes across the Indo-Pacific.

Stakeholders

Taiwan

• Protecting maritime sovereignty and territorial claims.
• Maintaining freedom of navigation and security in eastern waters.

China

• Expanding operational presence around Taiwan.
• Reinforcing sovereignty claims through maritime law-enforcement activities.

Japan

• Engaged in maritime boundary discussions with the Philippines.
• Monitoring Chinese activities that could affect regional security.

Philippines

• Seeking greater legal clarity over maritime boundaries.
• Increasing security cooperation with regional partners.

United States

• Maintaining stability in the Taiwan Strait and broader Indo-Pacific region.
• Supporting freedom of navigation and regional deterrence efforts.

Regional Security Partners

• Including Australia and other Indo-Pacific states concerned about changing maritime dynamics.

Strategic Implications

The patrols illustrate China’s increasing reliance on so-called “grey-zone” tactics, which fall below the threshold of open military conflict while steadily advancing strategic objectives. By deploying Coast Guard vessels rather than naval forces, Beijing can challenge Taiwan’s authority while reducing the risk of immediate military escalation.

The incident also reflects the expanding geographical scope of cross-strait competition. Traditionally concentrated in the Taiwan Strait, tensions are increasingly extending into the Western Pacific, where control of maritime approaches carries significant strategic value for both China and Taiwan.

Furthermore, the timing of the operation suggests that Beijing is seeking to influence regional maritime diplomacy. By responding directly to Japan-Philippines boundary discussions, China is signaling its opposition to initiatives that could strengthen legal and political frameworks contrary to its territorial claims.

The episode reinforces concerns among regional governments that maritime disputes are becoming increasingly interconnected, linking Taiwan, the East China Sea, and the South China Sea into a broader strategic contest.

What’s Next?

Several developments warrant close attention in the coming weeks:

• Taiwan is likely to increase coordination between its military and Coast Guard to strengthen maritime surveillance and response capabilities.
• China may continue deploying Coast Guard vessels east of Taiwan as part of a sustained effort to normalize its operational presence in the area.
• Japan and the Philippines are expected to proceed with maritime boundary discussions despite Beijing’s objections, potentially drawing further diplomatic responses from China.
• Increased activity by the Liaoning carrier group could provide additional indications of China’s broader military objectives in the Western Pacific.
• The United States and regional partners may intensify maritime monitoring and security cooperation to deter unilateral attempts to alter the status quo.

Future outcomes

The incident reflects a broader shift in regional security dynamics, where maritime law-enforcement operations are increasingly being used as instruments of strategic competition. Rather than relying solely on military pressure, China is employing a combination of legal, political, and operational tools to reinforce its territorial claims and shape the regional security environment.

For Taiwan, the challenge extends beyond the immediate presence of Chinese vessels. The longer-term concern lies in preventing the gradual normalization of Chinese activities in areas that Taipei considers vital to its sovereignty and security. As regional actors deepen cooperation on maritime governance and security, incidents of this nature are likely to become an increasingly important indicator of the evolving balance of power in the Indo-Pacific.

With information from Reuters.

NEW YORK — The World Cup, a 48-team, 104-match behemoth kicking off this week in Los Angeles and across 15 other cities in the United States, Mexico and Canada, presents an unprecedented security challenge, with more countries, games and a larger footprint than ever before.

It also comes against the backdrop of the U.S. and Israel’s war with Iran, mounting political violence in President Trump’s orbit and growing fears of artificial intelligence-fueled disruptions, creating a complex threat environment for authorities.

Overseeing the sprawling security apparatus is a legion of federal agencies, state and local police departments and private entities. Their responsibilities range from securing stadiums and fan zones to escorting teams and protecting dignitaries.

Their tools include hunter drones that can shoot nets over objects in restricted airspace, bag-inspecting robot dogs, giant X-ray trucks and thousands of AI-powered cameras trained on public spaces soon to be thronged by fans.

In the U.S., it’s “78 Super Bowls over 39 days,” said Andrew Giuliani, executive director of Trump’s World Cup task force, which is overseeing the multiagency effort.

“There’s never been a summer like this in American history from a security angle,” said Giuliani, son of former New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani. “We’re as prepared as we can be.”

Collaborative effort

The tournament has the same high-level federal security designation as the Super Bowl, just below a presidential inauguration or a national political convention, ensuring federal, state and local coordination. It coincides with other major events linked to the 250th anniversary of America’s founding.

So far, Giuliani said, there are no credible threats.

The Department of Homeland Security, focused on Trump’s immigration enforcement crackdown and with a funding lapse only recently resolved, estimates that as many as 7 million people will visit the United States for the World Cup.

The U.S. Secret Service, under scrutiny after security breaches and attempts on Trump’s life, is in charge of protecting world leaders who show up to cheer on their countries. Trump has expressed interest in attending a match.

“I feel very comfortable where we’re at, and we feel like we have a zero-fail mission,” Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin told Congress last week, noting that the Secret Service was understaffed by about 860 agents. “But it’s going to be complicated.”

Officials have indicated they are confident they can keep Trump safe because they will be integrating his usual security into the robust World Cup plan on days he may watch a match.

The FBI has spent two years developing its security plan, incorporating lessons from other major events such as the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade and New Year’s Eve ball drop in New York and testing them at smaller ones, including last weekend’s Israel Day parade in the city.

“We prepare for the worst day,” FBI Special Agent in Charge Amit Kachhia-Patel in New York told the Associated Press. “And that’s how we go into any single event.”

To help cover security costs, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has distributed $625 million to the 11 U.S. host cities. An additional $250 million is being directed toward tracking and neutralizing suspect drones.

The disbursement of those funds was held up by the department’s funding delay in Congress, which the Trump administration has argued hindered security planning.

Others involved in the planning effort said the federal government could have played a more hands-on role even before the partial shutdown.

John Cohen, a former senior Homeland Security official who has been briefing state leaders before the matches, said the government was largely absent from planning meetings last year and did not begin sharing threat intelligence with host regions until recently.

“With an event of this magnitude, one would expect the federal government would’ve played a more active role,” Cohen said. “It felt like a missed opportunity to showcase that collaboration.”

Evolving threats from drones and AI

In January, thousands of officials involved in World Cup security gathered for exercises simulating crowd surges, vehicle attacks and mass shootings.

A month later, the U.S. and Israel launched a war with Iran.

“The security picture fundamentally changed,” said Stefano Ritondale, chief intelligence officer at Artorias, a defense intelligence company not involved in the security preparations. “There’s a major difference in preparing for a lone-wolf radical who rams his car into a public place and a terrorist who is bankrolled by a foreign country we’re at war with.”

Among the greatest concerns are drones.

Since the last World Cup in Qatar in 2022, drones have become a prominent weapon in conflicts including Russia’s war in Ukraine and Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

“If there is one threat that keeps me up at night, it is from drones,” said New York City Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch, whose department is partnering with the FBI on drone mitigation.

Drones are prohibited over stadiums and fan zones, and Kachhia-Patel said the FBI has a “full suite of options” to thwart incursions. They include agents monitoring the sky and a “variety of means” to safely down the devices, he said without elaborating.

Before this year’s World Cup, the growing sophistication of AI videos was a particular concern, with officials warning that state actors can harness the technology to sow misinformation and panic.

On match days, the FBI will activate joint operations centers in each host city, bringing together local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to monitor and investigate threats.

“If there’s a video that shows an explosion going off at a site, and it’s AI-generated, we have people on the ground who can validate whether or not that’s true,” Kachhia-Patel said.

Opportunity for private tech

Some AI companies have pitched themselves to police departments in host cities, promising to comb through data and surveillance on game days to prevent threats, including unruly fan behavior.

“We know sports fanaticism around here in terms of the NFL and baseball to some extent, but nothing like international soccer,” said Jake Becchina, a police spokesperson in Kansas City, Mo., which is hosting six matches.

The department has contracted with Peregrine Technologies, which promises to sift through police data and publicly available information such as team practice locations and the country affiliation of popular bars, to get ahead of possible conflict.

In Dallas, a recent $120-million tech upgrade will give local police body cameras capable of real-time translations, helping law enforcement communicate with international visitors soon to descend on the region.

Several drone detection and mitigation companies are joining efforts to help federal agencies secure the skies.

One of those companies, Fortem, has claimed to have signed a multimillion-dollar contract with the Department of Homeland Security before the World Cup for an unusual drone mitigation strategy: quadcopters that can shoot nets at encroaching drones to trap them in midair. A Homeland Security spokesman declined to discuss the contract.

Just as the teams will aim to perform their best on the pitch, Giuliani said the security planning was a unique chance to “show off American exceptionalism.”

“If we do our job right,” Giuliani added, “nobody will be talking about security at the World Cup.”

Offenhartz, Sisak and Santana write for the Associated Press. Offenhartz and Sisak reported from New York, Santana from Washington. AP writer Alanna Durkin Richer in Washington contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Former Trump administration national security advisor John Bolton has agreed to plead guilty to a single count of retaining classified information under a deal with the Justice Department that could allow him to avoid prison time, a person familiar with the matter said Thursday.

The deal would resolve a criminal case filed in October that charged Bolton with 18 counts of either retaining or disseminating classified information, including diary-like notes from his time in government that officials say he shared with his family members as he was preparing a memoir about his time in office.

Under the agreement, Bolton would also face a $2.25-million fine, said the person, who insisted on anonymity to discuss a deal that had not been made public. Any prison sentence would be capped at five years, but the agreement allows for him to avoid time behind bars, though the punishment will ultimately be up to a judge.

The case against Bolton, filed weeks after prosecutors secured indictments against former FBI Director James Comey and New York Atty. Gen. Letitia James, unfolded against the backdrop of concerns that the Justice Department was using its law enforcement powers to pursue perceived adversaries of President Trump. The investigation burst into public view last August when FBI agents served search warrants at his Maryland home and Washington office, but it had been well underway by the time Trump returned to the White House in January 2025.

Bolton is a longtime fixture in Republican foreign policy circles who became known for his hawkish views on U.S. power. He served for more than a year in Trump’s first administration before being fired in 2019 and publishing a critical book that portrayed the Republican president as deeply misinformed, an unflattering portrait of his leadership and decision-making.

Trump’s administration fought unsuccessfully to block the publication of “The Room Where it Happened” on the grounds that the book risked disclosing classified information. The plea deal that Bolton will enter covers the notes he shared with relatives as opposed to information published in the tell-all book.

A rearraignment, which typically signals a plea agreement, is scheduled for June 26 in federal court in Greenbelt, Md.

The Justice Department declined to comment.

The indictment’s 18 counts carried a threat of a substantial prison sentence in the event of conviction.

Court documents alleged that he shared with two family members “diary-like” entries with information classified as high as top secret that he had learned from meetings with other U.S. government officials, from intelligence briefings or talks with foreign leaders. After sending one document, Bolton wrote in a message to his relatives, “None of which we talk about!!!” In response, one of his relatives wrote, “Shhhhh,” prosecutors said.

The indictment said that among the material shared was information about foreign adversaries that in some cases revealed details about sources and methods used by the U.S. government to collect intelligence. One document related to a foreign adversary’s plans for a missile launch, while another detailed U.S. government plans for covert action and included intelligence blaming an adversary for an attack, court papers say.

In a statement released after his indictment, Bolton described the charges as part of an “intensive effort” by Trump to intimidate his opponents, to ensure that he alone determines what is said about his conduct.”

Bolton also served in the Department of Justice during President Reagan’s administration and was a State Department point person on arms control during George W. Bush’s presidency.

Bolton was nominated by Bush to serve as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, but the strong supporter of the Iraq war was unable to win Senate confirmation. He resigned after serving 17 months through a recess appointment that allowed him to hold the job on a temporary basis without Senate approval.

In 2018, Bolton was appointed to serve as Trump’s third national security advisor. His brief tenure was characterized by disputes with the president over North Korea, Iran and Ukraine.

Those rifts ultimately led to Bolton’s departure, with Trump announcing on social media in September 2019 that he had accepted Bolton’s resignation.

Bolton subsequently criticized Trump’s approach to foreign policy and government in his book, alleging that Trump directly tied providing military aid to Ukraine to that country’s willingness to conduct investigations into Joe Biden, who was soon to be Trump’s Democratic rival in the 2020 presidential election, and members of the Biden family.

Trump responded by slamming Bolton as a “washed-up guy” and a “crazy” warmonger who would have led the country into “World War Six.”

Tucker writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Alanna Durkin Richer contributed to this report.

Russia’s influence across its traditional sphere of influence is facing growing challenges as the war in Ukraine continues to consume military, economic and diplomatic resources. For decades, Moscow maintained strong ties with former Soviet states through security guarantees, energy supplies and economic integration. However, several longtime partners have increasingly sought closer relations with the West, raising concerns in the Kremlin about the erosion of its geopolitical position.

One of the most notable examples is Armenia, a longtime Russian ally that has recently deepened engagement with the United States and Europe while exploring a path toward eventual European Union membership.

What Happened

Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned Armenia that pursuing closer integration with the European Union could come at a significant economic cost. Ahead of Armenia’s parliamentary elections, Putin suggested that Yerevan could lose access to discounted Russian oil and gas if it continues moving toward the EU.

The warning comes as polls indicate that the party of Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan, who has pursued a more Western-oriented foreign policy, is likely to perform strongly in the vote.

Russia has already taken measures that many observers view as pressure tactics, including temporary restrictions on certain Armenian exports and warnings about possible reductions in economic cooperation.

Why Armenia Is Moving Closer to the West

Relations between Moscow and Yerevan have cooled significantly in recent years. Armenia signed a partnership agreement with the United States last month and has taken legislative steps that could eventually support EU membership aspirations.

Pashinyan’s government argues that Armenia must diversify its international partnerships and reduce its dependence on any single power. Supporters of closer Western ties point to economic opportunities, political reforms and security cooperation as key motivations behind the shift.

Russian officials, however, view Armenia’s growing engagement with Western institutions as part of a broader effort by the United States and Europe to weaken Moscow’s influence in the South Caucasus region.

Russia’s Wider Struggle to Retain Influence

The dispute with Armenia highlights a broader challenge facing Russia as it attempts to preserve its global standing while remaining heavily focused on the war in Ukraine.

Across multiple regions, Moscow is confronting increasing competition from Western powers. In Europe, countries once considered friendly to Russia are strengthening ties with the European Union and NATO. In the Balkans, political pressure is growing on governments that have traditionally maintained close relations with Moscow.

Russia also faces challenges in Moldova’s breakaway region of Transdniestria, where pro-European political forces are gaining influence. In Central Asia, Moscow is closely watching expanding Western engagement in a region it has long regarded as part of its strategic sphere.

Beyond its neighborhood, Russia’s relationships with partners such as Cuba, Venezuela and Iran are being tested as geopolitical dynamics shift and Western pressure intensifies.

What Comes Next

The outcome of Armenia’s parliamentary election will be closely watched in both Moscow and Western capitals. A victory for Pashinyan’s party could strengthen Armenia’s efforts to deepen ties with Europe and the United States, potentially leading to further tensions with Russia.

For the Kremlin, the situation represents a broader strategic dilemma. As the war in Ukraine continues without a clear resolution, Russia must balance military commitments with the need to maintain influence among traditional allies increasingly exploring alternative partnerships.

The coming months are likely to reveal whether Moscow can preserve its position in regions it has long considered part of its sphere of influence or whether Western engagement will continue to reshape the geopolitical landscape across Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus and beyond.

With information from Reuters.

WASHINGTON — Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, under intense grilling at a Senate hearing Tuesday, refused to commit to abiding by federal court orders.

Mullin also conceded that his predecessor as secretary, Kristi Noem, had inaccurately described two shootings involving immigration officers in Minneapolis.

His refusal to commit to complying with court orders came during a testy exchange with Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.). Murphy quoted Chief U.S. District Judge Patrick Schiltz in Minnesota — a Republican appointee — who said Immigration and Customs Enforcement had violated nearly 100 court orders and had “likely violated more court orders in January 2026 than some federal agencies have violated in their entire existence.”

When Murphy asked Mullin to commit to complying with court orders in the future, Mullin replied that his agency would not break the law.

“But that doesn’t sound like the same thing as committing that you will obey a court order,” Murphy said.

“If we didn’t think the courts were politicized, then I would probably be able to answer that. But we see courts over and over again that use their bench for political opinion and not just the rule of law,” Mullin said.

“So you’ll pick and choose which court orders you’ll obey?” Murphy asked,

Mullin told Murphy not to put words in his mouth.

Addressing his fellow senators, Murphy said, “If you’re a Democrat or a Republican on this committee, you should be really, really freaked out.”

Murphy later returned to the court orders question, saying that ignoring judges erodes democracy.

“I agree that there is politics involved in judicial decisions,” he said. “I do not think that gives an excuse to either Democratic or Republican administrations to ignore those court orders. I think that’s actually the end of our republic, if the administration willfully ignores a court order because they disagree with it or its motivation.”

Mullin faced the Senate Appropriations Committee amid scrutiny over the agency’s budget and immigration enforcement ahead of the World Cup. President Trump tapped Mullin to take over leadership of the embattled Department of Homeland Security after Noem was fired in March.

Mullin’s appearance came as the Senate is considering legislation that would fund immigration enforcement agencies through the end of Trump’s term. Republicans intend to use a legislative maneuver that would bypass the need for support from Democrats, who have pushed for reforms since two U.S. citizens were killed by immigration agents in Minneapolis.

During his previous appearance before senators, Mullin projected himself as diplomatic, saying he would work to bring confidence to the agency and keep it out of the news. But recently, he has set the travel industry on edge by threatening to remove Customs and Border Protection officers from airports in so-called sanctuary cities, which limit collaboration with immigration enforcement agents.

Millions of people are preparing to visit the United States for the World Cup, which starts June 11 and includes host cities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco and Seattle. Mullin said he will attend his first soccer game June 12 in Los Angeles.

Murphy, the committee’s top Democrat, made note of Mullin’s promise to keep Homeland Security out of the news. He said the agency has repeatedly broken the law, wasted billions in taxpayer dollars and lined the pockets of private prison corporations.

“Nothing has really gotten better,” he said. “In fact, you spent the first two months of your tenure threatening to suspend international arrivals in states represented by Democrats. Not only would that throw our entire air travel system into chaos, it’s completely illegal.”

Mullin took issue with Murphy’s characterization of the agency’s behavior, calling it political theater. Murphy sat with his head propped up on his hand, looking directly back at his former Senate colleague.

Mullin said threats against immigration agents are up significantly and that Murphy’s “reckless tone is getting people hurt.”

Protests erupted last month outside an immigrant detention facility in New Jersey after detainees launched a hunger and labor strike over what they called inhumane conditions such as rotten food and medical neglect. Tensions have escalated over several days as protesters clashed with law enforcement and counterprotesters.

On Monday in Dallas, Mullin said he would pull Customs officers from airports around the country to help with the security in Newark, if it became necessary.

Addressing the issue of officer training, Mullin said Tuesday that the agency will return next month to 72 days of training for new recruits, including training on crowd control. Last year, then-acting ICE Director Todd Lyons told Congress the agency had reduced the number of training days to 42.

He also said the agency is not “actively patrolling” sensitive locations, such as schools, and said that the agency has stopped relying on administrative warrants to enter a residence by force and is now seeking judicial warrants before doing so in most cases.

Asked by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) about body-worn cameras, Mullin said the agency doesn’t have the money to supply enough body cameras for every immigration officer. Homeland Security received an unprecedented windfall last year of $170 billion under Trump’s sweeping tax bill, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Mullin said the agency suffered a blow to morale because of the historic 76-day shutdown of ICE and CBP after a congressional stalemate over funding.

“Some people couldn’t sustain it,” he said. “We lost a tremendous amount of workforce, about 8%.”

During an exchange with Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mullin acknowledged that Noem had unfairly and inaccurately described two shootings involving immigration officers in Minneapolis.

An ICE agent was recently arrested over the nonfatal shooting of a Venezuelan man, whom Noem had called an attempted murderer.

“That’s an untrue statement, isn’t it?” Van Hollen said.

“From what we have been briefed on, yes,” Mullin replied.

Next, Van Hollen brought up Alex Pretti, who was shot and killed by CBP agents. Noem called him a domestic terrorist.

“You agree the facts don’t support that statement?” Van Hollen said.

“The investigation would say that’s probably not accurate,” Mullin replied.

Mullin was scheduled to appear before the House on Wednesday.

President Trump signed an executive order on artificial intelligence Tuesday, less than two weeks after postponing a White House ceremony over his concerns that a similar policy could dull America’s edge on AI technology.

The order establishes a framework for the federal government to vet the national security risks of the most advanced AI systems for up to a month before their public release. The government will be able to work with trusted partners “that will have early access to covered frontier models to promote secure innovation and strengthen the cybersecurity of critical infrastructure,” the order says.

It was not immediately clear to what extent the order differed from the one he declined to sign on May 21.

Trump canceled an Oval Office event with tech industry executives last month because he did not like what he saw in the earlier version of the order’s text. “We’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead,” Trump told reporters at the time.

That directive was characterized as a voluntary collaboration with participating U.S.-based tech companies, including Anthropic, OpenAI and Google.

O’Brien writes for the Associated Press.

Malaysia has introduced new regulations preventing children under the age of 16 from registering accounts on social media platforms as part of a broader effort to improve online safety and protect minors from harmful digital content.

Under the new rules, major social media companies including Meta Platforms, TikTok, and Alphabet will be required to verify users’ ages using government issued records before allowing new account registrations.

The policy took effect on Monday and is being enforced by the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission. Companies that fail to comply could face fines of up to 10 million ringgit, equivalent to approximately 2.5 million dollars.

Authorities emphasized that the measure is not intended to block children from using the internet entirely, but rather to ensure greater responsibility among technology companies, parents, and guardians in protecting young users online.

How the New Rules Will Work

The new framework requires social media platforms to implement age verification systems that cross check user information against official government records.

While the restrictions immediately apply to new account registrations, existing users will also be subject to age verification measures during a six month implementation period.

The move places greater responsibility on technology companies to ensure that underage users are not able to bypass age requirements through inaccurate information during the registration process.

Growing Concerns Over Children’s Online Safety

Malaysia’s decision reflects increasing global concern about the impact of social media on children and teenagers.

Governments around the world have raised alarms over issues including exposure to harmful content, cyberbullying, online exploitation, misinformation, and the effects of excessive social media use on mental health.

Policymakers argue that stronger safeguards are needed as digital platforms become a central part of daily life for younger generations.

Malaysia’s Wider Crackdown on Online Content

The age restrictions are part of a broader effort by Malaysian authorities to regulate online platforms more aggressively.

Officials have reported a significant increase in harmful online content in recent years and have intensified monitoring of material that could inflame racial or religious tensions. Authorities have also targeted content viewed as insulting or critical of the country’s monarchy.

The government says social media companies must play a more active role in preventing harmful content from reaching vulnerable audiences.

Why It Matters

Malaysia’s decision places it among a growing group of countries seeking stricter regulation of social media platforms and greater protections for children online.

The policy could become a model for other governments considering similar measures, particularly as concerns over digital safety continue to grow worldwide. It also increases pressure on technology companies to develop more reliable age verification systems while balancing privacy concerns and user accessibility.

The move highlights the growing debate over who should bear responsibility for protecting children online, governments, technology firms, or parents.

Key Stakeholders

Children and Teenagers

Young users will face stricter age verification requirements before being allowed to create social media accounts.

Parents and Guardians

Families are expected to play a larger role in monitoring children’s online activities and ensuring compliance with age restrictions.

Social Media Companies

Major technology platforms must implement and maintain age verification systems while ensuring compliance with Malaysian regulations.

Malaysian Government

Authorities aim to reduce children’s exposure to harmful content and strengthen oversight of online platforms.

Digital Rights and Privacy Advocates

Advocacy groups will closely monitor how age verification systems are implemented and whether they affect privacy and data protection standards.

What Happens Next

Social media companies now have six months to complete age verification checks for existing users and fully integrate compliance systems for new registrations.

Regulators are expected to monitor implementation closely and may impose penalties on platforms that fail to meet requirements. The effectiveness of the policy will likely be assessed based on whether it reduces underage access and limits exposure to harmful content.

Other countries in the region may also watch Malaysia’s experience as they consider similar online safety measures.

Analysis

Malaysia’s new restrictions reflect a broader global shift toward stronger regulation of digital platforms, particularly where children are concerned. Governments are increasingly moving away from voluntary industry guidelines and toward legally enforceable requirements that place direct responsibility on technology companies.

The success of the policy will depend largely on the effectiveness of age verification systems. If implementation is weak, underage users may still find ways to access platforms. If verification measures are too strict, however, concerns about privacy, data security, and accessibility could emerge.

The regulation also signals a growing willingness among governments to intervene in how social media platforms operate. As concerns about online safety continue to rise, Malaysia’s approach may become an important test case for balancing child protection, digital rights, and platform accountability in the years ahead.

With information from Reuters.

May 29 (Asia Today) — South Korea and the United States will hold their first meeting in Seoul next week to discuss security issues agreed to at last year’s bilateral summit, including South Korea’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines.

South Korea’s Foreign Ministry said Friday the two sides will hold a launch meeting June 2-3 in Seoul for follow-up consultations on the security provisions of the joint fact sheet issued after the summit.

The meeting will come eight months after the two leaders announced agreements in the security section of the joint fact sheet in October.

The two sides are expected to discuss specific measures related to South Korea’s construction of nuclear-powered submarines, as well as expanded authority over uranium enrichment and spent nuclear fuel reprocessing.

With U.S. midterm elections scheduled for November, negotiations in individual areas are expected to gain momentum.

South Korea will send an interagency delegation led by First Vice Foreign Minister Park Yoon-joo. Officials from the presidential National Security Office, Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, Ministry of Climate and Energy, Ministry of Science and ICT, Ministry of Trade, Industry and Resources and Nuclear Safety and Security Commission will also attend.

The U.S. delegation will be led by Allison Hooker, under secretary of state for political affairs. Officials from the White House National Security Council, State Department, Energy Department and War Department are expected to travel to Seoul for the talks.

— 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=20260529010008720

Hungarian Prime Minister Peter Magyar said he expects to finalize a political agreement with Ursula von der Leyen over the release of billions of euros in frozen European Union funds during talks in Brussels.

The negotiations focus on unlocking financial support that had been suspended under the previous government led by former Prime Minister Viktor Orban due to long standing EU concerns regarding corruption, rule of law standards, and judicial independence.

Hungary is seeking access to approximately 6.5 billion euros in EU recovery grants and 3.9 billion euros in low interest loans before a critical August deadline. Additional structural funds worth around 7 billion euros also remain frozen.

The talks come at a crucial moment for Hungary’s economy, which has struggled with weak growth, fiscal pressure, and budgetary strain over the past three years.

Why It Matters

The potential agreement carries major economic and political significance for both Hungary and the European Union.

For Hungary, securing the release of EU funds is essential to stabilizing public finances, supporting economic growth, and restoring investor confidence. The country’s economy has experienced prolonged stagnation, while high spending pressures and limited fiscal flexibility have increased urgency around external financing.

For the European Union, the negotiations represent an important test of how Brussels balances financial support with enforcement of democratic and governance standards among member states.

The dispute over frozen funds has become one of the most prominent examples of tensions between the EU and governments accused of weakening judicial independence or failing to address corruption concerns.

A successful agreement could signal improving relations between Brussels and Hungary after years of political friction under Orban’s leadership.

Key Stakeholders

Hungary’s Government

Prime Minister Peter Magyar is under pressure to secure financial relief while also demonstrating willingness to meet EU governance expectations.

European Commission

The European Commission must balance political compromise with maintaining credibility on rule of law enforcement and anti corruption standards across the bloc.

Hungarian Economy

Businesses, investors, and public institutions in Hungary are closely watching the outcome because EU funding plays a major role in infrastructure, development, and economic stability.

European Union Member States

Other EU governments are monitoring the negotiations as they could shape future disputes involving rule of law conditions and access to EU financial support.

Analysis

The negotiations reflect a broader shift in Hungary’s relationship with the European Union following the political transition away from Viktor Orban’s administration.

Under Orban, disputes with Brussels became increasingly confrontational, particularly over democratic governance, judicial reforms, media freedoms, and corruption allegations. Peter Magyar appears to be pursuing a more pragmatic approach focused on rebuilding trust with EU institutions while securing urgently needed economic support.

However, the remaining disagreements over anti corruption measures suggest Brussels still wants stronger guarantees before fully releasing funds. This highlights the EU’s growing willingness to use financial leverage as a tool for enforcing governance standards within member states.

For Hungary, the pressure is primarily economic. Frozen EU funds have limited the government’s financial flexibility at a time when growth remains weak and fiscal conditions are strained. Unlocking the money would provide both immediate economic relief and an important political victory for Magyar’s government.

At the same time, the negotiations also carry symbolic importance for the EU itself. Brussels will want to demonstrate that compromise does not come at the expense of accountability, especially after years of criticism over democratic backsliding within the bloc.

Future Outlook

If a political agreement is finalized, Hungary could begin unlocking critical EU funding in the coming months, easing fiscal pressure and improving economic confidence.

However, implementation will remain important. Brussels is likely to continue closely monitoring Hungary’s anti corruption reforms and governance commitments before fully releasing all frozen funds.

A successful deal may also help normalize Hungary’s relationship with the European Union after years of tension, potentially opening the door for broader cooperation on economic and political issues.

At the same time, the outcome could influence future EU disputes involving rule of law conditions and financial oversight, particularly as Brussels increasingly links access to funding with governance standards.

For Hungary, the immediate priority remains economic stabilization. But politically, the negotiations may also determine whether Peter Magyar can establish a more cooperative and sustainable relationship with Europe while distancing his administration from the confrontational legacy of the Orban era.

With information from Reuters.

New research from the European Central Bank suggests that the economic impact of the Iran war may be affecting euro zone consumers more deeply and rapidly than previous geopolitical crises, raising concerns about inflation, slowing growth, and long term economic uncertainty across Europe.

According to ECB economists, European consumers appear to be reacting more sensitively to rising prices and economic instability because many households are still psychologically affected by the financial stress caused by the Russia Ukraine war and the energy crisis that followed in 2022.

The latest conflict involving Iran, triggered after United States and Israeli airstrikes earlier this year, caused major disruptions to global energy supplies and reignited fears of another inflation shock throughout Europe.

ECB researchers found that consumers quickly became more attentive to price increases even while inflation remained close to the central bank’s 2 percent target. Economists believe this reaction reflects growing public anxiety over repeated geopolitical and economic disruptions.

Why It Matters

The findings raise serious concerns for Europe’s economic recovery because consumer confidence plays a critical role in spending, investment, and overall growth.

When households become highly sensitive to inflation and uncertainty, they often reduce spending, delay purchases, and increase savings out of caution. This behavior can weaken economic activity and slow recovery across key sectors including retail, manufacturing, housing, and services.

ECB researchers warned that Europe may now face the risk of a more persistent stagflation environment, where inflation remains elevated while economic growth slows simultaneously.

The Iran war also exposed Europe’s continuing vulnerability to global energy shocks. Despite efforts to reduce dependence on Russian energy after the Ukraine conflict, Europe remains heavily exposed to disruptions in global oil and gas markets.

Although oil prices have recently eased amid hopes for diplomacy, they surged sharply earlier this year during the height of the Iran conflict, intensifying inflationary pressure across the euro zone.

Key Stakeholders

Several major stakeholders are directly affected by the growing economic uncertainty surrounding the Iran war and Europe’s inflation outlook.

European Central Bank

The ECB faces increasing pressure to balance inflation control with economic stability. Policymakers are now widely expected to continue raising interest rates in an effort to prevent inflation expectations from becoming entrenched among consumers and businesses.

European Consumers

Households across Europe remain at the center of the crisis. Rising living costs, energy prices, and borrowing expenses continue placing pressure on disposable incomes and consumer confidence.

Businesses and Industries

European businesses, particularly energy intensive industries, face higher operating costs and weaker consumer demand. Continued uncertainty may reduce investment activity and slow hiring across multiple sectors.

Energy Markets

Global oil and gas markets remain highly sensitive to developments in the Middle East. Any renewed escalation involving Iran could rapidly push energy prices higher again, directly affecting inflation and economic stability in Europe.

Governments Across Europe

European governments may face growing political pressure if inflation remains persistent while economic growth weakens. Policymakers could be forced to increase public spending or introduce additional support measures for households and industries.

Future Outlook

The coming months are likely to become a critical period for the euro zone economy as European policymakers attempt to manage the combined effects of geopolitical instability, inflation concerns, and slowing growth.

Much will depend on whether tensions in the Middle East continue easing or whether new disruptions emerge in global energy markets. A stable diplomatic environment could help reduce inflationary pressure and restore consumer confidence gradually.

However, ECB researchers warn that the psychological impact of repeated crises may continue shaping consumer behavior long after energy prices stabilize. Many Europeans who experienced financial stress during the Ukraine war now appear quicker to react to fears of inflation and economic instability.

The ECB is therefore expected to maintain a cautious but firm monetary stance in the near term, with additional interest rate increases remaining highly likely.

If inflation remains elevated while economic growth weakens, Europe could face a prolonged period of economic stagnation combined with reduced consumer spending and higher borrowing costs.

The situation highlights how modern geopolitical conflicts increasingly influence not only energy and security policy but also consumer psychology, market behavior, and long term economic confidence across global economies.

With information from Reuters.

Across South Asia, concerns over press freedom, political influence, and media credibility are drawing increasing international scrutiny. From Bangladesh and Pakistan to India, journalists and independent media organisations face mounting political, economic, and legal pressures that are reshaping how information is produced and consumed.

Recent international assessments point to what rights groups describe as a broader regional decline in media independence. The 2026 World Press Freedom Index placed multiple South Asian countries near the lower end of global rankings, reflecting concerns over censorship, political pressure, and growing ideological polarisation within news ecosystems.

Among these cases, India continues to attract the most sustained global attention due to its scale, democratic profile, and influence as the world’s largest electoral democracy.

When a country that defines itself as a global democratic model falls to 157th out of 180 nations on the World Press Freedom Index, the question is no longer whether there are challenges within its media environment. The question is how deeply those challenges have reshaped journalism itself.

Together with other regional indicators, the findings suggest not isolated failures but a structural transformation in how media systems operate across South Asia.

The concerns highlighted in global reports do not exist in isolation. Across South Asia, governments and political actors are increasingly accused of exerting pressure on journalists through legal action, advertising influence, regulatory scrutiny, and informal intimidation.

According to World Press Freedom Index in 2026, Bangladesh stood at 152nd. Afghanistan remained among the lowest-ranked countries globally, reflecting ongoing restrictions on press activity. Nepal, while comparatively better positioned at 87th, has also faced periodic concerns over political influence and media ownership concentration.

Analysts argue that while each country’s political context differs, a shared pattern is emerging: fragile media economies, heightened political polarisation, and increasing hostility toward independent journalism.

However, India’s trajectory is often singled out due to its democratic stature and its role as a regional political and cultural benchmark. This contrast between democratic identity and media freedom rankings has intensified global debate about the state of its information ecosystem.

Political Influence and the Changing Nature of News

Within India, one of the central concerns raised by international observers is the perceived growth of political influence over large sections of mainstream media.

A detailed report by Genocide Watch described what it termed a “severe crisis of credibility” in parts of the Indian media landscape, arguing that dominant narratives in some outlets increasingly align with those of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party rather than independently scrutinising power.

This does not imply uniformity across the entire media sector. India still has a diverse ecosystem of investigative journalists, regional newspapers, and independent digital platforms producing critical reporting. However, critics argue that the dominant tone of mainstream television and high-visibility digital media increasingly reflects political messaging rather than adversarial journalism.

The Reporters Without Borders (RSF) assessment echoed concerns about structural vulnerabilities. It highlighted the heavy dependence of Indian media on advertising revenue, including significant spending by both central and state governments. Critics argue that this financial structure creates subtle incentives for compliance, where editorial decisions may be influenced not through direct censorship, but through economic dependency.

In such an environment, formal restrictions are often unnecessary. Editorial caution can emerge internally, as news organisations weigh political and financial risks before pursuing certain stories.

The Rise of Divisive Television Narratives

Another recurring concern involves the increasing polarisation of televised political discourse.

Genocide Watch and other rights-focused assessments have warned that sections of mainstream media increasingly frame political and social issues through identity-based narratives, often centred on religion and nationalism. Complex policy debates are frequently simplified into binary positions, contributing to heightened social tension.

Human Rights Watch, in its World Report 2026, also documented concerns that hostile rhetoric in parts of media and online spaces has coincided with rising incidents of discrimination and attacks against minority communities, including Muslims in different parts of the country.

While causation is difficult to establish definitively, observers argue that repeated framing of communities through suspicion or collective identity can contribute to an environment where social hostility becomes easier to normalise.

The RSF report additionally pointed to structural imbalances within media representation, noting concerns about concentration of leadership within certain social groups and the underrepresentation of women in prominent political debate programming. These imbalances, critics argue, shape not only who speaks in media spaces, but also which perspectives are amplified or marginalised.

Self-Censorship and Invisible Constraints

Not all constraints on journalism are explicit. In many cases, they manifest as self-censorship.

According to Genocide Watch, journalists and editors increasingly avoid topics that could lead to political backlash, regulatory scrutiny, legal threats, or coordinated online harassment campaigns. Over time, this produces a newsroom culture in which certain subjects are quietly excluded before formal editorial decisions are even made.

This form of pressure is difficult to measure, but its effects can be significant. When reporters internalise risk calculations, the range of publicly available information can narrow without any formal ban or directive.

RSF similarly highlighted concerns over actions taken against independent journalists, commentators, and publications. It cited instances of restrictions, legal pressure, and bans on certain media outlets in sensitive regions, including Jammu and Kashmir, where authorities have taken action against publications accused of promoting separatism.

Critics argue that such measures contribute to a wider climate of caution, particularly around politically sensitive reporting.

A Broader Democratic Stress Test

The implications of these developments extend beyond journalism alone.

Genocide Watch framed the weakening of press freedom as part of a broader institutional credibility challenge linked to political polarisation and majoritarian dynamics. In this view, media independence is not an isolated issue but part of a wider ecosystem that includes accountability, governance, and civic trust.

A free press plays a central role in democratic systems by enabling scrutiny of power and facilitating informed public debate. When that role weakens, the consequences extend into how citizens engage with institutions and interpret political realities.

India’s trajectory in the RSF index over recent years reflects this concern. The country ranked 150th in 2022, fell further to 161st in 2023, improved slightly to 151st in 2025, and then declined again to 157th in 2026. Analysts interpret this pattern not as random fluctuation but as part of a longer-term structural challenge.

At the same time, government supporters argue that India remains a robust electoral democracy with active institutions, a vibrant political opposition, and a highly diverse media landscape. They contend that international rankings often fail to capture the complexity of India’s scale, security challenges, and internal diversity.

The debate, therefore, is not solely about classification, but about how democratic quality itself should be assessed.

South Asia in a Global Decline

These concerns are unfolding within a broader global downturn in press freedom. RSF’s 2026 index noted that worldwide media freedom has reached its weakest level in 25 years, with more than half of all countries classified as having “difficult” or “very serious” conditions.

South Asia reflects this global trend particularly sharply. Alongside India, countries such as Bangladesh remain in the lower tiers of the global rankings, highlighting shared regional challenges around political influence, media ownership concentration, and journalist safety.

Yet despite this broader pattern, analysts continue to emphasise that each country’s trajectory is shaped by its own political history and institutional structures. In India’s case, its global influence and democratic identity make developments in its media landscape particularly consequential for international observers.

What Is Ultimately at Stake

The credibility of media systems plays a central role in shaping the health of democratic life. Journalism informs not only public debate but also citizens’ ability to evaluate leadership, understand policy decisions, and hold institutions accountable.

When trust in media declines, democratic accountability becomes harder to sustain.

The findings from Genocide Watch and RSF should therefore be viewed not simply as criticism of individual outlets or governments, but as indicators of broader institutional stress across South Asia.

Addressing these challenges would require a combination of stronger protections for editorial independence, more diversified ownership structures, reduced reliance on state advertising, and greater safeguards for journalists facing intimidation or harassment.

Despite these pressures, the region continues to produce significant investigative journalism and independent reporting under difficult conditions. Many journalists continue to work at considerable personal and professional risk to maintain public access to information.

Acknowledging structural challenges across South Asia is not an indictment of any single democracy. Rather, it is increasingly seen by analysts as a necessary step toward strengthening the democratic principles that the region’s constitutions and institutions claim to uphold.

With information from Reuters.

Here’s everything UK holidaymakers need to know before heading there this summer, from entry requirements to taxi use and dress code

Turkey remains a firm favourite amongst British holidaymakers, with thousands of people flying out to the country each year. Anyone planning a trip there this year is strongly advised to familiarise themselves with all current travel guidance and any warnings in place.

The UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) provides a wealth of information on its website, covering countries across the globe. It’s an invaluable resource for anyone with holidays booked or considering travelling abroad, reports Chronicle Live..

If you’re heading to Turkey, there are several important things to be aware of. We’ve outlined the key travel warnings and advice below.

The Foreign Office states: “If you choose to travel, research your destinations and get appropriate travel insurance. Insurance should cover your itinerary, planned activities and expenses in an emergency.” It also cautions: “Your travel insurance could be invalidated if you travel against advice from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO).”

Warning over Turkey- Syria border

The FCDO advises against all travel to within 10km of the border with Syria due to ongoing fighting and an increased risk of terrorism. The FCDO states: “Fighting in Syria continues in areas close to the Turkish border and there is a heightened risk of terrorism in the region. Due to the ongoing conflict in Syria, roads in Hatay Province leading towards the border may be closed at short notice.”

Entry requirements

To enter Turkey, your passport must have an ‘expiry date’ at least 150 days beyond the date you arrive and at least one blank page. If you’re entering at a land border, ensure officials stamp and date your passport at the border crossing.

The FCDO says: “Check with your travel provider that your passport and other travel documents meet requirements. Renew your passport if you need to. You will be denied entry if you do not have a valid travel document or try to use a passport that has been reported lost or stolen.” You can visit Turkey without a visa for up to 90 days within any 180-day period, for business or tourism purposes.

Political situation

The Foreign Office states: “Regular demonstrations and protests are currently taking place in Istanbul and other cities across Turkey. Demonstrations may become violent. The police response has included use of tear gas and water cannons.

“Events in Israel and Palestine have led to heightened tensions in the region and in locations across Turkey. Demonstrations continue to occur outside diplomatic missions connected to the conflict in major cities, particularly Israeli diplomatic missions in Ankara and Istanbul. Avoid all demonstrations and leave the area if one develops. Local transport routes may be disrupted.”

Drink and food spiking

The FCDO warns: “Be wary of strangers approaching you to change money, or to take you to a restaurant or nightclub. If strangers offer you food and drink these could be spiked. Buy your own drinks and always keep sight of them.”

Holidaymakers are being cautioned that there have previously been instances of severe illness caused by alcoholic beverages containing methanol in popular tourist destinations across the globe. The FCDO says: “In Turkey, including Ankara and Istanbul, people have died or suffered serious illness after drinking illegally produced local spirits and counterfeit bottles of branded alcohol.

“Even small amounts of methanol can kill. It is not possible to identify methanol in alcoholic drinks by taste or smell. See Travel Aware Drink Spiking and methanol poisoning for information about how to reduce the risks. Seek urgent medical attention if you or someone you are travelling with show the signs of methanol poisoning after drinking.”

Taxis The website says: “Accepting lifts from drivers of unofficial taxis is highly risky. Find a registered taxi, note the registration number before entering and ensure the fare is metered. App-based taxis and pre-booked taxis are also widely available.”

Carry your ID

It is illegal not to carry some form of photographic ID in Turkey. Always carry your passport or residence permit. In some busy areas, especially Istanbul, the authorities may stop people for ID checks. There are also several police checkpoints on main roads across Turkey. Cooperate with officials conducting checks.

Dress code

Holidaymakers are also given guidance on appropriate attire. The FCDO advises people to “dress modestly if you’re visiting a mosque or a religious shrine to avoid causing offence”.

Stray dogs

The Foreign Office says: “Most towns and cities have stray dogs. Packs congregate in parks and wastelands and can be aggressive. Take care and do not approach stray dogs. If you’re bitten, get medical advice immediately. Rabies and other animal borne diseases are present in Turkey.”

Rules over sale of antiquities

Purchasing or exporting antiquities is prohibited. You could face a fine and a prison sentence of 5 to 12 years. Certain historical items found at local markets and in antique shops may be sold within Turkey but are forbidden from being exported. Always verify the status of antique items before making a purchase.

WASHINGTON — Republican senators are considering dropping a proposal for $1 billion in security money for the White House complex and President Trump’s ballroom after it has failed to win enough party support on Capitol Hill.

Pressured by the White House, Republicans have tried to add the money to a roughly $70-billion bill to restore funding to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol. But the security proposal has met with backlash from some GOP lawmakers who are questioning the cost and the lack of detail from the White House and U.S. Secret Service about how the taxpayer dollars would be used.

Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) said Wednesday that the bill was “back to square one” without the security money because “the votes are not there.”

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said the effort to add the security package to the bill was a “bad idea” and he does not think there is enough backing to pass it, even if it were reduced.

The text of the bill has not yet been released. But Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) acknowledged “ongoing vote issues” as leaders try to measure Republican support, as well as “ongoing parliamentarian issues” as they try to figure out what will be allowed in the bill under the chamber’s rules.

The wrangling comes as Democrats have criticized Republicans for trying to fund Trump’s ballroom when voters are concerned about basic affordability issues — and as some GOP lawmakers have grown increasingly frustrated with Trump. Several have spoken out against the administration’s $1.8-billion settlement fund designed to compensate Trump’s allies, and many were upset by the president’s endorsement Tuesday of Texas Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton in the party primary runoff next week against Sen. John Cornyn.

“There’s always a consequence with taking on United States senators,” Thune said. Trump “obviously has his favorites and people he wants to endorse and that’s his prerogative. But what we have to deal with up here is moving the agenda, and obviously that can become slightly more complicated.”

Republican opposition blocks Secret Service request

Under the Secret Service request, about $220 million would pay for security improvements related to the ballroom. The rest would go for a new screening center for visitors, training and other security measures.

Tillis said the bill should not have included the other security improvements “because it’s just giving everybody the ‘billion-dollar ballroom.’”

“They need to explain to me why we need this,” Tillis said, noting that Trump had originally said private money would cover the project.

Several other Republicans in the House and Senate have questioned the request, and senators left a briefing with the director of the Secret Service last week saying they needed a lot more information.

People “can’t afford groceries and gasoline and healthcare, and we’re going to do a billion dollars for a ballroom?” asked Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who lost reelection in the GOP primary on Saturday after Trump endorsed one of his opponents.

Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.) said he is supportive of the security money and thinks it is necessary to protect the president. But he acknowledged that the optics are not very good for Republicans, and that they have not communicated about it well.

“We’ve got people out there who are worried about how in the world they’re going to have enough gas to get home,” Justice said.

Tensions rise between Senate and White House

As Republicans challenged parts of his agenda, Trump unloaded on the Senate in a social media post.

He urged Republicans to fire the Senate parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, who said over the weekend that parts of the $1-billion security proposal cannot remain in the ICE and Border Patrol bill. Trump renewed his long-standing calls for the Senate to pass the SAVE Act, a Republican bill that would require all voters to prove U.S. citizenship, and to end the Senate filibuster.

“Republicans play a very soft game compared to the Dumocrats,” he wrote. “It is their single biggest disadvantage in politics.”

Trump said Democrats would eliminate the filibuster “on the First Day” if they ever get full power in Washington again and that Republicans need to “get smart and tough” or “you’ll all be looking for a job much sooner than you thought possible!”

Republicans have been loyal to Trump on most issues, but they have resisted his repeated calls — even in his first term — to kill the filibuster, which triggers a 60-vote threshold in the Senate.

Hanging over the growing GOP rift is Trump’s surprise endorsement of Paxton. That intervention has Republican senators privately fuming that it could cost them their majority in November as they view the incumbent, Cornyn, as the better candidate in the November general election.

Democrats test Republicans on settlement fund

As Republicans move forward on the immigration enforcement legislation, Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Democrats plan to force a vote on Trump’s proposed settlement fund.

Democrats have an opening because Republicans are trying to pass the immigration enforcement bill through a complicated budget process that requires a long series of amendment votes. Democrats are considering multiple amendments potentially to block that new fund outright or to ban any payments to Trump supporters who harmed law enforcement officers in the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.

Those amendments, along with others, could pass as a growing number of Republicans speak out against the fund and other parts of Trump’s agenda.

Thune said he was “not a big fan” of the new fund, which the administration announced as a part of a settlement that resolves the president’s lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of his tax returns. Cassidy called it a “slush fund” and said “you can’t just make up things.”

Tillis said he thinks it is a “real risk” that some of the rioters charged — and later pardoned by Trump — in the Jan. 6 attack could get compensation through the fund. He said that would be “absurd.”

On Wednesday, two police officers who helped defend the Capitol in the 2021 assault sued to block the payouts. Acting Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche, a personal attorney for Trump before joining the Department of Justice in Trump’s second term, would not rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police on Jan. 6 would be eligible for compensation when he testified in a Senate hearing this week.

Jalonick, Freking and Cappelletti write for the Associated Press.