suspend

A group of Walt Disney Co. shareholders is demanding the company release information related to the suspension of late-night host Jimmy Kimmel, according to a recent letter.

The letter, dated Wednesday and sent by the American Federation of Teachers union and press freedom group Reporters Without Borders, said the groups want transparency into Disney’s decision last week to indefinitely suspend the show “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” following comments he made in his monologue about the shooter who killed conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Disney reinstated Kimmel’s show Tuesday, saying in a statement that the initial decision was made to “avoid further inflaming a tense situation at an emotional moment for our country” and calling some of his comments “ill-timed and thus insensitive.”

The late-night host’s suspension set off a political firestorm and nationwide debate about free speech. Protesters demonstrated outside the El Capitan Theatre in Hollywood as well as Disney’s Burbank headquarters. More than 400 celebrities signed an open letter decrying attempts at government censorship. Some called for consumers to cancel their Disney+ streaming subscriptions.

“Disney shareholders deserve the truth about exactly what went down inside the company after Brendan Carr’s threat to punish ABC unless action was taken against Jimmy Kimmel,” American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten said in a statement. “The Disney board has a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of its shareholders — and we are seeking answers to discover if that bond was broken to kowtow to the Trump administration.”

Prior to the initial suspension decision, Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr had called for Disney to take action against Kimmel during a podcast interview that aired last week. Carr said there could be consequences for the TV stations that carry his show. Shortly before Disney announced Kimmel’s initial suspension, TV station groups Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcast Group each said they would preempt the show and have said they will not bring it back.

The letter calls for Disney to provide records, including any meeting minutes or written materials, related to the suspension or return of Kimmel’s show.

“There is a credible basis to suspect that the Board and executives may have breached their fiduciary duties of loyalty, care, and good faith by placing improper political or affiliate considerations above the best interests of the Company and its stockholders,” the letter said.

Disney did not respond to a request for comment.

Times staff writer Meg James contributed to this report.

The hugely popular star of ABC’s lineup was known as an outspoken critic of the president of the United States. But when one comment sparked an outrage, the network moved swiftly to yank the entertainer off the air.

It was May 2018, and the star was Roseanne Barr.

Hollywood reacted in shock when ABC abruptly pulled the plug on “Roseanne,” the top-rated reboot of the sitcom about the Conner family and their struggles with harsh economic difficulties. Barr’s reunion with her television family was an instant hit, becoming the most successful TV series on the network in years.

The cancellation came just hours after Barr posted a response to a tweet about a WikiLeaks report claiming that the CIA spied on French presidential candidates during the Obama administration. The comedian made a reference to Valerie Jarrett, a former aide of former President Obama, as the offspring of the Muslim Brotherhood and the “Planet of the Apes” film franchise.

Although Barr, a vocal supporter of Donald Trump in his first presidential term, had long been a fiery presence on social media, the racism of the barb was undeniable. Executives at the Walt Disney Co.-owned broadcaster said that the post crossed a line, rejecting Barr’s apology and pleas for forgiveness.

“Roseanne’s Twitter statement is abhorrent, repugnant and inconsistent with our values, and we have decided to cancel her show,” announced then-ABC Entertainment President Channing Dungey. Disney Chief Executive Bob Iger later tweeted about the cancellation, “There was only one thing to do here, and that was the right thing.”

The incident had echoes of Wednesday’s announcement that ABC was pulling “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” indefinitely in the wake of sharp backlash over Kimmel’s comments about slain right-wing activist Charlie Kirk. The late-night host said during the monologue on his show Monday that Tyler Robinson, the Utah man accused in the shooting death of Kirk, might have been a pro-Trump Republican.

The network’s decision to suspend the show came after Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr suggested on a right-wing podcast Wednesday that the FCC could take action against ABC for Kimmel’s comments. Within hours of Carr’s comments, Nexstar Media Group said it would pull the show from its ABC affiliate stations, and Walt Disney Co., which owns ABC, followed suit, saying it was pulling Kimmel from the network.

Barr on Thursday jumped into the fray over the pulling of Kimmel’s show, firing off a response to Obama’s post on X, formerly Twitter, saying that the Trump administration was taking “cancel culture” to “a new and dangerous level.”

“Remember when you and your wife called Bob Iger to have me fired?” Barr wrote in a repost of his message.

There were no reports or indications that the Obamas had any involvement with the cancellation of “Roseanne.”

Less than six months later, “The Conners,” a spinoff of “Roseanne,” premiered to high ratings. The series picked up the story of the working class family, who were grieving over the death of matriarch Roseanne Conner, who had overdosed on opioids. The comedy became a staple of ABC’s primetime, concluding its seven-season run in April.

In a 2023 Times interview promoting her stand-up special on Fox Nation, Barr called the cancellation “a witch-burning,” lashing out at the network and her former co-stars.

“I felt like the devil himself was coming against me to try to tear me apart, to punish me for believing in God,” she said. “And they denied me the right to apologize. Oh my God, they just hated me so badly. I had never known that they hated me like that. They hate me because I have talent, because I have an opinion. Even though ‘Roseanne’ became their No. 1 show, they’d rather not have a No. 1 show.”

She added, “It didn’t faze them to murder my character, either. They s— on my contribution to television and the show itself. But I forgive everybody. I started thinking that God took me out of there to save me. And once I started thinking that way, I was, like, a lot better off.”

In “NCIS: Tony & Ziva,” premiering Thursday on Paramount+, two popular characters from the CBS military procedural “NCIS,” have been brought back after several years and given a series of their own. Michael Weatherly and Cote de Pablo, as special agents Anthony “Tony” DiNozzo and Ziva David, so occupied the romantic fantasies of viewers that their names were portmanteaued into “Tiva.” (You can find thousands of instances of Tiva-themed fan fiction online.) As to the will-they, won’t-they of the relationship, they finally did, before they didn’t, and now they have a 12-year-old daughter, Tali (Isla Gie), whom they’re amicably co-parenting.

I have looked in on the franchise now and again, professionally, as new iterations have extended the length and breadth of the brand, which technically reaches back into “JAG,” from which it was spun off. But I’m not even going to attempt to pretend to have any real expertise in the adventures of a large rotating cast over 22 seasons. (It’s been renewed for a 23rd.) But I respect the institution — the original of which has been and may be now America’s most watched series — and its longevity, as I will salute your long marriage.

At the same time, once you know the basic premise of the show — it’s an elite military police procedural — it’s not hard to figure out where you are, wherever you drop in. The characters may be heroic or eccentric, but they’re heroic or eccentric within a recognized mold, with enough individual personality to make them lovable over a long run, and you can pick up on the interpersonal vibes pretty quickly.

Unlike earlier “NCIS” series, all based on broadcast television, “Tony & Ziva” is platformed on Paramount+, which means that characters utter a bad word now and again — it doesn’t get much edgier than that, and despite the sexual heat it’s hardly racy — and that there’s a budget which allows for foreign locations and big action scenes. And where the earlier shows, notwithstanding soap operatic long arcs, are fundamentally episodic, “Tony & Ziva” is a serial story, stretched over 10 episodes. Whether it’s stretched to breaking, we’ll have to wait and see; only four episodes out of 10 were offered for review.

The crime-fighting combo of a roguish guy and a no-nonsense gal is familiar from “Moonlighting” and “Castle.” Even the fact that the title joins Tony and Ziva with an ampersand and not an “and” indicates a certain lightness of tone, and when Tony, speaking of his company, says, “We try to walk that fine line between techno thriller and workplace comedy,” he is, of course, describing the very series he’s in. A strain of comedy is common to team-based procedurals, and it’s certainly part of what’s kept “NCIS” going strong all these years.

Given that the American brand hasn’t been as toxic, internationally and domestically, since the Vietnam era, possibly, and that “NCIS” series show around the world, it’s just as well that the presumed villains are (apparently) not the anti-American, freedom-hating terrorists one often finds in these things, but Bond-type stateless actors merely seeking power and money.

Additionally, the series — whose earlier iterations have been based in Washington, Los Angeles, New Orleans, Hawaii, Sydney and, in last year’s prequel, “NCIS: Origins,” exotic Oceanside, Calif. — is set in Paris, where, having gone civilian, Ziva has opened a fancy language school and Tony runs a high-end security service. (Among his clients: Interpol. You can’t get more European than that.) Along with easy access to croissants and café au lait, our heroes have the benefit of not having to wax patriotic about a country in which they no longer live. It feels very 2025.

The series’ MacGuffin is a magical thumb drive that, when plugged into a computer system, can seemingly do anything at all; possessing it, therefore, is an issue for both the good guys and the bad, into whose respective hands it goes in and out. When villains use it to frame Tony for extorting money from a hospital and threaten Tali’s life, Tony and Ziva are dragged back into a life of running, shooting, reckless driving and fisticuffs. “Two words,” says Tony, observing Ziva take apart a thug endangering her daughter. “Jewish mother.”

Most important, it puts the pair on the run together — the opening episodes find them (ostensibly and/or actually) in France, Italy, Switzerland and Hungary — and into constant close quarters, where old tender feelings simmer and the question of sharing a bed arises, as in “The 39 Steps,” the greatest of all innocent-and-on-the-run romances.

Ziva, whose pre-NCIS employment was as an assassin for the Israeli secret service — perhaps not the best job for a TV heroine to have on her resume nowadays, but it’s not an issue here — has hung on to an arsenal and plural safe houses. (“Have I ever told you how deeply I appreciate your paranoia?” Tony tells her.) And they’ve both kept their old NCIS badges, which they will flash to dazzle security guards and the like.

Along the way they pick up Boris (Maximilian Osinski), a non-aligned Russian hacker who made the MacGuffin in the first place, and his chirpy fiancee Fruzsi (Anne-Marie Waldeck), who provide both comedy and the image of a healthy, all-in romantic relationship to contrast with that of our hesitating heroes. Filling out the ranks are Tali’s capable nanny, Sophie (Lara Rossi), and Tony’s resident tech whiz, Claudette (Amita Suman), because you apparently can’t plot a thriller anymore without computers at the center of things. By virtue of being Tony’s friend and Tali’s godfather, Interpol exec Henry (James D’Arcy) is the sort of character you expect to turn out to be bad, though it’s up in the air. I’ll say no more about Martine (Nassima Benchicou), other than that Benchicou is very good at being very bad.

Created by John McNamara (“The Magicians”), not previously part of the “NCIS” world, “Tony & Ziva” can be quite absurd, depending heavily on suspensions of disbelief, or a viewer just not thinking too hard. This does not set it apart from a great many such screenplays, and the series does not shy away from genre tropes — the car chase through a marketplace, a fight with a seemingly unbeatable big bald bruiser. Indeed, it embraces them.

But what makes the show worth watching are Weatherly and De Pablo, two extremely attractive middle-aged people with genuine chemistry; he’s superheroically unflappable without ever seeming anything but a regular Joe. She’s sad and serious and not to be messed with. They’ve been around; they have worn edges, and when they intersect, it generates something authentically sweet, as real as the rest of the series is improbable. There’s a reason for all that fan fiction.

US tariff exemption on packages worth $800 or less due to end this week.

Mexico says it will suspend package shipments to the United States before the end of a tariff exemption for small-value packages.

The announcement on Wednesday follows similar moves by postal services from several European countries, including Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Italy, and the United Kingdom, as they await  further details from the US government.

The “de minimis” exemption has allowed packages worth less than $800 to enter the US tariff-free since 2016, but the loophole is set to expire on Friday.

The change is expected to dent the business of Chinese e-commerce platforms like Shein and Temu – which have evaded US tariffs by mailing directly to customers – but it has also created confusion for other US trade partners. Mexico said it will suspend shipments pending more details from Washington about new duties.

“Mexico continues its dialogue with US authorities and international postal organisations to define mechanisms that will allow for the orderly resumption of services, providing certainty to users and avoiding setbacks in the delivery of goods,” the government said.

Shipping giant DHL said “key questions remain unresolved, particularly regarding how and by whom customs duties will be collected in the future, what additional data will be required, and how the data transmission to the US Customs and Border Protection will be carried out.”

The White House announced plans to suspend the de minimis exemption for all countries on July 30, as part of US President Donald Trump’s wider trade war.

The exemption was previously suspended for China, Hong Kong, Mexico, and Canada due to concerns about the flow of fentanyl and other drugs over the US border.

A White House Fact Sheet released on July 30 said two schemes may be used to calculate tariffs for small packages.

The first is calculated based on the value of the package, while the second scheme sets a tariff of $80 to $200 per item.

Both rates are based on the blanket tariff set by the Trump administration for most US trade partners in August, ranging from 10 to 40 percent.

The White House has also imposed tariffs on individual sectors, such as semiconductors, steel and aluminium, vehicles and auto parts.

Mexico is still negotiating its tariff rate with the US, and has pledged to raise tariffs on Chinese goods and take tougher measures against drug cartels to secure a deal with Trump. Some goods, however, will still be covered by the 2020 free trade US-Mexico-Canada Agreement.

ATHENS — The end of an exemption on tariff duties for low-value packages coming into the United States is causing multiple international postal services to pause shipping to the U.S. as they await more clarity on the rule.

The exemption, known as the “de minimis” exemption, allows packages worth less than $800 to come into the U.S. duty-free. A total of 1.36 billion packages were sent in 2024 under this exemption, for goods worth $64.6 billion, according to data from the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Agency.

It is set to expire Friday. On Saturday, postal services around Europe announced that they are suspending the shipment of many packages to the United States amid confusion over new import duties.

Postal services in Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Italy said they will stop shipping most merchandise to the U.S. effective immediately. France and Austria will follow Monday.

The U.K.’s Royal Mail said it would halt shipments to the U.S. on Tuesday to allow time for those packages to arrive before duties kick in. Items originating in the U.K. worth over $100 — including gifts to friends and family — will incur a 10% duty, it said.

“Key questions remain unresolved, particularly regarding how and by whom customs duties will be collected in the future, what additional data will be required, and how the data transmission to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection will be carried out,” DHL, the largest shipping provider in Europe, said in a statement.

The company said that starting Saturday it “will no longer be able to accept and transport parcels and postal items containing goods from business customers destined for the U.S.”

A trade framework agreed on by the U.S. and the European Union last month set a 15% tariff on the vast majority of products shipped from the EU. Packages under $800 will now also be subject to the tariff.

The U.S. duty-free exemption for goods originating from China ended in May as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to curb American shoppers from ordering low-value Chinese goods. The exemption is being extended to shipments from around the world.

Many European postal services say they are pausing deliveries now because they cannot guarantee the goods will enter the U.S. before Aug. 29. They cite ambiguity about what kind of goods are covered by the new rules, and the lack of time to process their implications.

Postnord, the Nordic logistics company, and Italy’s postal service announced similar suspensions effective Saturday.

“In the absence of different instructions from US authorities … Poste Italiane will be forced, like other European postal operators, to temporarily suspend acceptance of all shipments containing goods destined for the United States, starting August 23. Mail shipments not containing merchandise will continue to be accepted,” Poste Italiane said in a statement Friday.

Shipping by services such as DHL Express remains possible, it added.

Bjorn Bergman, head of PostNord’s Group Brand and Communication, said the pause was “unfortunate but necessary to ensure full compliance of the newly implemented rules.”

In the Netherlands, PostNL spokesperson Wout Witteveen said the Trump administration is pressing ahead with the new duties despite U.S. authorities lacking a system to collect them. He said that PostNL is working closely with its U.S. counterparts to find a solution.

“If you have something to send to America, you should do it today,” Witteveen told the Associated Press.

Austrian Post, Austria’s leading logistics and postal service provider, stated that the last acceptance of commercial shipments to the U.S., including Puerto Rico, will take place Tuesday.

France’s national postal service, La Poste, said the U.S. did not provide full details or allow enough time for the French postal service to prepare for new customs procedures.

″Despite discussions with U.S. customs services, no time was provided to postal operators to re-organize and assure the necessary computer updates to conform to the new rules,″ it said in a statement.

PostEurop, an association of 51 European public postal operators, said that if no solution can be found by Aug. 29, all its members will probably follow suit.

Nellas and Anderson write for the Associated Press and reported from Athens and New York, respectively. AP writers Angela Charlton in Paris; Costas Kantouris in Thessaloniki, Greece; Stephanie Lichtenstein in Vienna; Brian Melley in London and Molly Quell in Amsterdam contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — A divided panel of appeals court judges ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration can suspend or terminate billions of dollars of congressionally appropriated funding for foreign aid.

Two of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that grant recipients challenging the freeze did not meet the requirements for a preliminary injunction restoring the flow of money.

In January, on the first day of his second term in the White House, Republican President Trump issued an executive order directing the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to freeze spending on foreign aid.

After groups of grant recipients sued to challenge that order, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ordered the administration to release the full amount of foreign assistance that Congress had appropriated for the 2024 budget year.

The appeal court’s majority partially vacated Ali’s order.

Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Gregory Katsas concluded that the plaintiffs did not have a valid legal basis for the court to hear their claims. The ruling was not on the merits of whether the government unconstitutionally infringed on Congress’ spending powers.

“The parties also dispute the scope of the district court’s remedy but we need not resolve it … because the grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,” Henderson wrote.

Judge Florence Pan, who dissented, said the Supreme Court has held “in no uncertain terms” that the president does not have the authority to disobey laws for policy reasons.

“Yet that is what the majority enables today,” Pan wrote. “The majority opinion thus misconstrues the separation-of-powers claim brought by the grantees, misapplies precedent, and allows Executive Branch officials to evade judicial review of constitutionally impermissible actions.”

The money at issue includes nearly $4 billion for USAID to spend on global health programs and more than $6 billion for HIV and AIDS programs. Trump has portrayed the foreign aid as wasteful spending that does not align with his foreign policy goals.

Henderson was nominated to the court by Republican President George H.W. Bush. Katsas was nominated by Trump. Pan was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden.

Kunzelman writes for the Associated Press.

Published on
04/08/2025 – 18:23 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

The European Commission will suspend on Tuesday a package of trade countermeasures targeting €93 billions’ worth of American goods which was scheduled to take effect on 7 August, as it continues to negotiate a joint statement formalising the agreement struck by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and US President Donald Trump on 27 July.

“The EU continues to work with the US to finalise a joint statement, as agreed on 27 July,” EU spokesperson Olof Gill said, adding: “With these objectives in mind, the Commission will take the necessary steps to suspend by six months the EU’s countermeasures against the US, which were due to enter into force on 7 August.”

In line with the agreement reached, the US reduced its tariff rate to 15% last Thursday.

Gill said the step gained the EU immediate tariff relief, “a first important foundation is laid for restoring clarity to EU companies exporting to the US”.

The trade dispute is not over

However the trade dispute between the EU and the US is not over, as both sides still need to negotiate certain points of the agreement that have led to differing interpretations.

 Furthermore, the US Executive Order of July 31 does not provide relief to the EU automotive industry as expected (it remains subject to 25% tariffs), nor does it exempt strategic sectors such as aircraft.

As negotiations continue, the Commission should postpone through urgency procedure the retaliation package it adopted against the US tariffs.

It consists in two lists of products that were worth respectively €21 billion and €72 billion and were merged on 24 July after EU member states adopted them, targeting US products such as soyabean, cars, aircraft and Bourbon Whiskey.

President Dina Boluarte has blasted the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for its opposition to a recently passed bill that would grant amnesty to soldiers, police officers and other security personnel involved in Peru’s internal conflict from 1985 to 2000.

On Thursday, Boluarte asserted that the international court had overstepped its authority by seeking the law’s suspension.

“We are not anyone’s colony,” she said, posting a snippet of her speech to social media.

“And we will not allow the intervention of the Inter-American Court that intends to suspend a bill that seeks justice for members of our armed forces, our National Police and the self-defence committees that fought, risking their lives, against the insanity of terrorism.”

Since passing Peru’s Congress in July, the amnesty law has been awaiting Boluarte’s approval. She can either sign it into law, allow it to take effect automatically or send it back to Congress for revisions.

But the bill has prompted international outcry, not least because it is seen to shield security forces from accountability for the atrocities that unfolded during Peru’s war.

The legislation would also offer “humanitarian” amnesty to perpetrators over age 70 who have been convicted of wartime crimes.

Some 70,000 people were killed in the internal conflict, the majority of them from rural and Indigenous communities.

Soldiers and police officers were ostensibly tasked with combatting armed uprisings from rebel groups like the Shining Path and the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement. But the conflict became infamous for its human rights abuses and massacres of civilians with no ties to any rebel group.

Francisco Ochoa was 14 years old when residents in his Andean village, Accomarca, were slaughtered by soldiers. He told Al Jazeera earlier this week that he and other survivors felt “outraged and betrayed” by the new amnesty law.

International organisations have likewise denounced the law as a step backwards for Peruvian society.

Nine human rights experts with the United Nations signed a statement on July 17 expressing “alarm” at the bill’s passage through Congress. They called on the government of Peru to veto the bill.

“The proposed legislation would prevent the criminal prosecution and condemnation of individuals who committed gross human rights violations during Peru’s internal armed conflict,” they said.

“It would put the State in clear breach of its obligations under international law.”

A week later, on July 24, the president of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Nancy Hernandez Lopez, ordered Peru to “immediately suspend the processing” of the bill. She ruled that the legislation violated previous rulings against such amnesty laws in the country.

“If it is not suspended, the competent authorities refrain from enforcing this law,” she said.

She noted that a session would be convened with survivors, Peruvian officials and members of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR).

In previous rulings, the Inter-American Court has found that amnesty laws and statutes of limitations are unlawful in the case of serious human rights violations like forced disappearances and extrajudicial executions.

It also declared that age is not a disqualifying factor for suspects accused of grave human rights abuses. Such exemptions, the court said, are only acceptable under international law for lesser or nonviolent offences.

The National Human Rights Coordinator, a coalition of humanitarian groups in Peru, estimates that the country’s latest amnesty law could overturn 156 convictions and disrupt more than 600 ongoing investigations.

A previous amnesty law implemented in 1995, under then-President Alberto Fujimori, was later repealed.

Still, President Boluarte on Thursday sought to frame her government’s actions as in line with international human rights standards.

“We are defenders of human rights, of citizens,” she wrote on social media, while emphasising that her government was “free”, “sovereign” and “autonomous”, apparent jabs at the Inter-American Court’s decision.

Constitutional panel ratifies bill to cease cooperation with IAEA after US and Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites.

Iran’s Guardian Council has ratified a parliament-approved legislation to suspend Tehran’s cooperation with the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, after the war with Israel and the United States.

Iranian news outlets reported on Thursday that the appointed council, which has veto power over bills approved by lawmakers, found the parliament’s measure to “not to be in contradiction to the Islamic principles and the Constitution”.

Guardian Council spokesperson Hadi Tahan Nazif told the official state news agency, IRNA, that the government is now required to suspend cooperation with the IAEA for the “full respect for the national sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Islamic Republic of Iran”.

Nazif added that the decision was prompted by the “attacks … by the Zionist regime and the United States against peaceful nuclear facilities”.

The bill will be submitted to President Masoud Pezeshkian for final approval and would allow Iran “to benefit from all the entitlements specified under … the Non-Proliferation Treaty, especially with regard to uranium enrichment”, Nazif said.

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf suggested that the legislation is now binding after the Guardian Council’s approval.

“Continued cooperation with the agency, which plays a role as a protector of anti-human interests and an agent of the illegitimate Zionist regime through the pretext of war and aggression, is not possible until the security of our nuclear facilities is ensured,” Ghalibaf said in a social media post.

However, the IAEA said on Thursday that it had not received an official communication from Iran regarding the suspension.

Iranian officials have been decrying the IAEA’s failure to condemn Israeli attacks on the country’s nuclear facilities.

Before the war started, Tehran claimed to have obtained Israeli documents that show that the IAEA was passing off information to Israel about Iran’s nuclear programme – allegations that were denied by the agency.

Israel is widely believed to have its own nuclear arsenal, but its nuclear programme has not been monitored by the UN watchdog.

For years, Iranian nuclear sites have been under strict IAEA inspection, including by constant video feed. But it appears that Iran moved its stockpiles of highly enriched uranium from the facilities before they were bombed by Israel and the US during the recent war, putting them out of the view of UN observers for the first time.

US and Israeli officials have argued that the military strikes have set back Iran’s nuclear programme for years. But suspending cooperation with the IAEA could escalate the programme, although Tehran insists that it is not seeking a nuclear weapon.

Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Thursday that Moscow was “interested in Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA continuing”.

“We are interested in everyone respecting the supreme leader of Iran, who has repeatedly stated that Iran does not and will not have plans to create nuclear weapons,”  Lavrov said.

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul also told journalists that Berlin “urges the Iranian government not to go down this path” and cease cooperation with the board.

On June 13, Israel launched a surprise bombing campaign against Iran, striking residential buildings and nuclear sites and military facilities, killing top commanders and scientists as well as hundreds of civilians.

Iran responded with barrages of missiles that left widespread destruction in Israel and killed at least 29 people.

On Sunday, the US joined Israel and launched unprecedented strikes on Iran’s Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites.

Following Iran’s retaliatory attack on a US military base in Qatar, a ceasefire was reached between the countries.

Both Israel and Iran declared victory after the war.

In a move that threatens to destabilise Nigeria’s already fragile humanitarian landscape, the International NGO Safety Organisation (INSO) has been ordered by the Nigerian authorities to suspend all its humanitarian support operations in the country immediately. The directive, communicated directly to INSO leadership, comes as a surprise blow to dozens of humanitarian partners across Nigeria’s conflict-affected regions.

In a statement seen by HumAngle, INSO Country Director Zeljko Toncic said, “INSO received a formal request from Nigerian authorities to suspend its humanitarian activities in the country. In strict compliance with this decision, INSO is immediately suspending all of its services to humanitarian partners in Nigeria.”

Since 2016, INSO has played a pivotal role in supporting over 110 humanitarian organisations, including international agencies and local NGOs, to navigate the complex security challenges posed by the Boko Haram insurgency in the North East, terrorism in the North West, and communal violence in the Middle Belt.

The panic among humanitarian organisations is palpable, with many describing the suspension as a devastating blow to their safety and operations.

The suspension of INSO’s services, which range from security advisories to risk mitigation training, is likely to leave humanitarian workers vulnerable at a time of heightened insecurity.

INSO has maintained that it operates on strict humanitarian principles of neutrality, impartiality, and independence, with no political affiliations or agendas. The organisation has also expressed its willingness to engage with the Nigerian government to clarify its mandate and resume operations.

Humanitarian partners are reeling from the sudden halt in security information and support, fearing that the already volatile environment will become even more perilous.

Humanitarian fallout looms

The suspension comes as humanitarian needs continue to surge in Nigeria, with over eight million people in need of aid in the North East alone, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Aid workers, who rely heavily on INSO’s security support to operate safely in volatile areas, warn that the move could severely hamper the delivery of life-saving assistance.

“This is a serious setback. INSO’s services are critical to our risk assessments and operational planning. Without them, humanitarian workers are left to navigate these dangerous environments alone,” a humanitarian worker, speaking on condition of anonymity, told HumAngle. 

The anxiety within the humanitarian community is intensifying, with fears that without INSO, aid efforts will stall, putting lives at even greater risk.

A history of tension

This latest move is not without precedent. Nigerian authorities have previously clamped down on humanitarian actors over alleged concerns about transparency, neutrality, and security operations. In 2019, two international NGOs, Action Against Hunger (ACF) and Mercy Corps, were temporarily suspended in Borno State amid allegations of aiding armed groups, claims both agencies strongly denied.

Analysts suggest that the government’s increasing scrutiny of international NGOs is rooted in broader concerns about sovereignty and national security, particularly in conflict-prone areas. However, aid organisations caution that these suspensions jeopardise not only their operations but also the lives of the most vulnerable Nigerians.

INSO’s expressed willingness to engage with authorities signals a potential path forward. Aid agencies and civil society groups are calling for immediate dialogue to ensure that humanitarian neutrality is upheld and vital services can continue uninterrupted.

“We sincerely hope that a space for dialogue may help this situation, for the benefit of the humanitarian NGOs we support and the civilian populations you serve,” Toncic wrote in his letter.

INSO’s operations in the Niger Republic were also suspended in February following refusal by the country’s junta to renew the organisation’s operational license. The organisation had been active in the country since 2020, providing support to over 132 humanitarian organisations, including 35 national, local, and international NGOs.

HumAngle will continue to monitor the situation closely and provide updates as they become available.