Azerbaijan’s relationship with Germany is shifting beyond energy, with the two countries deepening ties across industry and logistics as Europe works to diversify its supply chains away from Russia.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
“Azerbaijan is gradually ceasing to be perceived by Germany solely as an energy supplier and is increasingly becoming part of a new Eurasian industrial and logistics architecture,” said Orkhan Yolchuyev, director of the CASPIA Analytical Center.
Bilateral trade between the two countries reached around €1.7 billion in 2025, driven by German exports of industrial equipment, machinery and transport systems, Yolchuyev said.
Over 250 German companies now operate in Azerbaijan, spanning manufacturing, construction, logistics and energy.
The shift has accelerated since Azerbaijan began supplying gas directly to Germany and Austria in early 2026, part of a wider European push to reduce dependence on Russian energy following Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Beyond energy
The real change, Yolchuyev said, is not in the trade figures but in what they represent.
“[They] indicate that bilateral relations are evolving toward a higher level of industrial cooperation,” he said, pointing to Germany’s need for new export markets and more resilient supply networks.
German companies already active in Azerbaijan could soon be drawn into its reconstruction programmes and expanding industrial zones, particularly in engineering, transport, renewable energy and advanced manufacturing.
Much of this shift runs through the Middle Corridor, the transport route linking China and Central Asia with Europe via the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Turkey.
Russia’s war in Ukraine has given the route new urgency, as European firms hunt for alternatives that insulate their supply chains from disruption.
Azerbaijan sits at its logistical centre, with sea and rail links increasingly central to the transcontinental route.
Yolchuyev said the corridor’s value lies less in cargo volumes than in what it carries.
“The higher the share of high value-added products, such as automotive components, industrial machinery, electrical equipment, electronics or chemical products, the greater the economic efficiency of the route,” he said, pointing to the expansion of the Port of Baku and the Alat Free Economic Zone as drivers of new manufacturing and logistics investment.
Energy still at the core
Energy remains central despite the widening scope of cooperation. Azerbaijan has positioned itself as a dependable gas supplier and, since early 2026, has been sending gas directly to Germany and Austria.
Farid Shukurlu, a non-resident fellow at the Research Institute for European and American Studies, said Russia’s invasion marked a turning point.
“Traditionally, economic relations between Azerbaijan and Germany were concentrated in a limited number of sectors, including heavy machinery, automobiles and pharmaceuticals,” he said.
“However, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine fundamentally reshaped the bilateral economic relationship.”
Within five months of Azerbaijan’s first crude shipment to Germany, the country had exported 360,300 tonnes of crude oil and petroleum products worth approximately $210.9 million (€196mn), Shukurlu said.
He believes Azerbaijan could eventually become a transit route for Kazakh oil and Turkmen gas bound for Germany and other European markets.
Germany’s shift carries weight given its past reliance on Russian gas. Italy remains the largest European buyer of Azerbaijani gas via the Trans Adriatic Pipeline, but Germany is now moving in the same direction.
Manfred Scherer, mayor of the Verbandsgemeinde Sprendlingen-Gensingen, a collective municipality in Germany’s Mainz-Bingen district, recalled meeting Azerbaijan’s current energy minister, Parviz Shahbazov, during his time as ambassador to Germany.
“Economic relations between Germany and Azerbaijan have developed positively in recent years. There is strong potential to further strengthen cooperation,” Scherer said.
“I have fond memories of the visit of the current minister of energy, Parviz Shahbazov, to our municipality during his time as ambassador of Azerbaijan to Germany,” he continued.
“At that time, we discussed opportunities to deepen our relations through a municipal partnership and to strengthen cooperation between our regions.”
A wider European shift
Germany’s pivot fits a broader European turn toward the South Caucasus and Central Asia, partly in support of the Armenia-Azerbaijan peace process, which could unlock further energy diversification and regional connectivity.
The high-level visits have piled up. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the partnership with Azerbaijan “matters greatly to the European Union” and had “real momentum”.
European Council President António Costa travelled to Baku for talks on deeper EU re-engagement, while EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas visited in May.
Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Slovak President Peter Pellegrini have also held high-level talks with President Ilham Aliyev.
Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) welcomes North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui (R) during their meeting in the Moscow Kremlin, Russia. Photo by ARTEM GEODAKYAN / EPA-EFE
July 19 (Asia Today) — North Korea is intensifying engagement with China and Russia as South Korea, the United States and Japan broaden their cooperation to include the overseas deployment of small modular reactors.
The diplomatic activity follows events marking the 65th anniversary of the North Korea-China Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance.
North Korea received a senior Chinese delegation for the anniversary and dispatched Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui to Russia, signaling efforts to manage relations with both of its principal partners.
The moves are widely viewed as an attempt to strengthen alignment among North Korea, China and Russia as Seoul, Washington and Tokyo expand their security and economic cooperation.
The three allies recently signed a memorandum aimed at encouraging cooperation among their civilian nuclear industries and supporting the deployment of small modular reactors in third countries.
The Korean Central News Agency said Choe left Pyongyang aboard a government aircraft Saturday at the invitation of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry also said Choe was making an official visit to the country.
It was Choe’s first visit to Russia in about nine months and the first major high-level exchange between the countries since the April opening of a memorial in North Korea honoring troops sent to support Russia.
Because the trip was not tied to a major anniversary or previously announced diplomatic event, analysts said Choe could be preparing for a possible visit to Russia by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.
Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly invited Kim to visit Russia during their June 2024 summit and again when the leaders attended events in China marking the anniversary of the end of World War II in Asia.
Possible subjects for Choe’s talks include a visit by Kim, recent developments in North Korea-China relations and coordination involving the Tumen River region, where the three countries share geographic and economic interests.
Park Won-gon, a professor of North Korean studies at Ewha Womans University in Seoul, said military and diplomatic accomplishments are easier for Pyongyang to demonstrate than economic achievements.
“If Chinese President Xi Jinping visits North Korea and Kim Jong Un subsequently visits Russia, North Korea could present those events as major diplomatic accomplishments,” Park said.
“Practical trilateral cooperation among North Korea, China and Russia has not progressed smoothly, but the Tumen River project could become a vehicle for cooperation among the three countries.”
China ties show signs of recovery
Relations between North Korea and China also appear to be recovering rapidly around the treaty anniversary.
Kim and Xi exchanged messages, a North Korean delegation traveled to China and Wang Huning, chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, led a Chinese party and government delegation to North Korea.
The exchanges could expand cooperation in economic affairs, science and technology, public health and culture.
Wang’s visit to the Wonsan Kalma Coastal Tourist Area was particularly notable because the resort is one of Kim’s priority development projects.
Analysts have questioned whether Russian tourists alone can generate enough demand to make the resort financially sustainable.
Wang’s visit has therefore raised the possibility that the two countries discussed bringing larger numbers of Chinese tourists to the site.
Tourism is considered an area in which China may be able to support North Korea without directly violating the main restrictions imposed by U.N. Security Council sanctions.
Oh Gyeong-seop, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for National Unification, said attracting Chinese visitors is crucial to the resort’s prospects.
“Bringing in Chinese tourists is an issue that can avoid U.N. Security Council sanctions and is therefore critically important for North Korea,” Oh said.
“Large numbers of Chinese tourists are necessary to revitalize the Wonsan Kalma Coastal Tourist Area, so related discussions are likely to have continued.”
North Korea’s renewed engagement with China and Russia does not necessarily indicate that the three countries have established a formal trilateral alliance.
Their interests frequently differ, and analysts say much of their coordination remains bilateral.
The latest exchanges, however, demonstrate Pyongyang’s effort to strengthen diplomatic, economic and strategic ties with Beijing and Moscow while South Korea, the United States and Japan deepen their own cooperation.
Wang Huning, chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference, held talks in Pyongyang with a senior North Korean official, state-run media reported Thursday. Wang is seen here at a meeting in Beijing on March 4. File Photo by Jessica Lee/EPA
A senior North Korean party official and China’s top political adviser have met in Pyongyang and discussed ways to strengthen bilateral exchanges and cooperation, the North’s state media said Thursday.
Jo Yong-won, a secretary of the Central Committee of the Workers’ Party of Korea, and Wang Huning, chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), held talks Wednesday, according to the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).
Wang, China’s fourth-ranking official, is leading a Chinese party and government delegation on a three-day visit to North Korea through Friday to commemorate the 65th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Mutual Assistance between the two countries.
During the talks, Jo said the rapidly changing international political situation “has required the two countries to further strengthen the militant unity, support and solidarity and steadily intensify and develop the friendly and cooperative relations” based on the spirit of the treaty.
Jo also said bilateral ties have entered a new stage of development under the leadership of North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and Chinese President Xi Jinping, expressing Pyongyang’s willingness to expand strategic communication and cooperation across various sectors.
Wang said the friendship treaty has provided a legal foundation for consolidating the “militant friendship formed at the cost of blood” between the two countries.
He also reaffirmed China’s commitment to elevating bilateral ties to a higher level in line with the consensus reached by Xi and Kim during their summit in Pyongyang in June, according to the KCNA.
The two sides discussed ways to deepen party-to-party exchanges and expand cooperation in various fields, including the economy and culture, with the aim of promoting the well-being of their peoples, the report said.
Wang’s visit comes days after North Korean Premier Pak Thae-song traveled to China to attend events marking the treaty anniversary, where he met with Xi and other senior Chinese leaders.
The exchange of high-level delegations has highlighted increasingly active contacts between Pyongyang and Beijing as the two sides seek to reaffirm their traditionally close ties and deepen cooperation.
“We are closely monitoring the possibility of a meeting between Wang and North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, as well as any follow-up cooperation that may emerge from the talks,” an official at Seoul’s unification ministry told reporters.
He added the government is also paying attention to the presence of officials involved in urban management at the talks, saying it could signal discussions on cooperation in the economic and urban development sectors.
The latest exchanges reflect efforts by Pyongyang and Beijing to strengthen strategic communication and party-to-party ties, though it remains to be seen whether the current pace of high-level exchanges will continue beyond events marking the treaty anniversary, the official said.
Copyright (c) Yonhap News Agency prohibits its content from being redistributed or reprinted without consent, and forbids the content from being learned and used by artificial intelligence systems.
July 14 (UPI) — Billionaire investor Warren Buffet left the Gates Foundation out of his annual charitable stock gifts and said he would give all his stock for the year to his charities run by his children.
Berkshire Hathaway said that Buffet, 95, will donate 9 million Class B shares of the company to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation and 1 million shares each to the Susie Buffet-run Sherwood Foundation, the Howard G. Buffett Foundation and the NoVo Foundation, which was founded by Peter and Jennifer Buffet. “My goal is to dispose of all of my Berkshire shares within about eight years,” Buffett said in a statement announcing the gifts. “As I explained last year, my children are unfortunately growing older. I have every hope that the three of them are able to carry out the disposal of my shares by Dec. 31, 2034.”
In previous years, the Gates Foundation was the largest recipient of his Berkshire donations. Buffett has donated more than $47 billion of Berkshire stock to the Gates foundation. The Wall Street Journal reported that Buffett was waiting for the outcome of a probe into the foundation’s involvement with Jeffrey Epstein, the sex offender who died by suicide while awaiting trial for sex trafficking charges.
In March, Buffett told CNBC that he hadn’t spoken to Gates “at all since the whole thing was unveiled.”
Forbes values Buffett’s net worth at $147 billion, making him the 10th wealthiest person in the world.
Relations begin to thaw as both countries reinstate ambassadors and reopen airspace closed to each other since April 2025.
Published On 11 Jul 202611 Jul 2026
More than a year after a diplomatic fallout, relations between Algeria and Mali are beginning to thaw, with both countries reinstating their ambassadors and reopening their airspace to one another.
Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune announced on Saturday that the country’s ambassador would return to Mali, a day after Algiers fully reopened its airspace to civilian and military aircraft travelling to and from its southern neighbour.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Issa Ousmane Coulibaly, spokesperson for Mali’s military government, confirmed in a statement that Bamako had taken reciprocal measures.
Relations between the two African nations deteriorated in April last year after Algeria said it had shot down a Malian surveillance drone for violating its airspace. Bamako disputes this, saying the drone was downed within its own borders.
The fallout between Algeria and Mali has jeopardised security in the Sahel region. Mali is a member of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), along with Burkina Faso and Niger. Both Ouagadougou and Niamey also withdrew their ambassadors to Algeria in April last year in solidarity with their ally.
The AES has experienced a surge in attacks by armed groups linked to the ISIL (ISIS) group and al-Qaeda in recent years. Many analysts argue that such groups were able to establish a foothold in the Sahel partly because of the NATO-backed overthrow of longtime Libyan ruler Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.
The ousting of Gaddafi left a power vacuum that has been exploited by armed groups. Vast stockpiles of weapons belonging to forces loyal to him were looted and are believed to have been used by those groups.
Algeria has previously mediated peace talks between the Malian government and Tuareg separatist rebels waging an armed rebellion there.
However, last year’s diplomatic fallout led Algiers to step back from its role as mediator, raising concerns about Mali’s security and territorial integrity while also posing a threat to Algeria’s own internal security.
This April, Algerian Foreign Minister Ahmed Attaf reaffirmed Algiers’s support for Mali’s territorial integrity, rejecting what he described as all forms of “terrorism”.
Turkey emerged as one of the biggest diplomatic winners from the NATO summit in Ankara after President Donald Trump lavished praise on Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, promised to lift U.S. sanctions and signalled openness to restoring Turkey’s access to the F-35 fighter jet programme.
The public display of warmth contrasted sharply with Trump’s criticism of several NATO allies during the summit and highlighted improving U.S.-Turkey relations after years of tensions.
Turkey rolls out high-profile welcome for Trump
Turkey spared little effort in welcoming Trump to Ankara.
The visit featured a red, white and blue aerial display by Turkish jets, while a newly opened airport terminal was named after the U.S. president. Erdogan personally greeted Trump at the airport before the two leaders walked together, exchanged warm remarks and held talks ahead of the summit.
Stay ahead of the geopolitical week.
MD Briefing delivers expert analysis across five global fronts — the Indo-Pacific, energy, geoeconomics, European security, and the Middle East — every Monday morning. Free.
Trump later described Erdogan as a close friend and repeatedly praised the Turkish leader during the two-day gathering.
Trump says Erdogan convinced him to attend
For Turkish officials, securing Trump’s attendance was itself considered a diplomatic achievement.
Trump, who has frequently criticised NATO and questioned the alliance’s value, said he attended the summit because Erdogan was hosting it.
Erdogan welcomed the remarks after the summit.
“It was valuable that Trump emphasised the importance he places on myself and our friendship,” Erdogan said.
US signals shift on sanctions and F-35 fighter jets
The most significant outcome for Ankara was Trump’s indication that he intends to remove U.S. sanctions imposed after Turkey purchased Russia’s S-400 missile defence system in 2019.
Trump also said he was willing to consider allowing Turkey back into the F-35 stealth fighter programme, although he later clarified that he had not made a final decision.
If implemented, both moves would reverse major elements of U.S. policy that had severely strained bilateral relations during Trump’s first presidency.
U.S. lawmakers have previously insisted Turkey cannot participate in the F-35 programme while retaining the Russian-made S-400 system, making congressional approval uncertain.
Turkey could also face complications with Russia because agreements governing the S-400 purchase include end-user obligations that may limit Ankara’s options.
As a result, the announcements currently represent political commitments rather than guaranteed policy changes.
Erdogan strengthens Turkey’s position inside NATO
The summit reinforced Turkey’s ambition to play a larger role within NATO.
As the alliance’s second-largest military, Turkey has increasingly promoted itself as an indispensable security partner while seeking greater participation in European defence initiatives.
Trump also publicly defended Erdogan against criticism from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who opposed potential U.S. sales of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey.
The episode underscored Ankara’s growing diplomatic influence within the alliance.
Trump overshadows summit with disputes involving allies
While relations with Turkey improved, Trump generated fresh tensions elsewhere during the summit.
He threatened to halt U.S. trade with Spain over defence spending disputes and repeated claims regarding Greenland, drawing criticism from fellow NATO members.
Despite those disagreements, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte later described the summit as demonstrating alliance unity.
Human rights concerns receive limited attention
The summit also highlighted how Turkey’s strategic importance has reduced public Western criticism over democratic issues.
The gathering took place amid arrests of opposition figures, journalists and a prominent comedian in Turkey, prompting questions about democratic freedoms.
Rutte reiterated that democracy includes freedom of expression, free media and the right to protest.
Opposition figures argued Erdogan’s increasingly close relationship with Washington reflects growing political dependence on the United States, while critics contend Western governments have become less vocal about human rights as Turkey’s military and geopolitical importance has grown.
Future outlook
The NATO summit could mark a turning point in U.S.-Turkey relations if Trump’s pledges on sanctions relief and the F-35 programme translate into policy. However, congressional resistance, Turkey’s continued possession of the Russian S-400 system and wider geopolitical considerations remain significant obstacles. Ankara is also expected to continue pushing for greater influence within NATO and broader participation in European defence initiatives.
Analysis
The NATO summit marked one of the strongest public displays of U.S.-Turkey relations in years, with President Donald Trump using the gathering to signal a willingness to reset ties with Ankara after years of friction over Turkey’s purchase of Russia’s S-400 missile defence system. For President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, simply hosting Trump and receiving repeated public praise from him represented a significant diplomatic victory that reinforced Turkey’s strategic importance within the alliance.
Trump’s promises to lift sanctions and reconsider Turkey’s return to the F-35 fighter jet programme address two of Ankara’s longest-standing demands. However, turning those pledges into reality will be far more difficult. U.S. law and congressional opposition remain major obstacles, particularly while Turkey continues to possess the Russian-made S-400 system. Moscow could also object if Ankara takes steps that undermine agreements linked to the missile purchase.
The summit also highlighted a broader shift in Western priorities. During previous U.S. administrations, especially under Joe Biden, democratic backsliding and human rights concerns were central issues in relations with Turkey. This time, those concerns received relatively little attention as NATO focused on defence spending, military cooperation and regional security, reflecting Turkey’s growing value as a defence producer and a key NATO member on the alliance’s southeastern flank.
Trump’s warm embrace of Erdogan contrasted sharply with his confrontational approach toward several other NATO allies, including Spain and Denmark. That dynamic allowed Turkey to emerge from the summit with enhanced diplomatic standing even as broader alliance tensions persisted.
Whether this diplomatic momentum produces lasting policy changes will depend on decisions in Washington after the summit. If sanctions are eased and progress is made on the F-35 issue, bilateral ties could enter their most constructive phase in years. If congressional or legal barriers prevent those moves, however, the summit may ultimately be remembered more for its symbolism than for delivering concrete strategic gains.
Lee Yong-cheol, chief of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, attends a ceremony at the Navy submarine command in Changwon, South Gyeongsang Province, South Korea, 25 March 2026. Photo by YONHAP / EPA
July 7 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s defense acquisition chief apologized Tuesday for failing to win Canada’s next-generation submarine project, saying alliance interoperability was the decisive factor in Ottawa’s decision.
Lee Yong-cheol, head of South Korea’s Defense Acquisition Program Administration, said South Korea’s submarine proposal was competitive on performance, delivery schedule and maintenance, but Canada placed greater weight on its long-standing NATO defense network.
“I am sorry that we were unable to achieve the expected result despite strong public interest and all-out support from the Industry Ministry, Defense Ministry, Foreign Ministry, Navy and other government agencies,” Lee told reporters at the Defense Ministry press room. “The failure to secure the result was due to my lack of ability.”
Canada selected Germany’s Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems as the preferred bidder for its Canadian Patrol Submarine Project, which aims to replace the Royal Canadian Navy’s aging submarine fleet.
Lee said Canada appeared to consider several factors, including fuel cell-based air-independent propulsion technology, battery performance, Germany’s record of supplying submarines to more than one-third of NATO members, alliance interoperability, crew sharing, joint training, maintenance, parts supply and industrial benefits tied to jobs and maintenance facilities.
“In terms of submarine performance, early delivery and regional benefits such as maintenance, repair and overhaul, I do not believe there was a meaningful gap with our proposal,” Lee said. “In delivery schedule, even considering Norway’s production slot, we were faster.”
“The decisive difference appears to have been NATO interoperability and cooperation that allows crew sharing,” he said.
A defense acquisition official said South Korea’s submarines should not be seen as inferior in operational capability.
“Submarines, for which stealth is most important, do not operate by constantly exchanging wireless communications,” the official said. “We do not believe our submarine had weaker operational capability. Canada appears to have judged that sharing future operating systems and parts would be relatively easier with Germany.”
The official said Canada’s geography and Arctic security concerns likely shaped the decision.
“Canada stretches across both ends of the North American continent and must cover both the Atlantic and Pacific,” the official said. “Personally, I think the difference in Arctic security priorities also played a major role. For South Korea, the Arctic is more of a conceptual issue, but for Canada it is a real security concern.”
The official said Canada’s Indo-Pacific defense cooperation with South Korea is still developing, while its Atlantic alliance structure has been operating for more than 70 years.
“Training among those allies is routine, to the point where they can discuss sharing submarine crew members,” the official said. “South Korea has only recently begun joint exercises with Canada. Canada chose to strengthen an existing alliance framework, and I think that strategic choice should be respected.”
The agency said the failed bid still produced meaningful results for South Korea’s defense industry.
Lee cited South Korea’s previous loss in Norway’s K2 tank procurement, saying the tank passed performance testing in harsh winter conditions but narrowly failed to win the contract.
“Poland took close note of that performance and moved aggressively to sign a contract,” Lee said. “This challenge may also lead to another reversal.”
In Fox News interview, Israeli prime minister lauds US alliance and argues that Ankara should not receive F-35 jets.
Published On 6 Jul 20266 Jul 2026
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says his ties with US President Donald Trump are “fine”, dismissing reports of rifts between the two leaders over the ceasefire with Iran and Israel’s attacks in Lebanon.
In an interview with Fox News on Monday, Netanyahu heaped praise on the United States and Trump.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
“America has been a tremendous force for good, and without America, there won’t be any democracy in the world, and there won’t be any freedom in the world,” he said.
The Israeli prime minister added that he and Trump see eye to eye on “just about everything”.
His comments come amid criticism by some members of the Israeli cabinet of the memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran that calls for a regional ceasefire, including in Lebanon.
Israel has refused to withdraw from Lebanon, insisting that it has the right to bomb the country at any time to respond to “threats”. An Israeli strike in southern Lebanon on Monday killed four civilians, including a teacher.
Netanyahu said there can be differences between the US and Israel, but the two countries are “model allies”.
“My relationship with the president is fine, and we have a way of ironing out our differences as allies who respect each other,” he said.
The prime minister confirmed he will soon visit the US again, but said no date has been set for the trip.
Asked about his agenda during the visit, Netanyahu took aim at Turkiye, saying that he will lobby against the transfer of F-35 jets to Ankara.
“I don’t think they should be given F-35s or the engines for their fighter jets because that’ll upset the power balance in the Middle East, which is ultimately guaranteed by Israeli air superiority, and also by, I think, by America’s posture in the Middle East,” he said.
Turkiye, a NATO ally of the US, has been an outspoken critic of Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.
Trump is set to visit Ankara later this week for a NATO summit.
Netanyahu attempted to draw a contrast between Israel and Turkiye.
“They didn’t lift a finger to help you in Iran. We did,” he told Fox News, a conservative US media network mostly watched by Trump voters. “We’re the model ally that fought next to your great soldiers.”
Netanyahu has called for the US to attack Iran for decades, leading to the US-Israel war on Iran that broke out on February 28, which proved to be overwhelmingly unpopular with American voters.
Some Israeli commentators and politicians have been escalating rhetoric against Turkiye, suggesting that the country is the next regional rival and target after Iran.
Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned on Saturday against Israel’s efforts to undermine the US-Iran agreement.
“We are closely following the Israeli administration’s attempts to dynamite the deal,” he said. “The current war-addicted Israeli government must not be allowed to drown our geography in the smell of gunpowder and blood again.”
A highly divisive period drama starring Taylor Swift is currently available on Netflix as the hitmaker weds Travis Kelce in New York
Taylor Swift’s ‘painful to watch’ period drama is on Netflix (Image: GETTY)
It has its fair share of defenders but scored just 32 percent on Rotten Tomatoes.
A 2022 period drama with an all-star cast including pop star Taylor Swift is currently available to stream on Netflix – but it’s not some of the star’s most acclaimed work.
The 1989 chart-topper has just tied the knot with Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce on Friday, July 3 at a lavish ceremony in Madison Square Garden in New York.
Attended by around 1,000 guests and officiated by Hollywood A-lister Adam Sandler, it’s become one of the most publicised celebrity weddings in history.
For those looking to Netflix for their Swiftie fix to mark the occasion, you can currently stream her acclaimed behind-the-scenes documentary Miss Americana, a Netflix Original released in 2020.
However, she is also known for infrequent movie roles, including the critically maligned musical Cats and lending her voice to animated film The Lorax.
Her only acting role currently streaming on Netflix in the UK may be a surprise to fans as it’s David O Russell’s critical and commercial flop Amsterdam, a mystery thriller set in the 1930s.
Based on the real-life Business Plot case from 1933, an investigation into the death of a retired US general, Swift has a supporting role as Elizabeth Meekins alongside an all-star cast that also includes Christian Bale, Margot Robbie, John David Washington and Anya Taylor-Joy.
Made on a budget of $80 million (£59 million), it was a box office bomb for 20th Century Studios with an estimated loss of more than $100 million (£74.9 million).
While it was critically panned, Amsterdam does have some defenders with one fan even claiming: “An instant classic. Given time, it will be regarded as one of the greatest films ever made. The cast is outstanding.
“I can’t remember ever seeing so many talented actors in one film like this before. Everyone brought their A-Game and absolutely nailed their respective performances.”
Unfortunately, not everyone shares their opinion as a Rotten Tomatoes user branded the film “A confused mess that was painful to watch”.
“An incoherent mess. A waste of the stellar cast,” another viewer slammed, and someone else wrote: “Honestly in contention for the worst movie of the 2020s.”
Watch Unchosen on Netflix
This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more
The film continues to be eviscerated on IMDb, with one user slamming Amsterdam as “Quite literally one of the most worthless movies I’ve ever seen.
“The first few scenes set up what could only be anticipated as an action packed murder mystery type movie, only to be followed by a nearly pointless flashback with categorically pointless scenes attempting to make you feel something for characters that make absolutely no sense.
“This movie had serious potential, with an amazing cast. I took three friends and I feel like I owe them several hours of wasting their life.”
Swifties have been warned to stick with Miss Americana this weekend, or perhaps stream her concert extravaganza The Eras Tour, which was filmed and released by Disney+.
Sixteen of the 48 teams are heading home, but which of the sides left standing will survive all the way to the World Cup final at MetLife Stadium near New York City on 19 July?
The hopes of another 16 nations will bite the dust after the first knockout round, which includes England against DR Congo and holders Argentina against surprise package Cape Verde.
It was a different team who caused the biggest shock in the final set of group games, however.
While BBC Sport’s football expert Chris Sutton and AI still went for Cape Verde to lose against Saudi Arabia – from more than 50,000 users playing the BBC’s new predictor game – 39% of you correctly went for a draw and 43% even backed the African side to win.
Instead, it was Ecuador who caught almost everyone out this time.
From more than 56,000 users predictions for that game, only 597 of you correctly backed them to beat Germany.
Chris and AI were also wrong about that one but, overall, they both got 15/24 predictions right from that set of matches.
Again, the users did better, with 17/24, and they still lead the way with 72 of this World Cup’s 104 matches now completed.
Chris has been right 41 times (57%), AI has a score of 43 (60%), but you lot are doing even better with 48 (67%).
Before the tournament, Chris also picked the order he thought each of the 12 groups would finish in. He was right about seven of the winners, but only got all four teams in the correct order in three of the groups.
AI’s predictions have been generated using Microsoft Copilot Chat. We simply asked the tool to ‘predict the results of the World Cup last-32 ties’.
The new BBC predictor game allows readers to pick a winner from each knockout tie.
Israel and Lebanon have agreed on a new framework agreement after four days of marathon talks in Washington, DC, brokered by the United States, trying to end the months-long conflict.
Israel has been occupying almost 20 percent of Lebanese territory in the south and has killed more than 4,000 people since fighting erupted on March 2. A previous bout of fighting ended in a ceasefire in November 2024, but Israel carried out almost daily attacks and refused to end its occupation in breach of the deal.
The new deal, however, does not specifically call for the withdrawal of the Israeli forces and instead ties it to the disarmament of Hezbollah – a condition repeatedly rejected by the Iran-backed armed group.
Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem on Saturday rejected the framework agreement, calling it “null and void”. Hezbollah has demanded that Israel first end its occupation.
Hezbollah supporters flooded the streets of the capital, Beirut, on Friday evening to oppose the deal.
So, what is the new agreement, which does not include Hezbollah, and can it lead to peace in Lebanon?
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio looks on as State Department Counsellor Daniel Holler, Israel’s ambassador to the US, Yechiel Leiter, and Lebanon’s ambassador to the US, Nada Hamadeh, sign a framework agreement between Israel and Lebanon, at the State Department in Washington, DC, June 26, 2026 [Ken Cedeno/Reuters]
What’s in the Israel-Lebanon agreement?
After the trilateral signing in Washington, the US Department of State released the text of the agreement, which talks of a “sequenced process” that will see the Lebanese army restore “effective sovereign authority over all Lebanese territory, pending the verified disarmament of non-state armed groups” – a clear reference to Hezbollah.
The deal does not mandate Israeli withdrawal from the fifth of Lebanese land it occupies. Instead, the framework notes that Israel shall “progressively redeploy” out of Lebanon, offering two “pilot zones” where the Lebanese military “will gradually assume full and effective security responsibility”.
“One [pilot zone] is south of the Litani River and outside the security zone altogether, and the other is north of the Litani – a small area in the expanded security zone that we conquered in the last two weeks, and which the [Israeli military] says it does not need,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu later said in a statement.
Once these conditions are met, “Lebanese civilians will be able to safely return to these areas under the exclusive control of Lebanese state authorities,” the framework says. More than 1.2 million people have been forcefully displaced.
Israel says that successfully returning southern Lebanon to Lebanese government control would “eliminate any future need for [Israeli military] action or presence in Lebanon” and “[declared] that it has not territorial ambitions in Lebanon”.
The Lebanese government has signed that it rejects “the claims of any state or non-state actor to use force on its behalf without its explicit authorization,” deeming such attacks “illegal” and “contrary to Lebanese national interests”.
Hezbollah supporters block the old airport road in the southern suburbs of Beirut, with burning tyres to protest against the trilateral agreement that was signed between the US, Israel and Lebanon on June 27, 2026 [Ibrahim Amro/AFP]
How have parties to the conflict reacted to the agreement?
Israel
Netanyahu issued a video statement shortly after the agreement was announced, stressing that the framework would allow the Israeli military to remain in the occupied Lebanese land.
“We will maintain [the buffer zone] until Hezbollah disarms and as long as there is a threat to the State of Israel,” Netanyahu said.
It is also a partial, momentary win for Netanyahu, who faced intense domestic criticism after the US and Iran sidelined Israel to sign the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, which mandates an end to hostilities in Lebanon as well.
Lebanon
President Joseph Aoun expressed gratitude to Trump and other regional mediators after the signing of the trilateral agreement, which he hailed as “the first step on the path to restoring Lebanon’s sovereignty”.
In a statement from the Lebanese presidency, Aoun noted that the framework also “marks the beginning of the road to fructify [Lebanese citizens’] sacrifices, so that they may return to their fully liberated land”.
His statement has done little to tamp down the tensions in the capital, where supporters of Hezbollah took to the streets, burning tyres and blocking a road leading to the airport.
People react, as they watch Hezbollah chief Naim Qassem deliver a televised speech on a giant screen at the burial site of former Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, on the outskirts of Beirut, Lebanon, June 17, 2026 [Mohamed Azakir/Reuters]
Hezbollah
Though the armed group is not a party to the agreement, and was not present at the negotiating table, its posture and actions will dictate where the conflict heads in the future.
The Hezbollah leader on Saturday condemned proposals to tie the Israeli withdrawal to the group’s disarmament. “Linking the Israeli withdrawal to the disarmament of the resistance throughout Lebanon is a very dangerous proposition that crosses all red lines,” he said.
“The framework agreement in Washington is humiliating, shameful, and a surrender of sovereignty,” he said.
He added that the framework agreement should be replaced by the Iran-US Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed on June 15.
Earlier, Hassan Fadlallah, a Hezbollah representative in the parliament, said Lebanese authorities would not be able to enforce the framework agreement unless, with US support, “they go to civil war”.
In a televised speech before the agreement was signed, Qassem said that Hezbollah would hold its weapons closer, ready to fight Israel for Lebanon, if the Lebanese state fails to do so.
The Iran-US MOU called for the “territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon” – a similar wording has been used in the framework agreement.
United States
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Washington’s point person in Israel and Lebanon talks, announced an “immediate” $100m donation by the US towards humanitarian assistance in coordination with the UN.
At the signing ceremony at the State Department in Washington, Rubio appeared to acknowledge the limited scope of the agreement, calling it “the beginning of the beginning.”
“There’s a lot of work ahead. We don’t in any way underestimate the difficulty of the task ahead, but we understand the importance of it, how vital it is, and we are honored to have played a part in bringing this together,” he said.
Two previous ceasefire agreements brokered by Washington failed to stop the fighting in Lebanon, as well as the Islamabad MOU, signed by President Trump and his Iranian counterpart Masoud Pezeshkian, earlier this month.
Iran
Though Tehran is yet to officially react to the agreement, its state media has been pressing against the deal.
Fars news agency noted that the agreement is essentially the US permitting Israel to violate the first clause of the Islamabad MOU, which mandated the cessation of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon.
Does the Israel-Lebanon agreement contradict the Islamabad MOU?
Analysts point towards two direct contradictions between the preliminary deal signed by the US and Iran, and the latest agreement between Israel and Lebanon.
In short, the Islamabad MOU mandates the end of hostilities on all fronts, including Lebanon, with no conditions – while the Israel-Lebanon agreement ties it to Hezbollah’s disarmament.
Israel has not adhered to any of the ceasefire agreements, including earlier ones, and continued with its assault on Lebanese territories. On Saturday, Lebanese state news agency NNA reported that the Farah amusement park intersection in Nabatieh al-Fawqa was targeted by an Israeli drone strike.
Israel has killed at least 4,192 people in Lebanon since the start of the war on Iran four months ago.
Secondly, the Islamabad MOU does not refer to or mention any of the Iran-backed proxy armed groups among its listed clauses to take forward the negotiations to end the war.
Tahani Mustafa, a visiting fellow on the Middle East and North Africa programme at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told Al Jazeera that Israel and Washington would “definitely use the fact that Hezbollah refuses to disarm and capitulate to blame Hezbollah for derailing the entire process”.
Mustafa further added that Israel “has also proven that it is acting in bad faith, which really gives no confidence to Hezbollah to disarm or capitulate in the way that is being demanded.”
Washington is not blame-free either, she noted, arguing that “the American negotiators actively work behind the scenes to try and decouple Lebanon and Iran.”
“This has really just been something that both the Israelis and the Americans have attempted to cook up behind the scenes and once again obfuscating the blame for its failure,” she told Al Jazeera.
Mourners put wreaths on the grave during the funeral of Israeli soldier Alexander Filin, who, according to the Israeli army, was wounded and later died in an explosive attack by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, in Haifa, Israel, June 21, 2026 [Shir Torem/Reuters]
Can a deal work if Hezbollah rejects?
This is not the first time that Hezbollah’s disarmament is on the table – and the existing challenges remain. The 2024 deal also called for Hezbollah’s disarmament, but it could not be achieved as Israel continued to attack Lebanon and refused to withdraw its troops in breach of the deal.
Alon Pinkas, an Israeli former ambassador and consul general in New York, says he is “very doubtful and sceptical” that this will work out because the deal is between Israel and Lebanon with the US; the issue here is Hezbollah.”
Iran’s linking of the Lebanon conflict to the maturation of an agreement with the US, Pinkas says, “complicates things [because] Netanyahu said that [Israel] would not yield to any linkage to Iran and that Israel would defend itself in Lebanon”.
Al Jazeera’s Ali Hashem said that the agreement is an “existential threat” to Hezbollah’s presence.
“Without Hezbollah’s consent, this is not going to happen,” Hashem said. “This is going to be a recipe for another confrontation. The Lebanese government isn’t capable of imposing this deal. It’s not the de facto force on the ground.”
South Korean soldiers escort a group of Korean War veterans from Commonwealth nations during a ceremony marking the 73rd anniversary of the Battle of Kapyong, in Gapyeong County, northeast of Seoul, South Korea. The Battle of Kapyong, from 22 to 27 April 1951, was fought between United Nations Command forces composed mainly of Canadian, Australian, and New Zealand troops, and invading Chinese forces along the Gapyeong (Kapyong) River valley. Photo by YONHAP / EPA
June 23 (Asia Today) — South Korean power equipment maker LS Electric is strengthening its ties with communities in Utah by honoring Korean War veterans and investing in local education as it expands in the fast-growing North American power market.
Demand for power equipment has surged as artificial intelligence companies build more data centers across North America. Against that backdrop, LS Electric Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Ja-Kyun Koo has emphasized what the company describes as a management strategy based on long-term trust with local communities.
LS Electric said Koo has pursued the strategy through LS Electric Utah, formerly MCM Engineering II, in Cedar City. The South Korean company acquired the operation in 2022 and has since directed an expansion of its production facilities.
Koo has highlighted a Korean War engagement involving soldiers from southern Utah as a historical link between the state and South Korea.
On May 26, 1951, 240 members of the Utah National Guard’s 213th Armored Field Artillery Battalion encountered a Chinese force of more than 4,000 troops near Gapyeong in Gyeonggi Province.
The engagement became known in Utah as the “Miracle at Kapyong.” Accounts maintained by the Utah National Guard say the soldiers fought off the advancing force without losing a member of the unit in the battle.
Families and descendants of the veterans remain part of the community around Cedar City, where LS Electric Utah is based.
Koo said the soldiers’ service in an unfamiliar country demonstrated the kind of courage and commitment that a Korean company operating in Utah should recognize.
LS Electric this year sponsored a Southern Utah University program supporting Korean War veterans. The company also paid the travel expenses of surviving veterans who visited South Korea in May for a ceremony marking the 75th anniversary of the Utah unit’s action near Gapyeong.
The company has also supported the development of science, technology, engineering and mathematics education facilities at Southern Utah University as part of its efforts to train workers for the region’s future industries.
LS Electric joined a separate initiative led by the Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry to connect Korean companies operating in the United States with veterans who previously served with U.S. Forces Korea.
The company said the program could help Korean businesses recruit workers who already have experience with South Korea and its culture.
LS Electric’s community engagement has accompanied a sharp increase in orders for equipment used in North American data centers.
Korea Investment & Securities said LS Electric secured two North American data center equipment projects during the second quarter with a combined value of 489.3 billion won, or about $318 million.
The brokerage expects the company’s North American data center orders to increase by more than 50% from a year earlier and surpass 1.5 trillion won, or about $974 million, in 2026.
“Today, our firm footing in the U.S. market rests on the noble sacrifice of Utah veterans who fought for freedom and peace,” Koo said.
“Remembering and honoring the heroes who created the Miracle at Kapyong is a responsibility that companies should fulfill,” he said.
Koo said businesses built on strong relationships with their communities would be better positioned to achieve stable, long-term growth.
Poland’s president, Karol Nawrocki, has decided to revoke the country’s highest honor, the Order of the White Eagle, from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. This decision comes after Zelenskiy renamed a Ukrainian army unit to honor the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), a nationalist group responsible for massacring Poles during World War Two. Nawrocki’s statement emphasized that the revocation is not against the Ukrainian people or Poland’s security policy, yet it is expected to create significant diplomatic tensions between Poland and Ukraine ahead of a reconstruction conference in Gdansk.
Relations between Poland and Ukraine have been strained, despite Poland’s support for Ukraine in its conflict with Russia. Polish public opinion towards Ukraine has shifted negatively due to dissatisfaction over refugee issues, disputes about grain imports, and historical grievances. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha criticized the decision as a “strategic error,” stating that Poland escalated a conflict rather than seeking solutions. He asserted that foreign leaders should not dictate Ukraine’s history.
Former Polish President Lech Walesa also expressed discontent, saying he would no longer wear a Ukrainian flag badge, although he still supports Ukraine against Russian aggression. Some Ukrainians view the UPA as symbols of their resistance against oppressive regimes, while Poland remembers it as a perpetrator of the Volhynia massacres, which claimed many lives on both sides. Ukraine suggested that the name change was meant to honor the unit’s fight against Russia, not to offend Poland.
Zelenskiy’s chief of staff renounces Polish medal amid WW2 dispute
President Volodymyr Zelenskiy’s chief of staff, Kyrylo Budanov, announced he is giving up a Polish state medal after Poland’s President Karol Nawrocki revoked Zelenskiy’s top honor. This decision was made over a dispute related to a military unit named after Ukrainian insurgents linked to atrocities against Poles during World War II. Budanov described Nawrocki’s action as a “gift” to Russia and said it should lead to reflection rather than political conflict. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha called the revocation a “strategic error. ” Meanwhile, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk urged both leaders to stay calm amid rising tensions between the two nations.
Former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda (2-L) speaks during the 2024 Jeju Forum for peace and prosperity at a convention center on the country’s southern Jeju Island, South Korea. Photo by YONHAP / EPA
June 19 (Asia Today) — Former North Korean diplomats have alleged that a North Korean education specialist affiliated with UNESCO and being considered as a speaker at an international forum in South Korea may be connected to Pyongyang’s intelligence apparatus.
Jang Kwang-chol is under consideration to participate by video in a session titled “UNESCO and the Future of Education: Challenges and Prospects” at the 21st Jeju Forum for Peace and Prosperity, according to forum organizers.
The forum, jointly hosted by South Korea’s Foreign Ministry, the Jeju provincial government and other organizations, is scheduled to take place from Wednesday through June 26 at Haevichi Hotel & Resort Jeju and Jeju Stone Park.
The former diplomats’ allegations regarding Jang could not be independently verified. Neither UNESCO nor the North Korean government was quoted as responding to the claims.
Several former North Korean diplomats said Pyongyang selects Foreign Ministry officials for assignments at United Nations agencies to secure international assistance, collect information about foreign governments and South Korea and earn foreign currency.
They alleged that officials selected for such work sometimes receive fabricated or altered professional backgrounds tailored to the agency where they will serve.
Before deployment, the officials may formally transfer their affiliation to an intelligence organization such as North Korea’s Reconnaissance General Bureau, the former diplomats claimed. Such an arrangement, they said, allows the officials to operate with greater independence than ordinary North Korean diplomats.
UNESCO materials identify Jang as an education specialist who earned a doctorate in education from Kim Hyong Jik University of Education and previously worked for North Korea’s Education Ministry.
The former diplomats alleged that at least part of that professional background could serve as a cover for intelligence-gathering duties.
Ko Young-hwan, a former first secretary at the North Korean Embassy in the Republic of Congo, told Asia Today that North Korea has frequently dispatched what it calls international civil servants to U.N. organizations.
“When they were sent abroad in the past, their affiliations were transferred to organizations under the Workers’ Party, such as the United Front Department or the External Information Investigation Department, also known as Office 35,” Ko said.
“After those organizations were consolidated, I understand that their affiliations were transferred to the Reconnaissance General Bureau.”
Ko, who later headed South Korea’s National Institute for Unification Education, said he believed Jang could fall into that category.
North Korea created the Reconnaissance General Bureau in 2009 by combining intelligence and operational units that had previously been divided among the Workers’ Party and the military.
South Korean authorities have described the bureau as North Korea’s principal organization for overseas intelligence collection, cyber operations and clandestine activities.
Former North Korean diplomats also said officials assigned to international organizations operate with fewer restrictions than diplomats posted to embassies.
Ko recalled an official who worked at UNESCO headquarters in Paris while he was serving in the North Korean Foreign Ministry.
“He attended a weekly self-criticism session at the embassy only once a week and did not have to report unless something unusual occurred,” Ko said.
Ryu Hyun-woo, a former acting North Korean ambassador to Kuwait, said such officials can operate independently under special circumstances.
“They are diplomats who act alone in exceptional situations,” Ryu said. “I understand that they receive separate, specialized training before being dispatched.”
The Jeju Forum’s organizers said education innovation is one of this year’s major themes and that Jang is being considered because he is a UNESCO-affiliated official suited to the education session.
The organizers have not publicly suggested that his proposed participation is connected to intelligence activity.
Some observers, however, have interpreted the invitation as a possible attempt to reopen communication with North Korea amid strained inter-Korean relations.
The outreach comes after the Jeju provincial government provided North Korea with about 160 million won ($116,000) worth of agricultural and medical supplies, including hallabong citrus seedlings, chemicals used to combat pine wilt disease and kidney dialysis equipment.
The provincial government’s North Korea assistance program has also drawn scrutiny following reports that Jeju Gov. Oh Young-hun had contact with Ri Ho-nam, a former counselor at the North Korean Embassy in Beijing who has been identified by South Korean sources as an operative involved in inter-Korean affairs.
No evidence was presented in the article showing that Jang had engaged in espionage or other illegal activity in connection with the Jeju Forum.
June 16 (UPI) — On Tuesday, federal prosecutors announced charges against 15 people in Minnesota they say “conspired to impede or injure federal officers” in connection with an Immigration and Customs Enforcement push in Minneapolis earlier this year.
A Department of Justice press release said the 15 are members or associates of Direct Action Minnesota. The charges included conspiracy to impede or injure a federal officer, interstate stalking, interstate threats, solicitation to commit a crime of violence, assaults on federal officers and destruction of government property.
The prosecutors and other officials said those charged are left-wing antifa activists. “Antifa” is short for “anti-facist.” Thirteen of those charged are in custody, while two remain at large.
The Trump administration’s ICE surge in Minneapolis drew widespread protests and pushback, including volunteer “rapid response” and “ICE watch” patrols, The Washington Post reported. ICE agents killed two protestors, Renee Good and Alex Pretti, during the surge.
Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche said Tuesday that those charged “engaged in an unrelenting campaign of harassment and violence targeting local and federal law enforcement.”
Markwayne Mullin, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, said the people charged were “rioters” and said the charges were “a win for law and order.”
“We have zero tolerance for violence against our law enforcement,” he said. “If you assault or obstruct law enforcement, you will face the consequences.”
Daniel Rosen, U.S. attorney for the District of Minnesota, was asked during a briefing about the charges how many federal agents were injured through the defendant’s alleged actions, The Post reported. Rosen said the charges were based on their plans.
In the release, Rosen said the direct actions of the activists were “un-American” and “will be met with swift justice.”
The press release said Direct Action Minnesota is, in the group’s own description, “a decentralized coalition of working-class people engaged in various forms of community defense against the (then-current) federal occupation happening within the wider metro area, and against state and a far-right violence more broadly.” It said the group “trains its members in the use of shields against law enforcement, surveillance, event planning, role differentiation and rapid mass mobilization” against ICE actions.
Jason Chavez, a Minneapolis City Council member, said Tuesday on social media that he was concerned investigators were targeting legal observers.
“Alerting our neighbors about ICE activity is not a crime,” he wrote. “Observing is not a crime, and loving your immigrant neighbors is not a crime. To every person who was observing the illegal actions committed by ICE and who supported our immigrant community, please know we have your back.”
As of yet, there are no charges against the ICE agents involved in the deaths of Good and Pretti. Rosen said Tuesday that investigations are ongoing.
With its recent Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Delhi, the Quad has again shown it remains active, defying widespread rumours of collapse.
While the Japanese and Australian foreign ministers highlighted their countries’ strong relations with India and the Quad’s central role in shaping the Indo-Pacific security architecture, Marco Rubio’s four-day visit to India was the most noteworthy aspect, as he repeatedly emphasized the significance of Indo-US relations.
Speculations about the Quad’s potential dissolution, reminiscent of developments in the 2000s, were fuelled by the postponement of the leaders’ summit, President Trump’s apparent lack of interest, and a more conciliatory approach toward China. Even so, the meeting reaffirmed the US’s ongoing engagement in the region and its support for the Quad.
The Quad’s momentum currently faces its principal challenge not from India’s or the US’s relations with Australia and Japan, but from a complicated Indo-US relationship.
Two factors show why India-US relations are central to the Quad’s minilateral framework.
Over the past year, India has faced unprecedented criticism from the US administration, particularly from President Trump, who has been critical of India on trade and security fronts. Issues such as tariff disputes, H-1B visa restrictions affecting Indian professionals, deepening US relations with the Pakistan Army, and increased US involvement in Bangladesh and Nepal have contributed to growing distrust about the US’s willingness to cooperate with India and promote stability in the Indo-Pacific.
In response to several contentious statements by President Trump directed at India, Rubio’s visit served as a diplomatic effort to restore bilateral relations. His repeated emphasis on India’s role as a strategic partner signalled a commitment to improving ties. While a single visit cannot resolve all tensions from the past year, it reassures India and reduces the risk of further deterioration.
The Quad Foreign Ministers’ meeting became feasible only after India and the US undertook concerted efforts to revive bilateral relations. Notable examples include India’s invitation to the US to attend the AI Impact Summit in February 2026, ongoing trade agreement negotiations, and the US decision to invite India to the Pax Silica initiative. The meeting occurred only after a certain level of normalization had been achieved. Even so, a leaders’ summit is unlikely unless President Trump and Prime Minister Modi demonstrate a clear commitment to advancing India-US relations.
Second, without proactive American engagement, Japan, Australia, and India may develop their own trilateral regional strategies, perhaps with some Southeast Asian countries such as Indonesia, the Philippines, and Singapore. However, the impact of such an alternative would be limited and localized. Japan could take a greater role in sustaining and rebuilding regional economic frameworks, replicating the Trans-Pacific Partnership experiment. Still, due to constitutional and capacity constraints, Tokyo is unlikely to replace Washington as the region’s primary security guarantor soon.
Although the Quad’s resilience is maintained by the agency and commitment of Australia, India, and Japan rather than by exclusive US leadership, strong US involvement in the Indo-Pacific security mechanism will remain a cornerstone of the Indo-Pacific architecture.
China’s persistent assertive behaviour remains the central factor. It continues to employ coercive tactics and expand its influence in regions critical to the US and its partners, so the original motivations for revitalizing the Quad remain relevant. Although the US approach to China is evolving, the fundamental dynamics of US-China relations remain unchanged. In the long term, Washington will require frameworks such as the Quad to maintain stability in the Indo-Pacific and prevent the erosion of its strategic influence. Consequently, the Quad is likely to remain central to regional strategy, with India as a key partner.
The US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau’s statement that the US is not going to make the same mistakes with India that it made with China 20 years ago must not guide Indo-US relations. The US needs India as much as India needs the US, and unlike China, India-US relations rest on shared values – democracy, freedom of speech, multiculturalism, and a common vision of maintaining a rules-based liberal international order. Both countries require mutually beneficial cooperation to advance their strategic objectives. Other Quad members and Indo-Pacific stakeholders also depend on collaboration between Washington and New Delhi to maintain strategic equilibrium and preserve the bloc’s cohesion.
The US regards India as a responsible stakeholder and a regional counterweight to China, especially after the limited outcomes of President Trump’s recent visit to China. Conversely, India depends on the US for advanced technology, strategic investments, and long-term defense needs. This mutual dependence makes both countries indispensable to each other, and significant short-term trade diversification is unlikely. Even if achieved, it would likely harm both parties.
The US must strengthen its engagement in the Indo-Pacific by leveraging the Quad and its member states to develop an effective regional strategy. Closer strategic coordination among Quad partners, particularly with India, is essential to this effort.
The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) presents the work of the late Nam June Paik, Korean American artist, who is considered to be the founder of video art, during a press preview of his first-ever retrospective exhibition in San Francisco, California. Photo by JOHN G. MABANGLO / EPA
June 12 (Asia Today) — Nam June Paik connected Seoul, Tokyo and New York by satellite in 1986.
His project, “Bye Bye Kipling,” brought Korean traditional dance, American popular music and Japanese avant-garde art together on one screen in real time. The work directly challenged British writer Rudyard Kipling’s famous line that East and West could never meet, presenting instead the possibility of communication across borders and cultures.
That history of encounter and exchange is at the center of “Road movie: Art between Korea and Japan since 1945,” now on view at the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Korea, in Gwacheon. The exhibition marks the 60th anniversary of normalized diplomatic relations between South Korea and Japan and traces 80 years of artistic exchange since Korea’s liberation in 1945.
The exhibition features about 200 works by 43 artists and artist teams from both countries. It was jointly organized by the Korean museum and the Yokohama Museum of Art. The show first opened in Yokohama late last year and drew about 37,000 visitors before coming to South Korea.
Featured artists include Nam June Paik, Lee Ufan, Lee Bul, Jung Yeondoo, Koki Tanaka, Jiro Takamatsu and Takashi Murakami, along with other major figures in contemporary Korean and Japanese art.
Paik is one of the central figures in the exhibition. He studied aesthetics and art history in Japan in the 1950s and later built close ties with Japan’s avant-garde art scene. It was there that he met Shigeko Kubota, his lifelong partner and artistic collaborator.
Alongside “Bye Bye Kipling,” the exhibition presents Kubota’s video work “Broken Diary: Korean Trip,” which documents Paik’s return to South Korea after 34 years abroad.
The exhibition, however, does not focus only on well-known artists. Its first section, “In Between: Zainichi Koreans’ Gaze,” examines the lives of Korean artists who remained in Japan after liberation. Cho Yanggyu’s “Sealed Warehouse” depicts a dark, enclosed labor site and reflects both the reality faced by Zainichi Koreans and the wounds left by national division.
The exhibition also explores the growth of artistic exchange after South Korea and Japan normalized diplomatic relations in 1965. Works by Lee Ufan, Park Seo-bo, Yun Hyong-keun, Jiro Takamatsu and Kishio Suga show how artists in the two countries influenced one another as modern art movements developed across borders.
Later works by Masato Nakamura, Takashi Murakami and Lee Bul show how artistic exchange expanded in the 1990s from official institutions to personal networks and collaborative relationships.
Lee Bul’s “Cyborg W5” presents a futuristic but incomplete body, questioning boundaries between humans and machines and between male and female identities. The work reflects the shared concerns about technology and identity that shaped Korean and Japanese contemporary art after the 1990s.
The exhibition’s final section shifts from past exchange to present-day solidarity. Koki Tanaka’s “Vulnerable Histories: A Road Movie” links the massacre of Koreans after the 1923 Great Kanto Earthquake to more recent anti-Korean demonstrations in Japan, asking viewers to consider histories of discrimination and exclusion.
Jung Yeondoo’s “Magician’s Walk” reflects on landscapes after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and explores the possibility of empathy and solidarity with the suffering of others.
The exhibition also extends to the museum’s outdoor sculpture park in Gwacheon. Six sculptures by Korean artists based in Japan and Japanese artists, including Duckjun Kwak, Quac Insik and Lee Ufan, highlight the museum’s role as an important site of Korean-Japanese artistic exchange.
Kim Sung-hee, director of the National Museum of Modern and Contemporary Art, Korea, said the exhibition revisits “historical moments experienced by the two countries and the traces of artistic exchange formed within them.”
Kim said she hopes the exhibition will offer visitors a chance to rediscover “the status and possibilities of Korean and Japanese contemporary art.”
Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan was denied entry into the United States for the World Cup after enduring an 11-hour interrogation in Miami, according to media reports. Andrew Giuliani, head of the White House Task Force on the World Cup, indicated Artan was suspected to having ties to a Somali militant group.
“We want to make sure we are not going to allow a soccer tournament to be the opportunity for terrorists to potentially get in the country or anybody who is actually talking to them,” Giuliani told the British Broadcasting Corporation.
“I am very, very disappointed,” Artan told the Times from Istanabul, where he stopped on his way back to Somalia. “I’m just simply a referee who’s trying to live his dream, the biggest dream of my life, to come to the World Cup.”
Safety was purportedly the concern with Artan, whose interrogation was conducted by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
“During processing, the traveler underwent additional inspection, a routine part of CBP’s inspection process when officers need to verify information or determine admissibility,” CBP said in a statement. “Following inspection, the traveler, a referee for the FIFA World Cup, was determined to be inadmissible due to vetting concerns and was denied entry.”
Somalia is on the U.S. list of banned countries for immigration, although exceptions can be made. Artan is considered one of the best referees in Africa, having officiated in the Somali national football league championship and at the African Cup of Nations.
“Despite the circumstances, I am in a positive mood and focused on the next challenges in my refereeing career,” Artan said in a statement. “I would like to thank FIFA and [the African federation] for all their support and I promise to keep my refereeing levels up as I concentrate on the future.”
Artan, Africa’s Referee of the Year in 2025, was greeted Wednesday at Aden Adde International Airport in Somalia by government officials and hundreds of well-wishers.
“I want to thank FIFA for supporting me all the way, and for Somali people also,” he told Al Jazeera. “So I am very grateful for FIFA and for CAF also. This is what I have to say.”
Lawmakers in the United States are quietly advancing a proposal that could deepen military ties between the US and Israel in unprecedented ways, at a time when public support for Israel among Americans is increasingly fractured.
Among the provisions included in the 2027 National Defence Authorisation Act (NDAA) released this week is Section 224, the “United States-Israel Defence Technology Cooperation Initiative”.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
The NDAA, which Congress passes annually to set military policy and authorise defence spending, will undergo further debate and amendments before becoming law. Some legislators have already signalled opposition, with Representative Thomas Massie saying he would seek to remove the provision if it reaches the House floor.
The measure remains at an early stage, but analysts say if passed, it would limit political oversight over the defence relationship.
Analysts added that it could mark a significant shift in the US-Israel relationship, moving beyond a model centred on American military aid towards deeper institutional integration between the two countries’ defence industries and militaries.
Critics argue that such a move would make support for Israel less a matter of political choice and more a structural feature of US national security policy, embedding the relationship within joint military and industrial programmes that would be difficult to unwind.
What does the proposal include?
Section 224 incorporates elements of the US-Israel Future of Warfare Act legislation introduced by Representative Ronny Jackson, according to Track AIPAC. While the legislation did not advance as a standalone bill, key elements of it were instead folded into the NDAA.
The provision would require the US defence secretary to designate an official responsible for coordinating military cooperation between the two countries. According to the text, that official would be tasked with “synchronising cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel”, including “bilateral defence technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration and industrial cooperation”.
The legislation envisages cooperation across a wide range of military technologies. It specifically identifies as priority areas; “counter-unmanned systems including aerial, maritime and ground platforms”, “anti-tunnelling and subterranean threats”, and “missile and air defence technologies”.
The proposal also seeks to deepen collaboration on emerging technologies, including “artificial intelligence, quantum machine learning and autonomous systems”, as well as “directed energy and advanced sensing”, “cyber defence, electronic warfare and digital resilience”, and “biotechnology, biomanufacturing, and medical defence”.
The inclusion of “network integration” and “data fusion” has drawn particular attention because it suggests significantly closer integration of military information systems between the two countries.
The United States and Israel already cooperate on defence projects, including missile defence systems such as Iron Dome. However, analysts say that Section 224 would expand cooperation into nearly every major area of emerging military technology, and could create a “lock-in” between the two countries military infrastructure.
Mark Hilborne, a senior lecturer, the School of Security Studies at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera the proposal goes well beyond the traditional foundations of the US-Israel defence relationship.
“While historically, the US-Israel defence relationship has included US military aid and weapons transfers, joint missile defence programmes such as Iron Dome, David’s Sling and Arrow, and intelligence and operational cooperation, the proposed agreement increases cooperation to include a wider set of emerging technologies,” he said.
“So this all suggests a much tighter integration – less about provision and perhaps sharing technologies and capabilities, and more about jointly developing these.
“It would point to a more institutionalised relationship, and perhaps one that might survive changing administrations in the US, as some of the development cycles could be very long and would become entrenched,” he said.
Why is it controversial?
The proposal comes amid growing debate in the US over military support for Israel, particularly as Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza continues, and concerns mount over the use of US-made weapons.
Human rights organisations and United Nations experts have repeatedly raised concerns about Israeli military actions in Gaza, where despite a so-called ceasefire in place since last October, at least 850 Palestinians have been killed. Israel is also advancing into southern Lebanon, where it has killed more than 3,000 people since the beginning of March.
These wars have led to increasing scepticism among Americans towards unconditional support for Israel, recent opinion polls suggest.
A New York Times poll in May found that only 30 percent of respondents believed Donald Trump made the right decision in ordering military strikes against Iran, while 64 percent said it was the wrong decision.
An Institute for Global Affairs poll released last week found that only 16 percent of Americans support continuing weapons transfers to Israel without additional restrictions. Thirty-eight percent said the US should stop supplying weapons entirely, while 24 percent said military aid should be conditioned on how the weapons are used.
Opposition has also emerged from parts of the Republican Party, which traditionally has always been aligned with Israel.
Former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene criticised the proposal on social media, writing: “This is what complete capture to a foreign government looks like, and there hasn’t been a single shot fired.”
Massie, who has opposed military aid to Israel, likewise pledged to introduce an amendment removing the provision from the NDAA. The Republican senator was defeated in the primary elections last month, highlighting the financial and political influence of pro-Israel lobby groups in the US.
Influential conservative commentator, Tucker Carlson, has increasingly criticised US support for Israel, reflecting divisions within the broader MAGA movement. Criticism has also intensified among left-wing Democrats, with many calling for restrictions on military aid to Israel.
What could it mean in practice?
Critics of the measures warn that the proposal could create a form of institutional “lock-in” that makes both countries simultaneously reliant on each other for military development and procurement.
Some analysts say such integration would move key aspects of the US-Israel relationship away from highly visible aid votes or commercial contracting, and into the less transparent world of defence procurement and industrial partnerships at a state-to-state level.
Hilborne from the King’s College said the initiative could also have direct implications for Palestinians. “If joint R&D produces more effective technology, then systems related to surveillance, autonomous vehicles, AI and targeting, and various counter-drone or counter-missile technology would be improved, providing a capability boost to Israeli forces operating in Gaza or the West Bank,” he said.
“This enhanced integration would further embed US technology into Israeli forces. These would all be concerns from a Palestinian perspective.”
Critics also point to the economic implications, where expanded co-production agreements could lead to new manufacturing facilities and defence jobs in the United States, creating a further reliance on Israel.
Hilborne also argued that deeper integration could reduce Washington’s leverage over Israel. “The deeper integration may also mean that the US loses some degree of leverage over Israel, as it would be less able to withhold certain capabilities from Israel,” he said.
“As a consequence, Israel might be emboldened in its policies.”
The proposal could also have implications beyond the US-Israel relationship, according to Imad Salamey, an international relations professor at the Lebanese American University. “The proposed US-Israeli defence integration can be seen as the next phase of the Abraham Accords: moving from normalisation toward a US-backed regional security regime centred on Israel as the dominant military and technological hub,” he told Al Jazeera.
Such a framework would strengthen efforts to contain Iran, limit Turkiye’s independent regional influence and deepen security cooperation with Arab partners, he said.
“For Lebanon and Gaza, it may translate into greater pressure to accommodate Israeli-led security arrangements as part of a broader emerging Middle Eastern order.”
Whether Section 224 survives the legislative process is uncertain.
But its inclusion in the NDAA shows how some politicians, many backed by the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC, are attempting to bind the two countries’ militaries closer together, creating long-term industrial links that future administrations may find difficult to reverse.
Australian Federal Police have not made any arrests but say inquiries are ongoing.
A group of 19 women and children with alleged links to ISIL (ISIS) has returned to Australia, with the government warning that anyone found to have engaged in criminal activity will be prosecuted.
The six women and 13 children arrived from a Syrian refugee camp on Tuesday, with one group landing in Sydney and the other in Melbourne.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
It is the second cohort of Australian women and children to return from Syria this month. Responding to criticism over their arrival, the Australian government said it had not assisted them in any capacity.
“These are people who have made the horrific choice to join a dangerous terrorist organisation and to place their children in an unspeakable situation,” Minister for Home Affairs Tony Burke said.
Australian women began travelling to Syria to marry members of ISIL in 2012, with some allegedly taken against their will.
At the height of its power in 2015, ISIL controlled territory across Syria and Iraq roughly equivalent in size to the United Kingdom.
Australian Federal Police did not arrest any members of the group upon their arrival but said that investigations were ongoing.
The group’s return has sparked anger in some sections of Australian society.
According to local media, a large police presence was deployed at Melbourne airport, where a scuffle reportedly broke out as the group of women and children was escorted out through a side entrance.
Australia is one of several Western countries that have shown reluctance to repatriate citizens who travelled to the Middle East to join ISIL about a decade ago.
Both France and the UK have expressed opposition to allowing former ISIL members to return.
In 2022, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child said that France’s failure to repatriate children born to French nationals in Syria violated their right to life and exposed them to inhumane treatment.
Meanwhile, the UK stripped British national Shamima Begum of her citizenship in 2019 on national security grounds.
In February, the Australian government issued a temporary exclusion order against a woman in Syria, preventing her from returning home.
Her child, who was not barred from returning, chose to stay with her.
The order prevents the woman from returning to Australia until February 2028, and her family is currently challenging the decision.
Afzal Ashraf, a visiting fellow at Loughborough University specialising in international relations and security, said the risk posed by people returning from countries including Syria needs to be viewed proportionately.
“There will be some security challenges, because people like this are likely to suffer from issues such as PTSD,” Ashraf told Al Jazeera.
“The fact of the matter is that there are security challenges in Australia and other countries, but statistically speaking, the return of these nationals doesn’t increase that risk very much, while the threat to life from terrorism is far lower than the threat posed by road accidents, for example.”
“That said, these threats can be reduced by providing comprehensive mental health support for returnees and ensuring they are reintegrated into society in a positive way, with follow-up programmes to address any dangerous ideas they may have adopted,” Ashraf said.
“It’s worth remembering that ISIL has killed far more Muslims than Westerners.”
Earlier this month, four women and 13 children arrived in Australia from Syria. Three of the women were arrested upon arrival.
Donald Trump announced that he has requested several countries, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, and Turkey, to join the Abraham Accords to normalize relations with Israel as part of an agreement with Iran.
U. S. President Donald Trump announced that he has requested several countries, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, and Turkey, to join the Abraham Accords to normalize relations with Israel as part of an agreement with Iran. He stated he spoke to the leaders of these countries, as well as the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, which have already signed the accords.
Trump expressed his wish for all these countries to immediately sign the accords and suggested that if Iran agrees to a deal with the U. S., it would be an honor to include Iran in this coalition. He mentioned the complexity of the negotiations that the U. S. has been working on and said most countries should be open to making a historic settlement with Iran.
While Trump indicated that negotiations with Iran were progressing, he didn’t provide details about a potential deal. He also noted that Egypt and Jordan already have relations with Israel, and he remains optimistic about Saudi Arabia joining the accords, although no movement from Riyadh has been observed.
![US Secretary of State Marco Rubio looks on as State Department Counselor Daniel Holler, Israel's Ambassador to the US Yechiel Leiter and Lebanon's Ambassador to the US Nada Hamadeh sign a framework agreement between Israel and Lebanon, at the State Department in Washington, DC, June 26, 2026. [Ken Cedeno/Reuters]](https://i0.wp.com/occasionaldigest.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/2026-06-26T175227Z_1896892704_RC2T1MA2VJJ9_RTRMADP_3_IRAN-CRISIS-LEBANON-ISRAEL-1782496481.jpg?w=640&ssl=1)
