ties

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?

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”.

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.

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.

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.”

TORONTO — Marina Mabrey matched the WNBA scoring record with 53 points to help the Toronto Tempo rout the Sparks 125-97 on Thursday night.

Mabrey tied the mark set by Liz Cambage for Dallas against New York on July 17, 2018, and by A’ja Wilson for Las Vegas at Atlanta on Aug. 22, 2023.

Mabrey was 17 of 28 from the field, hitting nine of 18 three-pointers, and made 10 of 12 free throws.

The Tempo opened a nine-game homestand.

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.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260623010008080

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.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260619010006871

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.

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.”

The exhibition runs through Sept. 27.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260612010003954

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.

The New York Times reported that Artan’s name is similar to that of a man identified as linked to Al Shabab, a group that has been the target of U.S. government sanctions.

“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”.

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.

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.

China’s Xi Jinping is hosting Russian President Vladimir Putin, just days after welcoming Donald Trump to Beijing. The Chinese leader is set to discuss energy security and trade, while balancing access to European markets, as Al Jazeera’s Katrina Yu explains.

The 2026 Africa France summit in Nairobi marks a significant diplomatic moment in the evolving relationship between Europe and Africa. For the first time, the summit is being held in an African country with no colonial history under France, signaling an intentional shift in symbolism and geopolitical messaging. It is also taking place against a backdrop of deteriorating French influence in parts of West Africa, where countries such as Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have sharply reduced engagement with Paris.

The summit reflects a broader attempt to redefine France’s role in Africa under President Emmanuel Macron and to reposition France within a more competitive global environment. At the same time, it highlights Kenya’s growing ambition under President William Ruto to present itself as a continental diplomatic hub and an economic gateway between Africa and global powers.

The convergence of these ambitions has produced a summit agenda focused on innovation, entrepreneurship, climate finance, artificial intelligence, and security cooperation. However, beneath this forward looking framing lies a more complex continuity of historical relationships, economic interests, and strategic recalibration between Africa and Europe.

Macron’s Repositioning of French Africa Policy

The summit reflects the long term evolution of Macron’s Africa strategy, which has sought to move away from traditional post colonial frameworks toward a more diversified and economically oriented engagement model. This approach emphasizes partnerships in innovation, private sector development, and strategic cooperation beyond France’s former colonial sphere.

A central feature of this policy has been an attempt to reduce France’s reliance on its traditional West African alliances while expanding diplomatic and economic ties across the broader African continent. This includes engagement with non Francophone countries and regional institutions, reflecting a recognition that France’s historical influence in West Africa is increasingly contested.

The emphasis on entrepreneurship and innovation, particularly through small business development and technology partnerships, reflects a shift toward a neoliberal development model. This model prioritizes private sector growth, investment facilitation, and startup ecosystems as drivers of economic transformation.

The Nairobi summit continues this trajectory by framing Africa France relations around innovation and growth rather than historical legacy or development aid dependency.

Kenya’s Strategic Diplomatic Positioning

For Kenya, the summit represents an opportunity to consolidate its position as a leading diplomatic and economic actor in Africa. By hosting a major international summit outside the traditional Francophone sphere, Kenya is signaling its ambition to transcend linguistic and colonial regional divisions and present itself as a neutral platform for continental and global engagement.

Under Ruto’s leadership, Kenya has increasingly adopted a development narrative centered on entrepreneurship and economic empowerment. This aligns with the broader summit theme of innovation driven growth and private sector expansion. Kenya’s domestic economic discourse, often framed around the concept of a “hustler economy,” mirrors the emphasis on small business development and market based solutions promoted in France’s external engagement strategy.

The convergence of these narratives allows both countries to present their partnership as forward looking and economically dynamic, rather than historically constrained.

Shared Policy Frameworks and Economic Priorities

A key reason the Nairobi summit bears the imprint of both Macron and Ruto is the overlap in their policy priorities. Both leaders emphasize climate finance, technological innovation, security cooperation, and private sector led development as central pillars of modern governance and international partnership.

This shared framework is particularly visible in discussions around artificial intelligence, climate initiatives, and industrial development. These sectors are presented as areas of mutual benefit, offering opportunities for investment, technological transfer, and economic growth.

However, this alignment is also strategic. It allows both sides to redefine their relationship in terms of future oriented sectors rather than historically sensitive areas such as colonial legacy or aid dependency. By focusing on emerging industries, both France and Kenya seek to establish a partnership narrative that is less politically contentious and more economically aspirational.

Historical Continuities Behind the New Partnership

Despite its modern framing, the France Kenya relationship is rooted in long standing historical interactions dating back to the post independence period. France’s early engagement with Kenya and the wider East African region was partly motivated by its broader strategy to balance British influence in Africa while expanding its own role within European and global institutions.

Kenya, in turn, has historically sought to diversify its international partnerships beyond the Commonwealth framework. Engagement with European economic structures in the early post independence period reflected a desire for greater autonomy in trade and development policy.

The current summit therefore reflects not a break from history, but a continuation of evolving pragmatic cooperation shaped by shifting global power dynamics.

Tensions Beneath Strategic Alignment

Despite the apparent convergence of interests, significant structural tensions remain between France and Kenya in areas such as climate policy, global security, and technological labor markets.

On climate change, both countries acknowledge the urgency of environmental action, but differ in priorities and implementation strategies. Kenya, highly vulnerable to droughts and environmental stress, seeks substantial climate finance and structural adaptation support. France and the broader European Union, however, often balance climate commitments with domestic energy and industrial policy considerations.

Similarly, in the field of artificial intelligence, cooperation masks underlying asymmetries. Much of the data processing and content moderation work that supports global AI systems is conducted in lower wage labor markets, including Kenya. This raises questions about value distribution and economic equity within the emerging digital economy.

In global security, divisions are also evident. Diverging responses to international conflicts, including voting patterns in global institutions, highlight differences in geopolitical alignment between African states and Western partners.

The Geopolitical Logic of the Summit

The Nairobi summit reflects a broader shift in international relations, where traditional post colonial hierarchies are being replaced by more transactional and issue based partnerships. Europe’s search for reliable global partners amid geopolitical uncertainty, combined with Africa’s growing strategic autonomy, is reshaping diplomatic engagement.

For France, Africa represents both an economic opportunity and a strategic necessity in an increasingly multipolar world. For Kenya, engagement with France offers access to investment, technology, and diplomatic visibility within global governance structures.

The summit therefore functions as both a symbolic and practical platform for redefining bilateral relations in a rapidly changing global order.

Analysis

The Nairobi Africa France summit illustrates the transformation of international partnerships from historically anchored relationships into forward looking economic and strategic arrangements. While the rhetoric emphasizes innovation, climate action, and entrepreneurship, the underlying dynamics remain shaped by long standing patterns of influence, economic asymmetry, and geopolitical repositioning.

The convergence between Macron’s and Ruto’s priorities reflects a pragmatic alignment rather than a fully equal partnership. Both sides benefit from framing cooperation in terms of emerging sectors such as artificial intelligence and green development, which carry fewer historical burdens and greater political flexibility.

However, the sustainability of this model depends on whether it can deliver inclusive economic outcomes rather than concentrating benefits among narrow elite and corporate actors. Without broader distribution of gains, the partnership risks reproducing familiar inequalities under a modern technological and developmental narrative.

Ultimately, the summit represents a transitional moment in Africa Europe relations, where historical legacies, contemporary economic interests, and future oriented strategic ambitions intersect in a rapidly evolving global system.

With information from Reuters.

The European Council says the move ‘sends a clear political signal of the EU’s commitment to re-engage with Syria and support its economic recovery’.

The European Council has terminated the partial suspension of a cooperation agreement with Syria, thereby restoring fuller trade ties with the country as it seeks to emerge from nearly 14 years of war.

The council said on Monday the move marked an important step towards strengthening relations between the European Union and Syria.

The decision “sends a clear political signal of the EU’s commitment to re-engage with Syria and support its economic recovery”, the European Council added in a statement.

At the same time, the EU’s foreign ministers met in Brussels with top Syrian diplomat Asaad al-Shaibani, kicking off a high-level political dialogue 18 months after the removal of Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad.

The 27-nation bloc has launched a new chapter with Syria after al-Assad was swept from power in December 2024.

Meeting in Damascus

European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen promised after meeting interim Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa in Damascus in January that Europe would “do everything it can” to support Syria’s recovery.

The commission proposed that EU states fully reactivate the bloc’s cooperation agreement with Syria last month.

The deal, which abolished duties on imports of most industrial products from Syria, was partially suspended in 2011 when al-Assad’s regime cracked down on antigovernment protests at the start of a civil war.

Syria-EU trade had peaked in 2010 at more than 7 billion euros ($9.1bn at the 2010 exchange rate).

By 2023, EU imports from the country had dwindled to 103 million euros ($120m) while European exports to Syria stood at 265 million euros ($310m).

On the sensitive matter of Syrian refugee returns, Germany, home to the EU’s largest Syrian community at more than a million people, is on the front line.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz has embraced tougher migration policies as he seeks to counter the far right, and he triggered a backlash by declaring during a visit by Syria’s president last month that he hoped 80 percent of Syrian refugees would return home within three years.

He later clarified this was a figure put forward by al-Sharaa himself.

UCLA senior Megan Grant hit her 37th home run of the season, tying the NCAA single-season record during the Bruins’ 19-5 win over Wisconsin during the Big Ten tournament semifinal Friday in College Park, Md.

The record was set in 1995 by Arizona’s Lauren Espinoza, but Grant and Oklahoma freshman Kendall Wells have hit homers at a blistering pace all season and are battling to close the season as the new title holder. Wells has 36 home runs, but her team was eliminated from the Southeastern Conference tournament Friday and she’ll have to wait until the NCAA tournament begins to add to her tally.

Grant, meanwhile, will be in the lineup when UCLA plays regular-season Big Ten champion Nebraska for the league tournament title at 10 a.m. Saturday in College Park, Md. The game will air on the Big Ten Network. First pitch was shifted earlier with the hope of avoiding storms in Maryland.

Grant’s teammates celebrated blast No. 37 and cheered behind her while she was interviewed on the Big Ten Network.

“I was just focusing as much as I can, just competing within that at-bat,” Grant said when asked about her record-tying blast. “… A one-on-one battle is all I think about. It kind of had a good payout.”

During their semifinal win over Wisconsin, the Bruins hit four home runs and pushed their NCAA record single-season team home run total to 181.

Earlier Friday, UCLA senior Jordan Woolery was named Big Ten player of the year by the league’s 17 head coaches.

Woolery leads the nation in RBIs (107) and is the fifth player in NCAA Division I history to record more than 100 RBIs in a season.

Bri Alejandre, Aleena Garcia, Rylee Slimp and Grant joined Woolery on the All-Big Ten first team. Bruins Kaniya Bragg, Alexis Ramirez and Taylor Tinsley earned second-team honors.

ROME — U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio urged European allies Friday to move beyond rhetoric and take concrete action against Iran, even as he sought to repair strained ties with Italy and the Vatican during a two-day visit following tensions over the U.S.-Israeli war in Iran.

Speaking after meetings with Premier Giorgia Meloni and Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani, Rubio warned that Tehran was attempting to assert control over the strategic Strait of Hormuz, calling the move “unacceptable” and a threat to global security.

“Everybody says Iran is a threat. Everybody says that Iran can’t have a nuclear weapon … but you’ve got to do something about it,” Rubio told reporters in Rome. “If the answer is no … then you better have something more than just strongly worded statements to back it up.”

Clear ‘red line’

Rubio said Iran was trying to normalize control over an international waterway, a precedent he warned could encourage similar actions elsewhere. He also cautioned Tehran against targeting U.S. maritime assets, saying the United States had thwarted attacks on three Navy ships in the strait.

“The red line is clear. They threaten Americans, they are going to be blown up,” he said.

Rubio said Washington was pursuing a diplomatic track, including a proposed U.N. Security Council resolution aimed at preserving freedom of navigation. He added the U.S. was awaiting Iran’s response on Friday to ongoing diplomatic efforts.

Rubio’s visit comes after weeks of sharp disagreements between Washington and Rome over the Iran war, tariffs and President Trump’s criticism of both Meloni and Pope Leo XIV.

Differences remain over Iran war

Meloni described her meeting with Rubio as “constructive, frank and productive,” focused on both bilateral relations and major international issues. She said the talks covered strategic topics, including the Middle East, freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, Ukraine, China and areas of Italian interest such as Libya and Lebanon.

“We both understand how important the trans-Atlantic relationship is, but we also understand that each country must defend its own national interests,” Meloni stressed after the meeting.

Tajani struck a more conciliatory tone after meeting his U.S. counterpart, reaffirming the importance of the trans-Atlantic alliance.

“I am convinced Europe needs America — Italy needs America — and the United States also needs Europe and Italy,” Tajani said, adding he hoped “tensions have been calmed.”

He said discussions covered the Iran conflict and its spillover into Lebanon, as well as Venezuela and Cuba. The U.S. State Department said Rubio also raised the need to protect economic interests and end the war in Ukraine.

Despite the effort to ease tensions, differences remain over the Iran conflict. Italy has opposed the U.S.-Israeli bombing campaign, with Meloni calling it “illegal,” and has resisted involvement in offensive operations.

Tajani said Italy would be prepared to contribute naval forces to demine the Strait of Hormuz once a permanent ceasefire is reached, and would maintain its role in the U.N. peacekeeping mission in Lebanon. He also stressed the importance of continued U.S. troop presence in Europe amid concerns about possible reductions.

No final decision on NATO troops adjustments

Rubio said “no final decision” had been made on NATO troop adjustments, noting that any changes would depend on U.S. national interests and global priorities.

The U.S. has announced a decision to pull 5,000 military personnel from Germany and Trump has threatened to withdraw more troops from Italy and Spain over their stance on the war.

Italy, a key logistics hub for U.S. and allied operations in the Mediterranean and beyond, has already signaled limits to its cooperation. In March, it declined to allow U.S. bombers bound for the Middle East to use a base in Sicily without parliamentary approval, reflecting constitutional constraints and strong domestic opposition to the war.

Meloni, weakened by a recent referendum defeat and facing public unease over the conflict, has insisted that any use of Italian bases for offensive operations would require parliamentary backing.

The war has also raised economic concerns in Italy, with Meloni warning that disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz risk driving up energy costs and inflation, while U.S. tariff threats weigh on the country’s export-driven economy.

An attempt to de-escalate at the Vatican

Rubio also sought to ease tensions with the Vatican following Trump’s criticism of the pope’s calls for peace. After a lengthy meeting on Thursday with the pontiff and Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Rubio said Washington remained committed to a “productive and fruitful” relationship with the Catholic Church.

“The president’s perspective is clear. He thinks that Iran is a threat, and it needs to be addressed. And that position remains unchanged,” Rubio said.

Rubio confirmed that Cuba was also discussed at the Vatican, with Washington hoping the church’s Caritas charity organization would continue distributing humanitarian aid.

Rubio said the U.S. has provided about $6 million in humanitarian aid to Cuba, to be distributed through Caritas, should the Cubans allow it. He added Washington has also offered up to $100 million in additional aid, but the Cuban government has not accepted it so far. Rubio blamed Cuba’s government for blocking assistance and worsening conditions, describing it as “incompetent.”

U.S. officials said the Vatican talks underscored strong bilateral ties and a shared commitment to promoting peace, even as differences over the Iran war persist.

Zampano and Winfield write for the Associated Press.

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican raised the “need to work tirelessly in favor of peace” in talks Thursday with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who came to Rome on a fence-mending visit after President Trump’s criticisms of Pope Leo XIV over the Iran war.

Both the Vatican and the U.S. State Department stressed that Rubio’s meetings with Leo and the Vatican’s top diplomat underscored strong bilateral ties. Those relations, though, have been strained over Trump’s repeated broadsides about Leo’s calls for peace and dialogue to end the U.S.-Israeli war.

Rubio, a practicing Catholic, has often been called on to tone down or explain Trump’s harsh rhetoric. He had an audience first with Leo, which was complicated at the last minute by Trump’s latest criticism of the Chicago-born pope. During a 2½-hour visit, Rubio then met with the Vatican secretary of state, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, who on the eve of his visit had strongly defended Leo and criticized Trump’s attacks.

“Attacking him like that or criticizing what he does seems a bit strange to me, to say the least,” Parolin said Wednesday.

After the meetings, the U.S. State Department said that Rubio and Parolin discussed “ongoing humanitarian efforts in the Western Hemisphere and efforts to achieve a durable peace in the Middle East. The discussion reflected the enduring partnership between the United States and the Holy See in advancing religious freedom.”

In a separate statement about the audience with Leo, U.S. State Department spokesperson Tommy Pigott said that the two discussed the situation in the Middle East and the Western Hemisphere. “The meeting underscored the strong relationship between the United States and the Holy See and their shared commitment to promoting peace and human dignity,” he said.

The Vatican, for its part, said that during Rubio’s meetings with both Leo and Parolin, “the shared commitment to fostering good bilateral relations between the Holy See and the United States of America was reaffirmed.”

It said the two sides exchanged views on the current events “with particular attention to countries marked by war, political tensions, and difficult humanitarian situations, as well as on the need to work tirelessly in favor of peace.”

Rubio also has meetings Friday with Italian Premier Giorgia Meloni and Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani. Those meetings might not be much easier for Washington’s top diplomat, given both have strongly defended Leo against Trump’s attacks and have criticized the Iran war as illegal — drawing the president’s ire.

A mission to smooth ties

The tensions began when Trump lashed out at Leo on social media last month, saying the pope was soft on crime and terrorism for comments about the administration’s immigration policies and deportations as well as the Iran war. Leo then said that God doesn’t listen to the prayers of those who wage war.

Later, Trump posted a social media image appearing to liken himself to Jesus Christ, which was deleted after a backlash. He has refused to apologize to Leo and has sought to explain away the post by saying that he thought the image was a representation of him as a doctor.

Rubio said that Trump’s recent criticisms of Leo were rooted in his opposition to Iran potentially obtaining a nuclear weapon, which he said could be used against millions of Catholics and other Christians.

Leo has never said Iran should obtain nuclear weapons and that the Catholic Church “for years has spoken out against all nuclear weapons, so there is no doubt there.”

“The mission of the church is to preach the Gospel, to preach peace. If someone wants to criticize me for announcing the Gospel, let him do it with the truth,” Leo said late Tuesday, after Trump again accused him of being “OK” with Iran having a nuclear weapon.

By Thursday, tensions seemed to have eased.

Rubio gave Leo a small crystal football paperweight. He acknowledged Leo’s known allegiance to the Chicago White Sox, saying “you’re a baseball guy,” but noted that the football had the seal of the State Department on it.

“What to get someone who has everything?” Rubio joked as he gave Leo the paperweight.

Leo, for his part, gave Rubio a pen apparently made of olive wood — “olive being of course the plant of peace,” Leo said — with his coat of arms on it and a picture book of Vatican artworks.

Trump also has criticized Meloni and other NATO allies for a lack of support for the Iran war, recently announcing plans to withdraw thousands of American troops from Germany in the coming months.

Vatican seen as willing to have dialogue

Giampiero Gramaglia, former head of the ANSA news agency and its onetime Washington correspondent, said that he didn’t expect much to come out of Rubio’s visit for Italian or Vatican relations. He, and other Italian commentators, believe Rubio instead was looking to smooth over relations with the pope for his own political ambitions, as well as the upcoming midterm U.S. congressional elections and 2028 presidential race.

“I doubt Rubio has the role of conciliator for Trump,” he told Italy’s Foreign Press Association. “I have the perception that Rubio’s mission is more about himself” and his political ambitions as a prominent Catholic Republican.

The Rev. Antonio Spadaro, undersecretary in the Vatican’s culture office, said that Rubio’s mission wasn’t to “convert” the pope to Trump’s side. Rather, Washington “has come to acknowledge — implicitly but legibly — that (Leo’s) voice carries weight in the world that cannot simply be dismissed.”

“The situation created by President Trump’s remarks required a high-level, direct intervention, conducted in the proper language of diplomacy: a semantic corrective to a narrative of frontal conflict with the church,” he wrote in an essay this week.

Cuba is also on the agenda

Rubio said that topics other than the Iran war were on the agenda for the Vatican visit, including Cuba. The Holy See is particularly concerned about the Trump administration’s threats of potential military action there following its January ouster of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Trump has said frequently that Cuba could be “next,” and even suggested that once the Iran war is over, naval assets deployed in the Middle East could return to the United States by way of Cuba.

Rubio is the son of Cuban immigrants and a longtime Cuba hawk.

“We gave Cuba $6 million of humanitarian aid, but obviously they won’t let us distribute it,” Rubio said. “We distributed it through the church. We’d like to do more.”

Winfield and Lee write for the Associated Press. Lee reported from Washington.

May 6 (UPI) — Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is scheduled to testify Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

The testimony is voluntary and behind closed doors. Lutnick is one of many people called before the committee to explain their ties to the late sex offender and financier.

“The Secretary looks forward to addressing any questions on the record when he testifies voluntarily before the Oversight Committee,” a spokesperson for the Commerce Department told CBS News. “He looks forward to putting to rest the inaccurate and baseless claims in the media designed to distract from his historic work underway at the Commerce Department.”

Lutnick has not been accused of any wrongdoing tied to Epstein.

Lutnick and Epstein were next-door neighbors in New York. He has said his interactions with Epstein were minimal, but earlier this month, he told a congressional committee that he had visited Epstein’s island, Little St. James in the U.S. Virgin Islands, with his family.

“We had lunch on the island, that is true, for an hour,” Lutnick told lawmakers. “Then we left with all of my children, with my nannies and my wife all together. We were on family vacation. We were not apart. To suggest there was anything untoward about that in 2012, I don’t recall why we did it. But we did.”

Epstein was convicted of solicitation involving a minor in 2008.

A photo of Lutnick and Epstein that appears to be on Little St. James with three other men was in the files released earlier this year.

Lutnick and Epstein also invested together in a now-shuttered advertising agency, Adfin, working together as late as 2014.

Lutnick previously claimed that he cut contact with Epstein in 2005

In October, Lutnick said on a podcast that he and his wife, Allison, visited Epstein’s New York townhouse in 2005, NBC News reported.

He said he saw a massage table in the middle of a room filled with candles. Lutnick said Epstein told him he had massages “every day” and got “weirdly close” to say, “The right kind of massage.”

“In the six to eight steps it takes to get from his house to my house, my wife and I decided that I will never be in the room with that disgusting person ever again,” Lutnick said.

“I was never in the room with him socially, for business, or even philanthropy,” he added. “If that guy was there, I wasn’t going, because he’s gross.”

The panel will likely question Lutnick’s credibility, Matt Dallek, a historian and political management professor at George Washington University, told NBC

“It’s risky business for him to go before Congress and testify about Epstein,” Dallek said. “Because lo and behold, he visited the island with his kids.”

Dallek said Trump will pay attention to Lutnick’s performance.

“If Lutnick comes off as wishy-washy or ineffective, Trump could sour on him,” Dallek said. “Especially if he wants a fall guy for the economy.”

May 3 (Asia Today) — Japan and Vietnam agreed to deepen cooperation across key economic security sectors, including energy, critical minerals, semiconductors, artificial intelligence and space, as Tokyo seeks to strengthen supply chains and reduce reliance on China.

Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi met with Vietnam’s top leadership, including Communist Party General Secretary and President To Lam and Prime Minister Le Minh Hung, during her visit to Hanoi. After the meetings, she said both countries had designated economic security as a top priority in bilateral cooperation.

According to Vietnamese media and Reuters, the two countries agreed Saturday to elevate their comprehensive strategic partnership and signed six memorandums of understanding covering technology, climate response and information and communications.

Energy cooperation at the forefront

A key outcome was in energy. Vietnam said Japan will support crude oil supplies to the Nghi Son refinery through a $10 billion “Power Asia” initiative aimed at strengthening energy resilience in the region.

The program, introduced by Takaichi last month, is designed to help Southeast Asian countries affected by disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz by supporting oil procurement, storage and supply chain resilience.

Japan’s Idemitsu Kosan has already decided to send about 4 million barrels of crude oil to Vietnam via routes that bypass the Strait of Hormuz. The shipment, equivalent to about 10 days of refinery operations, followed a request from Vietnam earlier this year.

Strategic message on China

In a speech at Vietnam National University, Takaichi emphasized the risks of overdependence on a single country for critical supplies, a remark widely interpreted as targeting China.

“Overreliance on one country often stems from abnormally low prices,” she said, calling for a “level playing field” in global trade.

She also stressed that regional supply chains depend on secure and open sea lanes, referencing both the Strait of Hormuz and the South China Sea.

The speech reaffirmed Japan’s vision of a “free and open Indo-Pacific,” a framework originally proposed by former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and now updated for what Takaichi described as a more challenging global environment.

Expanding cooperation in critical minerals

The two countries also agreed to expand cooperation on critical minerals, as Japan seeks to diversify supply chains heavily dependent on China.

Vietnam holds significant reserves of rare earth elements and gallium but lacks refining capacity, leaving it reliant on Chinese processing. Strengthened cooperation could help Japan secure alternative supply sources.

Japan remains one of Vietnam’s largest economic partners, with bilateral trade exceeding $50 billion last year. It is also Vietnam’s largest provider of official development assistance.

Takaichi highlighted Vietnam’s growing role in global manufacturing, citing production of Apple AirPods and Nintendo Switch devices, as part of efforts to encourage renewed Japanese investment.

She is scheduled to travel to Australia next, where she will meet Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to mark the 50th anniversary of bilateral relations and upgrade ties to a “special strategic partnership.”

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260503010000231

May 1 (Asia Today) — Former U.S. Six-Party Talks envoy Joseph DeTrani said North Korean leader Kim Jong Un still wants to normalize relations with the United States but is demanding that Washington recognize North Korea as a nuclear weapons state.

DeTrani said U.S. leverage in negotiations with North Korea has weakened sharply compared with the period around the 2005 Six-Party Talks joint statement, as Pyongyang has significantly expanded its nuclear and missile capabilities and China and Russia have effectively shielded the North.

He opposed calls by some Korea specialists in the United States for arms control negotiations with North Korea, saying Washington should maintain complete, verifiable denuclearization as its ultimate goal. At the same time, he said the United States should pursue interim freeze measures, including a halt to nuclear testing and production of fissile material.

DeTrani made the remarks Wednesday during a presentation and discussion with Greg Scarlatoiu, president of the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea, at the annual International Council on Korean Studies conference, “Challenges of the U.S.-South Korea Alliance 2026,” held at the Hudson Institute in Washington.

DeTrani previously served as director of the National Counterproliferation Center under the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and as U.S. representative to the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization. He spent 13 years handling negotiations with North Korea and participated in intelligence work that first confirmed the North’s highly enriched uranium program.

DeTrani said the Sept. 19, 2005, joint statement from the fourth round of the Six-Party Talks was meaningful because it explicitly confirmed North Korea’s commitment to abandon “all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs.”

The statement also committed North Korea to returning at an early date to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. The United States affirmed that it had no nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula and no intention to attack or invade North Korea with nuclear or conventional weapons.

But DeTrani said North Korea refused U.S. demands during both plenary and bilateral talks to explicitly include its highly enriched uranium program in the agreement, explaining why the final text did not directly mention the program.

He said North Korea would not have agreed to the 1994 Agreed Framework if Washington had tried to explicitly include highly enriched uranium, adding that Pyongyang has consistently shown since around 2000 that it wanted to pursue such a program for nuclear weapons development.

DeTrani said the U.S. negotiating “tool kit” was relatively strong in 2005 but has lost much of its effectiveness by 2026.

He said Wang Yi, now China’s foreign minister, played an active and constructive role as chair of the Six-Party Talks at the time. Today, however, China and Russia are effectively accepting North Korea as a nuclear weapons state and blocking additional U.N. Security Council sanctions, he said.

DeTrani said China still controls about 90% of North Korea’s foreign trade and oil supply, but added that it is difficult to expect Beijing to use that leverage to move Pyongyang in the direction Washington wants.

On Russia, DeTrani said North Korea is likely receiving assistance for its satellite, nuclear and missile programs in exchange for sending more than 12,000 troops, artillery shells and ballistic missiles to support Russia’s war in Ukraine, following the June 2024 comprehensive strategic partnership treaty between Kim and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Still, DeTrani warned against assuming that the alignment among North Korea, China and Russia is permanent. He said historical distrust between Pyongyang and Beijing, along with geopolitical competition between Moscow and Beijing, remains a source of internal friction.

DeTrani estimated North Korea now has 50 to 60 nuclear weapons based on fissile materials such as highly enriched uranium and plutonium and could expand that arsenal to 100 weapons within several years.

International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi warned during a visit to South Korea on April 15 that North Korea is expanding uranium enrichment capabilities at Yongbyon and at a new facility resembling the Kangson enrichment site in satellite imagery, describing the program as having advanced to a “very serious” level.

DeTrani said North Korea recently displayed the Hwasong-20, a solid-fuel, road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle capability and an estimated range of 15,000 kilometers, demonstrating a potential ability to reach the entire United States.

He said North Korea has more than 400 ballistic missiles, ranging from short-range systems to long-range intercontinental missiles, and is focusing on solid-fuel, road-mobile short-range systems such as the KN-23, KN-24 and KN-25.

DeTrani also said Kim recently visited the second 5,000-ton destroyer, Choe Hyon, and that North Korea aims to build a third and fourth destroyer while securing 12 nuclear-capable destroyers by 2030.

He said North Korea is constructing an 8,700-ton nuclear-powered submarine, a move he described as strengthening the second leg of a nuclear triad intended to preserve retaliatory nuclear capability even after a first strike.

DeTrani said another major change is North Korea’s nuclear doctrine, which now allows for automatic preemptive nuclear use if there is an imminent or perceived imminent threat to the leadership or command and control system.

“With satellite and imagery intelligence, I think we have verification capabilities and will not be deceived,” DeTrani said. “But North Korea remains a black hole, and there is still a great deal of information we cannot access.”

DeTrani said Kim, like his father Kim Jong Il and grandfather Kim Il Sung, understands that normalization with the United States could restore international confidence and open the door to institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.

He said Kim’s request at the February 2019 Hanoi summit for relief from U.N. Security Council sanctions imposed since 2016, in exchange for steps related to the Yongbyon nuclear facility, reflected that calculation.

DeTrani said President Donald Trump had built a degree of trust with Kim, and that Kim has conditionally signaled a willingness to meet Trump again.

But DeTrani said in his presentation that it would not be surprising if North Korea had given up on the United States and South Korea, given the Iran conflict, tensions between the United States and NATO, and China and Russia’s de facto acceptance of North Korea’s nuclear status.

He said if Washington recognizes North Korea as a nuclear weapons state, Pyongyang would claim victory and use that recognition to extract more concessions from China and Russia.

Asked about proposals for nuclear nonproliferation or arms control talks with North Korea, DeTrani said, “I absolutely disagree.”

Such an approach, he said, would reinforce the North Korean regime’s belief that the United States will eventually accept it as a nuclear weapons state and would damage the broader nuclear nonproliferation system.

DeTrani identified North Korea’s nuclear program as the biggest challenge facing the U.S.-South Korea alliance in 2026. He also cited additional alliance issues, including debate over the possible use of about 28,500 U.S. troops stationed in South Korea in a Taiwan Strait or South China Sea contingency and support for keeping the Strait of Hormuz open.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260501010000029

Two weeks ago, LIV Golf did its best to conceal the fact that the Saudi Public Investment Fund would cease to bankroll the league after the current season, only to have LIV CEO Scott O’Neill let the truth slip during a television interview.

This week, the intentions of PIF and consequences to LIV are known by all.

LIV Golf announced Thursday that it has established a new independent board that will attempt to keep the league afloat utilizing a “diversified, multi-partner investment model.” In other words, a model that doesn’t include PIF.

PIF Governor Yasir Al-Rumayyan no longer will serve as LIV Golf chairman, another unmistakable signal that the Saudi sovereign wealth fund worth an estimated $1 trillion is cutting ties with financially troubled LIV.

LIV Golf was supposed to be a key component in Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s “Vision 2030” plan to diversify the kingdom’s economy away from oil. PIV lured megastar golfers Phil Mickelson, Jon Rahm, Bryson DeChambeau, Dustin Johnson and others away from the PGA Tour by shoveling hundreds of millions of dollars into their bank accounts.

Al-Rumayyan, Prince bin Salman’s trusted technocrat, was charged with implementing the plan, but LIV Golf has failed to attract significant viewership or commercial sponsors despite innovations such as a 54-hole format and a team model.

When LIV and the PGA Tour came to a short-lived, tentative agreement to end pending litigation and potentially join forces in 2023, Al-Rumayyan was a key figure in the negotiations.

A last-ditch effort to broker a merger between the rival leagues took place in the White House in February 2025 when President Trump hosted Al-Rumayyan, PGA Tour commissioner Jay Monahan and Tiger Woods. No agreement was reached.

Now, apparently, PIF will attempt to turn its attention to initiatives that don’t bleed billions. The fund has invested more than $5 billion into LIV Golf since it was launched in 2022 and is reportedly spending $100 million per month this year.

The wealthy but suddenly unmoored LIV golfers have been left to scramble like a weekend hacker trying to salvage a bogey after chipping into a sand trap.

LIV Golf Louisiana announced that the tournament scheduled for June 25-28 in New Orleans has been postponed. A new date hasn’t been set. However, an official told ESPN on Thursday that next week’s tournament at Trump National Golf Club outside Washington, D.C., will take place as planned.

Six other tournaments remain on the schedule that concludes with LIV team championships on Aug. 27-30 at The Cardinal at Saint John’s in Michigan. Tournaments outside the United States are scheduled for South Korea, Spain and Great Britain.

Hired Thursday to come up with a financial model to keep LIV afloat sans PIF are Gene Davis and Jon Zinman, described in a LIV statement as “seasoned experts with proven track records of navigating complex situations and unlocking value for global organizations.”
 
LIV Golf’s contorted spin on acknowledging that PIF will no longer subsidize the league was a statement saying it will focus on ”securing long-term financial partners to support its transition from a foundational launch phase to a diversified, multi-partner investment model.”

Davis, the newly appointed chairman of the LIV Independent Directors Committee, sees opportunity in the face of a PIF-less future.

“LIV Golf has built something truly differentiated — a global league with passionate fans, world-class talent, and demonstrated commercial momentum,” he said in a statement. “The executive leadership team, along with Jon and I, see a clear opportunity to help the league formalize its structure, attract and secure long-term capital, and position the business for growth while continuing to promote the game across the world.

“ We look forward to positioning LIV Golf for future success.”