top news

The White House is set to impose a 15 percent tariff through Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 after the US Supreme Court ruled against Donald Trump’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.

United States President Donald Trump has ramped up tariff threats following last week’s US Supreme Court decision that ruled that Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, were unlawful.

On Monday, Trump said that any countries that wanted to “play games” after the high court’s ruling would be hit “with a much higher tariff ” in a post on his social media platform Truth Social.

In a separate post on the platform, Trump claimed that he does not need the approval of the US Congress for tariffs.

“As President, I do not have to go back to Congress to get approval of Tariffs . It has already been gotten, in many forms, a long time ago! They were also just reaffirmed by the ridiculous and poorly crafted supreme court decision!” Trump said in the post.

Trump does have some authority to impose other tariffs, but they are much more limited.

Following the court’s 6–3 decision on Friday, the president said he would introduce a 10 percent tariff, raising it to 15 percent by Saturday under Section 122 of the 1974 Trade Act, the maximum limit under the statute that enables the White House to impose tariffs for 150 days.

The statute only requires a presidential declaration and does not require further investigation. Section 122 is only temporary; the tariffs would then expire unless Congress extends them.

Trump’s tariffs are overwhelmingly unpopular. A new Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll found that 64 percent of Americans disapprove of the president’s handling of tariffs.

Looming uncertainty

Experts warn that Trump’s newly imposed tariffs will fuel further economic uncertainty.

“What we do know is that it would continue to require all those parties affected to continue to live in uncertainty and, as many have already pointed out, such uncertainty is not good for our economy and has negative impacts on American consumers,” Max Kulyk, partner and CEO of Chicory Wealth, a private wealth advisory firm, told Al Jazeera.

“It’s impossible to plan. You hear that tariffs are off, and you are considering how to get refunds. Then a few hours later, it’s 10 percent. Then it’s 15 percent the next day…. Not having that stable framework is hurtful for activity, hiring, investment,” Gregory Daco, chief economist at EY-Parthenon, told the Reuters news agency.

Gold, which is considered a safe investment in times of economic uncertainty, surged by 2 percent on Monday, hitting a three-week high as tariff pressures remain unclear.

US markets are also taking a hit. The tech-heavy Nasdaq is down 1.1 percent in midday trading. The S&P 500 is also down by 1 percent, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average slumped by 1.5 percent since the market opened on Monday.

Stalling trade deals

Trump’s erratic approach has also deterred movement on looming trade deals.

On Monday, the European Parliament opted to postpone voting on a trade deal with the US. It is the second time the bloc has pushed back the vote. The first was in protest against Trump’s unsolicited attempts to acquire Greenland.

The assembly had been considering removing several European Union import duties on US goods. Committee chair Bernd Lange said the new temporary US tariff could mean increased levies for some EU exports, and no one knew what would happen after they expire in 150 days. EU lawmakers will reconvene on March 4 to assess if the US has clarified the situation and confirmed its commitment to last year’s deal.

US skier Lindsey Vonn revealed that her leg was injured so severely in her Olympic crash that amputation was a possibility until her doctor was able to relieve the traumatic injury.

Feb. 23 (UPI) — Nearly $273 million in annual Ecuadorian exports are at stake if a reciprocal 30% tariff announced by Ecuador and Colombia takes effect, according to the Ecuadorian Federation of Exporters, Fedexpor.

The trade group said 580 Ecuadorian companies export to Colombia and warned that for several of them, the impact of new tariffs could be devastating, as up to half of their revenue depends on that market.

Although the tariff has not been implemented, Fedexpor said uncertainty is already affecting business decisions. Colombian buyers are reluctant to close deals amid the possibility that the measure could made formal in the short term, local newspaper Primicias reported.

The government of President Daniel Noboa announced Jan. 21 that Ecuador would impose a 30% tariff, described as a “security fee,” on imports from Colombia. Quito said the move responds to what it considers a lack of commitment by the government of President Gustavo Petro to border security.

Colombia responded the following day by announcing a reciprocal 30% tariff on 20 products imported from Ecuador. It also decided to cut off electricity supplies to Ecuador.

The 30% tariffs were scheduled to take effect Feb. 1, but were not implemented.

Xavier Rosero, president of Fedexpor, said there remains a “window of time” for both governments to reach an agreement on security and trade matters.

Industrial products such as fats, vegetable oils, canned tuna, plastics and rubber face high uncertainty. Orders for these goods, which are key in bilateral trade, are currently on hold, Rosero told digital outlet El Oriente.

He added that Colombian buyers are already seeking alternative suppliers in China, Brazil and Mexico to replace Ecuadorian products, a shift that could result in market losses that are difficult to recover.

Ecuadorian palm oil is among the most affected products, valued at roughly $96 million annually.

The palm oil sector generates 110,000 jobs across 14 provinces, mainly in border areas. It exports between 6,000 and 8,000 metric tons per month to the Colombian market — volumes that could be redirected to other destinations, though that would not be easy, according to Ecuavisa.

Fedexpor estimates about 40,000 jobs are tied to Ecuadorian companies with significant sales to Colombia. Once the tariff is applied, it could affect more than 50 Ecuadorian products.

Rosero acknowledged as “legitimate” the Noboa government’s concern over security conditions along the shared border with Colombia, describing it as “a key space for trade, but also one that has been vulnerable to illicit activities.”

The dispute is now under review by the Andean Community’s courts after complaints filed by Colombia and counterclaims from Ecuador, in a process that could prolong commercial uncertainty.

Feb. 23 (UPI) — A federal judge in Florida on Monday blocked the public release of former special counsel Jack Smith’s report on his investigation into classified documents held at President Donald Trump‘s Mar-a-Lago estate.

In the order, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon of the Southern District of Florida said Smith’s report should not be made public after she previously ruled that he was illegally appointed to spearhead the case.

In July 2024, she said Smith’s appointment as special counsel by President Joe Biden violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. She took issue with what she described as the “broad power” given to Smith, the “indefinite” appropriate given to the task and his lack of supervision.

Biden appointed Smith to investigate whether Trump — then the former president — mishandled classified documents by storing them at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Fla. Smith’s probe resulted in 41 criminal counts against Trump, but Cannon dismissed the case in 2024.

In her order Monday, she accused Smith of accelerating efforts to prepare the report after her ruling so it could be completed before he left his position in January 2025 upon Trump’s inauguration to a second term. She said Smith used “discover materials generated in this case,” and there was a 2023 protective order preventing the public release of such materials unless approved by a court.

Cannon said she’s also blocking the release of the report because doing so “would cause irreparable damage to former defendants” involved in the case. Also named in the indictment against Trump were his aide, Walton Nauta, and Carlos De Oliveira, a maintenance worker accused of helping Nauta move 30 boxes of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago into a storage room under Trump’s direction.

Smith defended his investigation into the handling of classified documents — and another into Trump’s alleged attempts to interfere with the 2020 election — to Congress in December. He said if given the same evidence, he would charge Trump with crimes again.

“Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power,” Smith said.

“Our investigation also developed powerful evidence that showed President Trump willfully retained highly classified documents after he left office in January 2021, storing them at his social club, including in a bathroom and a ballroom where events and gatherings took place.”

Feb. 23 (UPI) — A meeting on trade negotiations between the United States and India this week has been postponed in light of Friday’s Supreme Court ruling on President Donald Trump‘s tariffs.

Officials representing the United States and India were scheduled to meet for three days in Washington, D.C., to discuss their interim trade deal but the meeting has been delayed, CNBC, the BBC and Hindustan Times reported.

India’s top trade negotiator, Darpan Jain, was slated to travel to the United States for the meeting.

India is under a 25% reciprocal tariff imposed by the United States. It was expected to be reduced to 18% as part of an interim agreement between the countries earlier this month. The sides have continued to discuss future trade plans virtually since reaching the interim deal.

The United States and India were slated to finalize the interim agreement in March with it likely to go into effect in April. The framework for the agreement noted that any changes to the deal would allow the other country to “modify its commitments.”

On Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Trump improperly applied the Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose a swath of tariffs. With those tariffs ruled unlawful, Trump announced a 15% global tariff, citing Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows a president to impose temporary tariffs.

The act allows for the president to impose tariffs of up to 15% for 150 days.

The Trump administration continues to consider new plans to continue with its tariff policy, exploring other legal routes, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a social media post.

“We will immediately shift to other proven authorities — Actions 232, 301, and 122 — to keep our tariff strategy strong,” Bessent wrote.

UEFA announces suspension of Gianluca Prestianni after accusations he racially abused Real Madrid’s Vinicius Junior.

The Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) said on Monday it has provisionally suspended Benfica player Gianluca Prestianni for one match following accusations he racially abused Real Madrid star Vinicius Junior.

The decision means that Prestianni will miss Wednesday’s second leg of the Champions League playoff between Real and Benfica at the Bernabeu. Madrid won the first match in Lisbon last Tuesday with Vinicius scoring a second-half winner for a 1-0 victory.

The game was halted for nearly 10 minutes after the Brazil forward scored and celebrated by the Benfica corner flag, upsetting local fans and players. After being confronted by Prestianni, Vinicius accused the Argentine player of calling him “monkey.”

Prestianni has denied racially insulting Vinicius.

The anti-racism protocol was activated but no further action was taken during the match as there was no evidence against Prestianni, who covered his mouth with his shirt while talking to Vinicius. The Madrid forward was shown a yellow card after his celebration.

UEFA said the decision from its control, ethics and disciplinary Body (CEDB) is related to a discriminatory behavior.

“This is without prejudice to any ruling that the UEFA disciplinary bodies may subsequently make following the conclusion of the ongoing investigation and its respective submission to the UEFA disciplinary bodies,” it said in a statement.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino said after the match he was “shocked and saddened to see the incident of alleged racism” and praised the referee for activating the anti-racism protocol.

Benfica showed support for Prestianni, with the Portuguese club claiming that Madrid players who said they heard the insult were too far away. Benfica later released a statement saying it welcomed UEFA’s investigation and that it “fully supports and believes the version presented” by Prestianni, “whose conduct while with the club has always been guided by respect” toward everyone.

Benfica fans had reacted angrily to Vinicius celebrating his 50th-minute goal by dancing at the corner flag, throwing bottles and other objects toward the Madrid players. Prestianni then confronted Vinicius and said something while covering his mouth with his jersey.

Prestianni insisted that Vinicius misunderstood what was said, while Benfica players after the match reportedly said the Argentine provoked the Brazil forward but never racially insulted him.

Kylian Mbappe was among the Madrid players who strongly defended Vinicius and posted on X: “Dance, Vini, and please never stop. They will never tell us what we have to do or not.”

The France star also said Prestianni should never play in the Champions League again.

SEOUL, Feb. 23 (UPI) — South Korea’s Samsung SDI said Monday it collaborated with Columbia University to publish a paper on what it described as a major advance in futuristic lithium-metal batteries.

The study, published in Joule, one of the world’s leading peer-reviewed journals in energy science, discussed the development of a new electrolyte formulation designed to improve the lifespan and safety of lithium-metal batteries, according to Samsung SDI.

Lithium-metal batteries have been regarded as a next-generation technology because they can offer very high energy density, around 1.6 times that of conventional lithium-ion batteries.

However, their commercialization has been constrained by limited charge-discharge lifespans. Samsung SDI expected that the new findings could help address the challenges.

Once commercialized, Samsung SDI projected that lithium-metal batteries could bolster industries that require high energy density, including advanced wearable devices.

“The publication in Joule provides academic validation of our technology that improves the safety of lithium-metal batteries, which had long been considered a key weakness,” Samsung SDI Executive Vice President Joo Yong-lak said in a statement.

“We will continue to accelerate the development of next-generation battery technologies based on our global research network,” he added.

Yuan Yang, an associate professor of materials science and engineering at Columbia University, echoed the sentiment.

“This study represents a major improvement in lithium-metal battery performance through a new electrolyte formulation and brings commercialization of next-generation batteries one step closer,” he said.

The share price of Samsung SDI fell.61% on the Seoul bourse Monday. As a major affiliate of Samsung Group, the company is one of the world’s largest battery manufacturers.

Feb. 23 (UPI) — A new package of European Union sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine, the 20th such set of measures, was stalled Monday after being blocked by Hungary, which is demanding Ukraine reopen a pipeline supplying it with Russian oil.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said there was “not going to be progress” on the new round of sanctions at Monday’s meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels in time for the fourth anniversary of the war, which falls Tuesday.

“We are doing our utmost to have the sanctions package, through, and we are looking for ways how we can do it. But as we have heard some very strong statements from Hungary. I don’t really see they are going to change this unfortunately today,” she said.

“We should not tie together things that are not connected to each other at all. But let us listen to them explaining the reasons why they are blocking, and then see whether there are possibilities to overcome.”

Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto took to social media Sunday to make Hungary’s quid pro quo stance clear.

“The EU aims to adopt the 20th sanctions package at the Foreign Affairs Council. Hungary will block it. Until Ukraine resumes oil transit to Hungary and Slovakia via the Druzhba pipeline, we will not allow decisions important to Kyiv to move forward,” Sijjarto wrote on X.

The pipeline was damaged in a Russian attack, but Hungary insists Ukraine is dragging its feet getting it up and running again.

The financial services, trade and energy sanctions package drawn up by the European Commission would bring in a full maritime services ban for Russian crude oil, reducing its income from energy and making it more difficult to find customers. Access to oil tankers for Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” will also be tackled, along with measures targeting its gas exports.

Transaction bans will be imposed on 20 more Russian banks as part of an effort to hobble Russian efforts to create its own payment systems to circumvent a ban on using the SWIFT international payments system while tightening restrictions on exports to Russia, including military-use goods and technologies, and import bans on Russian rare earth minerals, metals and chemicals, worth at least $1.1 billion in total.

Hungary’s block drew sharp criticism from Hungary’s EU partners with Swedish Foreign Minister Maria Malmer Stenergard telling Euronews it was a “shame” and a “disgrace.”

“Every delay that we have in the adoption of a sanctions package is a failure for Europe,” she said.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said he was certain the sanctions package would pass, saying it was a matter of when, not if, while Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw accused the government of Prime Minister Viktor Orban of leveraging anti-Ukrainian sentiment it had whipped up to boost its fortunes in elections in April.

Hungary announced Friday it would also block a $105 billion EU loan to Ukraine, accusing Ukraine of blackmailing Hungary by shutting off the pipeline and conspiring with Brussels and the Hungarian opposition to “create supply disruptions” in Hungary to push up fuel prices ahead of the election.

Orban previously agreed not to veto the loan, along with Slovakia and the Czech Republic, provided it was exempted from contributing financially.

Populist Orban has been in power since 2010 after a first term between 1998 and 2002 and has been president of his Fidesz, or Hungarian Civic Party, for the past 23 years.

HAMYANG, South Korea, Feb. 23 (UPI) — As harvest season approached last November, farmer Ma Yong-un walked through his apple orchard in southern South Korea with a growing sense of dread.

The Fuji apples hanging from the trees were pale, lacking the deep red color that signals sweetness and commands a good price. To make matters worse, many were splitting open as they ripened.

An unusually rainy fall had blocked the sunlight needed for proper coloring, following one of the hottest summers on record.

“I had never seen this kind of cracking before,” Ma, 55, told UPI on his farm in Hamyang, a rural county in South Gyeongsang Province. “I was so stressed. I was worried about my family’s survival.”

A late dry spell before the harvest helped salvage some color, but another year of punishing weather had taken its toll. Ma estimated that half his apples were not of good quality.

Across South Korea, similar stories have become increasingly common. Farmers are facing mounting losses from heat waves, heavy rainfall, droughts and shifting growing seasons — impacts scientists widely link to climate change.

Now, their experiences are moving from fields and paddies into a courtroom.

Ma is one of five plaintiffs in a civil lawsuit filed against state-owned utility Korea Electric Power Corporation, or KEPCO, and five of its power-generation subsidiaries. The suit seeks financial compensation for climate-related agricultural damages and asks whether a major corporate emitter can be held legally responsible for the downstream effects of climate change.

The case is the first of its kind in South Korea, according to Yeny Kim, an attorney with the Seoul-based nonprofit Solutions for Our Climate, which is representing the plaintiffs.

“Agriculture is an industry that is absolutely dependent on climate conditions,” Kim told UPI. “As the climate changes, we’re reaching a point where certain crops can no longer be grown. That leads to damages to farmland, reduced yields and increased costs just to grow the same amount of crops.”

Filed in August, the lawsuit argues that KEPCO’s greenhouse gas emissions materially contributed to climate change and, in turn, to the plaintiffs’ economic losses.

Quantifying climate damage

The case is based on an analysis estimating $72.9 billion in climate-related economic damages linked to KEPCO’s emissions between 2011 and 2023. During that period, KEPCO and its subsidiaries accounted for roughly 27% of South Korea’s total greenhouse gas emissions, making the utility the single largest corporate emitter in the country.

Globally, the companies’ emissions represented about 0.39% of cumulative worldwide emissions over the same timeframe — a figure the plaintiffs argue is sufficient to establish measurable responsibility for climate-driven harm.

“In a court of law, quantifiable harm means legal liability,” Kim said.

The lawsuit draws on the “polluter pays” principle, which holds that those responsible for pollution should bear the costs of the damage it causes. While widely used in environmental law, applying it to climate change remains largely untested in Korean courts.

Each plaintiff is seeking an initial 5 million won — about $3,400 — in damages, an amount that could be adjusted as the case proceeds. They are also requesting an additional 2,035 won, roughly $1.40, as symbolic compensation for the emotional and psychological toll they say climate change has imposed on their lives.

Hwang Seong-yeol, a rice farmer and fellow plaintiff, said anxiety and a sense of helplessness now shadow every growing season.

“We just look at the sky and wonder what the weather is going to be like,” Hwang said at a press briefing in Seoul in November. “Being stressed from physical labor is something we can endure. But the stress caused by climate change is completely unbearable.”

The suit’s first hearing took place at Gwangju District Court last month. Court records show the defendants have submitted multiple written responses contesting the claims. The next hearing is scheduled for April 23.

KEPCO did not respond to a request for comment. The company has pledged to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, in line with South Korean government policy.

An economy at risk

South Korea has lagged other developed countries in transitioning away from fossil fuels. Government data show just 10.7% of the country’s electricity came from renewable sources in 2024, well below the global average of roughly 32%.

The country is also particularly exposed to climate disruptions abroad. South Korea imports the vast majority of its food — its calorie self-sufficiency rate stood at just 32.5% in 2023, roughly half the level recorded in 1990, according to the Korea Rural Economic Institute. The broader grain self-sufficiency rate, including animal feed, has fallen to 22.2%, among the lowest of any OECD country.

Nam Jae-Chol, a professor at Seoul National University and former administrator of the Korea Meteorological Administration, told UPI that dependence leaves the country vulnerable when climate shocks hit major exporters.

“When exporting countries begin to limit shipments because of climate impacts, that’s when the problem becomes visible,” Nam said. “If agricultural imports suddenly decline because of climate change, prices will skyrocket. In extreme cases, exports could even stop.”

“In 10 or 20 years, we’re going to face a serious crisis due to climate change,” Nam added. “It’s inevitable.”

In South Korea, warming temperatures have already pushed traditional crop-growing zones northward, forcing farmers to adapt — changing what they grow, how they manage water and how they run their operations, Nam said.

Ma said he first felt the full weight of climate change in 2018, when severe cold and frost tore through his orchard, a moment that convinced him the changes were accelerating.

Since then, he has cut his use of chemical fertilizers and tried more eco-friendly practices to improve soil health. He has also begun to consider whether he may eventually need to change crops or even move his orchard entirely — decisions that carry steep costs and uncertainty.

“The compensation is 5 million won, but the damages I suffered this fall alone were ten times more than that,” Ma said. “So the amount itself doesn’t really mean much.”

What he hopes, he said, is that the lawsuit makes those struggles harder to ignore.

“Climate change is already having a huge impact on our agriculture, and people need to see that,” Ma said. “KEPCO cannot continue operating this way, and Korea needs to change its energy policy toward something more sustainable.”

Palestinian boy Nidal Abu Rabeea died in Gaza after waiting 14 months for Israel to allow his medical evacuation, despite having the necessary clearance. Thousands of Palestinians are blocked from seeking urgent medical care through the partially reopened Rafah crossing.

The Winter Olympics ended as the twin flames in host cities Milan and Cortina d’Ampezzo were extinguished during a closing ceremony at the ancient Verona Arena, roughly mid-distance between the far-flung mountain, valley and city venues that made these the most spread-out Winter Games ever.

In declaring the 2026 Games over on Sunday, International Olympic Committee President Kirsty Coventry told local organisers that they “delivered a new kind of Winter Games and you set a new, very high standard for the future”.

The next Winter Games will be held in neighbouring France, which received the Olympic flag in the official handover earlier in the ceremony. Following the same spread-out model, the 2030 Winter Games will stage events in the Alps and Nice, on the Mediterranean Sea, while speed skating will be held either in Italy or the Netherlands.

A total of 116 medal events were held in eight Olympic sports across 16 disciplines, including the debut of ski mountaineering this year, over the course of 17 days of competition. With the final events wrapping up just hours before the ceremony, the 50km mass start men’s and women’s cross-country medals were awarded by Coventry inside the arena.

Hosts Italy won their highest Winter Olympic tally of 30 medals, including 10 gold and six silver, surpassing the previous record of 20 medals, set at the Lillehammer Olympics in 1994.

The closing ceremony paid tribute to Italian dance and music, from lyric opera to Italian pop of the 20th century to the DJ beat of Gabry Ponte, who got the 1,500 athletes on their feet and dancing while colourful confetti exploded on stage. Italian artist Achille Lauro delivered the last word with the song “Incoscienti Giovani”, or “reckless young people”, just before athletes who had so aptly harnessed their youthful energy for these games filed out.

The Milano Cortina Winter Olympics spanned an area of 22,000sq km (8,500sq miles), from ice sports in Milan to biathlon in Anterselva on the Austrian border, snowboarding and men’s downhill in Valtellina on the Swiss border, cross-country skiing in the Val di Fiemme north of Verona, and women’s downhill, curling and sliding sports in Cortina d’Ampezzo.

The closing ceremony concluded with the Olympic flames extinguished at the unprecedented two cauldrons in Milan and Cortina, viewed in Verona via videolink. A light show substituted for fireworks, which are not allowed in Verona to protect animals from being disturbed.

The Milan Cortina Paralympics’ opening ceremony will also take place in the Verona Arena, on March 6, and the games will run until March 15.

United States Secret Service ⁠agents and local police shot and killed a man who drove into the secure perimeter of President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida.

Washington, DC – President Donald Trump has long been fixated on how voting in the United States is administered, claiming without evidence that his 2020 presidential election loss was the result of malfeasance.

Fast forward more than five years, and Trump is set to be in office for one of the most consequential midterm races in recent times.

It is unclear how the US president might involve himself in the midterms, which will determine whether his Republican Party maintains control over both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The results will decide whether Trump can continue to enact his agenda with relative ease or if he will face congressional pushback at every turn.

The Republican leader’s approach so far appears to be twofold, according to Michael Traugott, a political scientist and professor emeritus at the University of Michigan.

On one hand, Trump has embarked on a messaging campaign to cast doubt on any results that seem unfavourable.

“Part of what the Trump administration is doing is trying to create the impression of fraud and mismanagement in local elections so that they can argue eventually that some outcomes are not legitimate or real or should be discounted,” Traugott told Al Jazeera.

On the other hand, Trump also appears to be conducting a stress test of pre-existing election law, to see how much the federal government can intervene.

“There are actions that he could take or try to take, which would likely be stopped in the courts,” Traugott said.

“The behaviour in the Trump administration is to appeal, appeal, appeal, until it gets to the Supreme Court,” he added. “I imagine that would be their strategy.”

Calls to ‘nationalise’ election administration

Trump has been explicit about his desire to assert more federal control over the election, saying in early February that “Republicans ought to nationalise the voting”.

He pointed to what he described as “horrible corruption on elections” in some parts of the US.

The US Constitution assigns states the power to determine the “times, places and manner” of elections for federal office.

Congress, meanwhile, has the ability to “make or alter” rules related to voting through legislation or, in extreme cases, constitutional amendments.

“It’s important to remember that, in the United States, we don’t really have national elections. We have a series of state and local elections that are held more or less on the same day,” Traugott explained.

The president, meanwhile, has no constitutional role in how elections are administered, beyond signing any legislation Congress passes.

Still, it is possible for a president to leverage executive branch agencies that interact with state election administration. Trump too has explicitly blurred the lines between federal and state power.

In the Oval Office on February 3, he told reporters, “A state is an agent for the federal government in elections. I don’t know why the federal government doesn’t do them anyway.”

His statements were swiftly condemned by voting rights groups.

The League of Women Voters, a voting rights group founded in 1920, called Trump’s remarks a “calculated effort to dismantle the integrity of the electoral system as we know it”.

“Time and again, the President’s claims of widespread fraud have been disproven by nonpartisan election officials, the courts, and the Department of Justice,” it added.

Despite Trump’s claims, voter fraud is exceedingly rare in the US, and any isolated instances typically have little effect on election outcomes.

Even the Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank behind the Trump-aligned Project 2025, has documented an inconsequential rate of voter fraud in its catalogue of cases running back to 1982.

An analysis from the centre-left Brookings Institution found that fraudulent votes failed to amount to one ten-thousandth of a percentage point of the ballots cast in states where elections tend to be the closest.

For example, Arizona is a perennial battleground in presidential elections, but it has seen just 36 reported cases of voter fraud since 1982, out of more than 42 million ballots cast. That put the percentage of fraud at 0.0000845, according to the analysis.

Department of Justice pushes boundaries

Nevertheless, the Trump administration has heaped pressure on the Department of Justice to increase its probes into alleged voter fraud.

The attorney general has demanded that 47 states and Washington, DC, a federal district, hand over their complete voter registration lists, according to a tally from the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan policy group.

Eleven states have complied or agreed to comply. The Trump administration has launched lawsuits against the 20 others that refused.

The Department of Justice has also stepped up its cooperation with the Department of Homeland Security to identify non-citizen voters.

Some critics have even accused the Justice Department of deploying coercive tactics to fulfil its demands for state voter information.

On January 24, for instance, US Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote a letter to Minnesota Governor Tim Walz suggesting three “common sense solutions” to “restore the rule of law” in the state.

One of those proposals was to allow the Justice Department to “access voter rolls”.

Bondi’s remarks came after a federal immigration crackdown in Minnesota had turned deadly, resulting in two on-camera shootings of US citizens.

While her letter did not directly offer a quid pro quo – access to the rolls in exchange for ending the crackdown – critics said the message it sent was clear. Arizona Secretary of State Adrian Fontes, for instance, called the letter tantamount to “blackmail”.

But four days later, on January 28, the Justice Department went even further, seizing voting records and ballots in a raid on an election facility in Fulton County, Georgia.

The state has been a sore point for Trump: Georgia voted for a Democratic presidential candidate for the first time in more than two decades during the 2020 race.

At the time, Trump infamously pressured Georgia’s secretary of state to “find more votes” following his loss. He has spread rumours about fraud in Georgia’s election system ever since.

Local officials condemned the January raid as a “flagrant constitutional violation”, saying in a lawsuit that an affidavit submitted by the FBI to obtain a search warrant relied on hypotheticals.

In other words, it failed to establish probable cause that any crime had occurred, Fulton County officials argued.

That affidavit also revealed the investigation was the direct result of a referral from Kurt Olsen, who was appointed to a White House role as Trump’s head of election security in October.

Before entering the White House, Olsen led unsuccessful legal challenges to the 2020 election results, in what Trump dubbed the “Stop the Steal” campaign.

Fulton County officials noted “multiple courts have sanctioned Olsen for his unsubstantiated, speculative claims about elections”.

What is Tulsi Gabbard’s role?

The apparent role of Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, in the election investigations has also raised questions.

Gabbard was present at the Fulton County raid, with Trump later telling reporters that she was “working very hard on trying to keep the election safe”.

Who authorised her presence, however, was the subject of contradictory statements from the Trump administration.

Gabbard said she had been sent on behalf of Trump, even though the president attempted to distance himself from the raid. The Justice Department later said Bondi had requested Gabbard’s presence. Gabbard finally said both Trump and Bondi had asked her to attend.

Whatever the case, Traugott, the political scientist, said that her presence at the scene was highly unusual.

“The director of national intelligence has been associated with observation and information gathering from foreign countries, not from domestic entities,” Traugott explained. “So historically, this is without precedent”.

In a statement, Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said he was concerned that Gabbard had exceeded the powers of her office. He said the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, where he is vice chairman, had not been briefed on any “foreign intelligence nexus” related to the Fulton County raid.

Either Gabbard was flouting her responsibility to keep the committee informed, Warner said, or she is “injecting the nonpartisan intelligence community she is supposed to be leading into a domestic political stunt designed to legitimize conspiracy theories that undermine our democracy”.

Gabbard, who is expected to testify before the Senate committee in March, responded in early February that she had been acting under her “broad statutory authority to coordinate, integrate, and analyse intelligence related to election security”.

She maintained her office would “not irresponsibly share incomplete intelligence assessments concerning foreign or other malign interference in US elections”.

Voter ID law

But it’s not just executive agencies like the Department of Justice and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence pushing Trump’s agenda for the midterm races.

Experts say Trump has been angling to use the Republican majorities in Congress to pass restrictive voter laws ahead of November’s election.

Trump has supported a bill, dubbed the SAVE Act, which would require citizens to provide more documentation – such as a passport or a birth certificate – when registering to vote, as well as photo identification when casting a ballot.

Rights groups have long argued that such requirements would disenfranchise some voters who lack access to such materials. As of 2023, the US State Department reported that only 48 percent of US citizens had a valid passport.

The bill would also require states to provide voter lists to the Department of Homeland Security to identify and remove non-citizens, raising concerns about voter privacy.

The legislation, which has been passed by the House, is likely to face an uphill battle in the Senate. It is already illegal for non-citizens to vote.

Even without the legislation, though, Trump has threatened to sign an executive order requiring local election organisers to require voter identification before distributing ballots.

Trump already signed a similar order last March seeking to impose new rules on elections, including voter ID requirements, reviews of electronic voting machines and restrictions on how long votes can be counted.

Nearly all of the provisions have since been blocked by federal judges. The most recent ruling by US District Judge John Chun related to restrictions like tying federal election funding to “proof of citizenship” requirements.

“In granting this relief,” Chun wrote in his decision, “the Court seeks to restore the proper balance of power among the Executive Branch, the states, and Congress envisioned by the Framers.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New Delhi, India – As Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi emerged from his plane at Ben Gurion airport outside Tel Aviv on July 4, 2017, his Israeli counterpart, Benjamin Netanyahu, waited for him at the other end of the red carpet laid out on the tarmac.

Minutes later, the leaders hugged. Speaking at the airport, Modi said his visit was a “path-breaking journey” – it was the first time an Indian prime minister had visited Israel. Netanyahu recalled their first meeting in New York in 2014, where, he said, “we agreed to break down the remaining walls between India and Israel”.

Nine years later, as Modi prepares to fly to Israel on February 25 for his second visit, he can largely claim to have accomplished that mission, analysts say. A relationship that was once frowned upon in India, and then carried out clandestinely, is now one of New Delhi’s most public friendships. Modi has frequently described Netanyahu as a “dear friend”, despite the International Criminal Court having issued an arrest warrant in late 2024 for the Israeli premier over alleged war crimes carried out during Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Indian diplomats and officials have justified the country’s pivot towards Israel as a “pragmatic approach” – Israel, with its tech and military expertise, has too much to offer to be ignored, they argue – balanced by efforts from New Delhi to strengthen ties with its Arab allies.

Yet, it has come at a cost, analysts say: to Palestine, and India’s relationship with it, and, according to some experts, to India’s moral credibility.

“The so-called realist turn of India has cost its moral power, which it used to enjoy in the Global South,” said Anwar Alam, a senior fellow with the Policy Perspectives Foundation think tank in New Delhi.

Amid an ongoing war in the Palestinian territory, Modi’s visit “amounts to legitimising the apartheid Israeli state”, Alam told Al Jazeera.

An ideological alliance

India was a staunch advocate for Palestine in the post-colonial world order, with major leaders backing Palestinian independence. In 1947, India opposed the United Nations plan to partition Palestine. And four decades later, in 1988, India became one of the first non-Arab states to recognise Palestine.

The end of the Cold War – India leaned towards the Soviet Union despite officially being non-aligned – forced a change in New Delhi’s calculations. Alongside an outreach to the United States, India also established diplomatic relations with Israel in January 1992.

Since then, defence ties have anchored the relationship, which has also expanded on other fronts in recent years.

Modi’s rise to power in India in 2014 proved to be the catalyst for the biggest shift in relations. Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has an ideology rooted in the vision of making India a Hindu nation, a natural homeland for Hindus anywhere in the world – an approach that mirrors, in many ways, Israel’s view of itself as a Jewish homeland. Both Modi and Israel view “Islamic terrorism”, which critics say is also shorthand for justifications needed to pursue broader anti-Muslim policies, as major threats.

Under Modi, India has become Israel’s largest weapons buyer. And in 2024, as Israel waged its war on Gaza, Indian weapons firms sold Israel rockets and explosives, according to an Al Jazeera investigation.

Ahead of Modi’s upcoming visit, the two countries signed a memorandum of understanding that aims to further deepen defence ties, with India exploring the joint development of anti-ballistic missile defence with Israel. In Jerusalem, Modi is scheduled to address the Knesset, Israel’s parliament.

“Modi’s address is special because of how it underlines the scale of the shift in relations under the Bharatiya Janata Party towards an overtly pro-Israel policy,” Max Rodenbeck, project director at the Washington-based Crisis Group’s Israel-Palestine department, told Al Jazeera.

But Modi’s visit is also personal for Netanyahu, Rodenbeck said. Israel is months away from a national election that is, in effect, a referendum on Netanyahu’s government – from the intelligence failures that enabled the October 7 attack by Palestinian groups to the war on Gaza that followed, as well as his attempts to weaken judicial independence through reforms.

The visit appears “as almost a personal favour to Netanyahu by boosting his image as an international statesman just as Israeli election campaigning is getting underway”, Rodenbeck said.

While several Western leaders have visited Israel since it began its genocidal war on Gaza in October 2023, few leaders from the Global South have made the trip.

At a time when the Gaza war has shrunk the set of countries willing to be seen as Israel’s friends, especially among emerging economies, Modi’s visit is significant.

Israel does not “have many friends” globally at the moment, said Kabir Taneja, the executive director of the Middle East office at the Observer Research Foundation, a New Delhi-based think tank. “So India is playing that role,” he added. “[Modi’s visit] sort of shows that Israel is not fully isolated.”

The July 2017 visit

In many ways, Modi’s visit to Israel this week will look to build on his July 2017 trip, which was a watershed moment in the bilateral ties, analysts note.

No Indian Prime Minister had previously visited Israel, but even lower-level diplomats would, until then, pair their Israel visits with parallel engagements in the Palestinian territory.

Modi broke with that policy. He did not visit Palestine in 2017, only making a trip there in 2018, by which time he had already also hosted Netanyahu in New Delhi. It had also been the first visit by an Israeli premier to India.

The 2017 Modi visit has been under scrutiny recently. An email released by the US Justice Department as part of the Jeffrey Epstein files showed that the late disgraced financier had advised a billionaire close to Modi during his trip.

After the visit on July 6, Epstein, a convicted sex offender, had emailed an unidentified individual he referred to as “Jabor Y”, saying: “The Indian Prime minister modi took advice. and danced and sang in israel for the benefit of the US president. they had met a few weeks ago.. IT WORKED. !”

India’s Ministry of External Affairs has dismissed these claims as the “trashy ruminations” of a convicted criminal.

Nonetheless, Modi’s visit to Israel solidified the bilateral relationship. Trade between the two nations has grown from $200m in 1992 to more than $6bn in 2024.

India is still Israel’s second-largest Asian trading partner after China in goods, dominated by diamonds, petroleum, and chemicals. India and Israel signed a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) in September last year and have both been looking to close negotiations on a free trade deal.

At the same time, people-to-people ties have grown as well. After Israel banned Palestinians from working in the country following the Hamas-led attack on October 7, 2023, thousands of Indians lined up to work in Israeli construction companies.

“India and Israel have a fairly deep strategic and economic relationship that has been flourishing since Prime Minister Modi came to office,” said the Observer Research Foundation’s Taneja.

Modi was also among the first world leaders to condemn the Hamas-led attack and throw India’s support behind Israel.

“It really, really feeds into India’s posture against terrorism,” Taneja said about the India-Israel ties. “Israel is a country that India sees facing similar crisis when it comes to terrorism.”

India accuses Pakistan of sponsoring armed attacks on its territory and in Indian-administered Kashmir. Pakistan has accepted that its nationals have, in some instances, been behind these attacks, but has rejected accusations that it has trained or financed the attackers.

Over the horizon, a different Middle East?

Despite its close ties with Israel, New Delhi under Modi has not completely abandoned its position on the Palestinian cause, calling for a two-state solution and peace through dialogue. But it has been increasingly hesitant to criticise Israel over its war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territory.

India’s historical support for the Palestinian cause is rooted in its pivotal role in the non-alignment movement, the Cold War-era neutrality posture adopted by several developing nations. Even before India gained independence, the leader of its freedom struggle, Mahatma Gandhi, decried the “imposition of Jews over Arabs” through the creation of Israel.

India now no longer calls its approach non-alignment, instead referring to it as “strategic autonomy”.

“The Middle East is the only geography where this policy actually functions, and also provide[s] dividend[s],” Taneja told Al Jazeera. “India has good relations with Israel, Arab powers and Iran alike. One of the reasons [it works is] because India does not step into regional conflicts and confrontations.”

But under pressure from US President Donald Trump, India has stopped buying oil from Iran and taken steps to end its work on developing the strategically significant Chabahar port, which New Delhi viewed as a gateway into landlocked Central Asia and Afghanistan.

Now, Trump is threatening to attack Iran. The US has amassed warships and jets near Iran, even as Washington and Tehran continue to engage in diplomatic talks.

“I suspect India may be looking over the horizon to a Middle East where Iran has suffered heavy attack from the US and Israel, and no longer projects power in the region. In these circumstances, Israel will emerge as something of a regional hegemon,” said the Crisis Group’s Rodenbeck.

“India is perhaps positioning itself to benefit. Also, Modi sees Israel as influential in Washington, and may hope that friendliness to Israel wins points with Congress and Trump, which India badly needs.”

The offbeat thriller has won six BAFTAs, including best film and best director for Paul Thomas Anderson.

The dark comedy One Battle After Another has swept the United Kingdom’s top film honours, picking up six BAFTA awards, including best film and best director for Paul Thomas Anderson.

The film beat the Shakespearean family tragedy Hamnet, and the vampire thriller Sinners, to take the top prizes at Sunday evening’s ceremony.

The UK prizes, officially called the EE BAFTA Film Awards, often provide hints about who will win at Hollywood’s Academy Awards, held this year on March 15.

One Battle After Another, an explosive film about a group of revolutionaries in chaotic conflict with the state, won awards for directing, adapted screenplay, cinematography, and editing, as well as for Sean Penn’s supporting performance as an obsessed military officer.

“This is very overwhelming and wonderful,” Anderson said as he accepted the directing prize. “We have a line from Nina Simone that we used in our film: ‘I know what freedom is: It’s no fear’,” the director said. “Let’s keep making things without fear. It’s a good idea.”

Sinners, which has a record 16 Oscar nods, won best original screenplay for writer and director Ryan Coogler, best supporting actress for Wunmi Mosaku, and best original score.

The gothic horror story Frankenstein won three awards each, while Hamnet won two, including best British film.

The documentary about Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, The Voice of Hind Rajab, was among the top contenders for BAFTA’s best director and non-English language film categories. But the film Sentimental Value won in the non-English language category.

The biggest surprise of the night was Robert Aramayo winning the best actor category for his performance in I Swear, a fact-based British indie drama about a campaigner for people with Tourette syndrome.

The 33-year-old British actor beat Timothee Chalamet, Leonardo DiCaprio, Michael B Jordan, Ethan Hawke and Jesse Plemons for the honour.

“I absolutely can’t believe this,” he said. “Everyone in this category blows me away.”

Jessie Buckley won best actress for playing Agnes, the wife of William Shakespeare, in Hamnet, based on the novel by Maggie O’Farrell and directed by previous Oscar winner Chloe Zhao.

The best documentary prize went to Mr Nobody Against Putin, about a Russian teacher who documented the propaganda imposed on Russian schools after Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine.

The film’s American director, David Borenstein, said that teacher Pavel Talankin had shown that “whether it’s in Russia or the streets of Minneapolis, we always face a moral choice”, referring to the protests against US immigration enforcement in Minnesota.

“We need more Mr Nobodies,” he said.

It beat documentaries including Mstyslav Chernov’s harrowing Ukraine war portrait, 2000 Meters to Andriivka, co-produced by The Associated Press and Frontline PBS.

The guests of honour at the awards were Prince William and Princess Kate. The event, hosted by Alan Cumming, was the first joint engagement for the pair since William’s uncle, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, was arrested on Thursday.

William, the president of the film academy, presented the BAFTA Fellowship to Donna Langley, studio head at NBC Universal.

Feb. 22 (Asia Today) — South Korea’s industrial sector said there is no immediate change in tariff rates but warned that uncertainty has grown after U.S. President Donald Trump signaled plans to impose new global tariffs.

Trump said Friday he would raise the proposed “global tariff” rate from 10% to 15% following a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down his earlier reciprocal tariffs. The 15% duties previously applied to South Korea are expected to reappear under the new global tariff framework.

Industry officials said item-specific tariffs on automobiles, steel and semiconductors have not been directly addressed in the latest announcement, leaving companies cautious about possible next steps.

Major exporters are closely monitoring developments as Washington has yet to finalize detailed tariff guidelines.

Semiconductors, one of South Korea’s top export items, are currently subject to product-specific tariff discussions but remain duty-free for now. However, companies have not ruled out the possibility that Washington could soon put semiconductor tariffs on the negotiating table or raise rates to offset revenue lost from the invalidated reciprocal tariffs.

SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won said after attending the U.S. Trans-Pacific Dialogue that he would review the court ruling before commenting further, reflecting the cautious stance of corporate leaders.

Automobile and steel tariffs are expected to remain in place regardless of the court decision. Automobiles and auto parts currently face a 15% tariff, while steel and aluminum were hit with a 50% tariff last year. Analysts said additional increases in those sectors appear unlikely in the near term.

For food, cosmetics, home appliances and chemical products, a 15% global tariff would largely mirror the current reciprocal tariff level. If the rate were set at 10% instead, exporters could see a modest reduction compared with the existing 15% rate.

While companies say there is no immediate operational impact, executives are concerned that Trump could invoke other trade authorities to introduce new measures, further complicating trade planning.

Industry officials said businesses are preparing contingency strategies as they await clearer guidance from Washington.

— 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=20260222010006449

Feb. 22 (Asia Today) — Major Japanese newspapers welcomed a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that struck down President Donald Trump’s reciprocal tariffs as illegal, but they diverged on whether Tokyo should reconsider its large-scale investment in the United States.

The court ruled Thursday that Trump’s tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act violated Congress’s constitutional authority to levy taxes. As a result, Japan’s 15% reciprocal tariff lost its legal effect.

Trump, however, invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act and issued an executive order imposing an additional 10% tariff on all imports beginning Monday.

The conservative Yomiuri Shimbun said the ruling effectively curbed the “weaponization” of tariffs and could force Trump to recalibrate his deal-focused diplomacy. Citing Edward Fishman of the Council on Foreign Relations, the paper said using emergency economic powers to impose tariffs has now become “virtually impossible.”

The conservative Sankei Shimbun also welcomed the decision as a check on indiscriminate high tariffs on allies. However, it warned of “new turbulence” in U.S.-Japan trade ties as Trump moves forward with fresh duties under other trade provisions.

In a Feb. 22 editorial, Sankei urged the government of Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi to safeguard national interests at a planned summit in March. The paper called for reaffirming Japan’s $550 billion investment package in the United States, preventing additional unfavorable conditions and clarifying tariff refund procedures for Japanese firms.

William Cho, deputy director for Japan at the Hudson Institute, told Sankei in an interview that renegotiating the investment agreement in light of the court ruling would be unwise, describing projects such as natural gas power generation as both economic and political in nature.

By contrast, the liberal Asahi Shimbun characterized the ruling as a victory for the separation of powers, saying even a conservative Supreme Court had reaffirmed constitutional limits on executive authority. The paper urged Trump to withdraw tariff measures immediately and restore free trade principles, while calling on Tokyo to review the $550 billion investment deal.

The Mainichi Shimbun criticized what it described as Trump’s expansive legal interpretation of presidential authority and warned that continued reliance on Section 122 could undermine the premise of Japan’s 80 trillion yen investment plan.

Despite differing views on investment policy, the four major dailies – Yomiuri, Sankei, Asahi and Mainichi – described the ruling as a welcome brake on high tariffs.

On investment strategy, however, the dominant view expressed by Yomiuri and Sankei favors maintaining and managing U.S. investments in line with national interests, a stance that mirrors the Japanese government’s position.

Economy, Trade and Industry Minister Ryosei Akazawa recently reaffirmed that there is no change to the $550 billion investment agreement during talks with U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. A government official also said Japan’s overall investment plan remains intact.

With Takaichi planning a March visit to Washington and Trump expected to visit China around the same time, Japanese media are closely watching how Tokyo balances national interests within the evolving U.S.-Japan-China dynamic.

— 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=20260222010006426

India were bowled out for 111 chasing 188-run target and must now win their next two games to qualify for the semifinals.

India have been handed a 76-run defeat by South Africa in their first cricket match of the Super Eight stage of the T20 World Cup and now must win their next two games to have a chance of reaching the semifinals.

The defending champions were bowled out for 111 in 18.5 overs while chasing a target of 188 at the Narendra Modi Stadium in Ahmedabad, India on Sunday.

It was the cohosts’ first loss of the tournament and also ended their 12-match winning streak in the T20 World Cup that they had carried on from their title-winning run in 2024.

South Africa’s bowlers put on a near-perfect display against a strong Indian batting lineup, and were backed by their fielders to leave the pre-tournament favourites reeling.

India lost their in-form opener Ishan Kishan on the fourth ball of the innings to the offspin bowling of South Africa’s captain Aiden Markram while trying to hit against the spin.

One-down batter Tilak Varma was the next to fall as he was caught behind off the first ball of Marco Jansen’s over.

India’s captain Suryakumar Yadav and out-of-form star batter Abhishek Sharma tried to rebuild their innings until Sharma fell in the fifth over after scoring 15 runs off 12 deliveries.

Incoming batter Washington Sundar and Yadav were the next two wickets to fall as India failed to build a big partnership in front of a large home crowd.

A 35-run partnership between all-rounders Hardik Pandya and Shivam Dube lifted the Indian run chase briefly, but South Africa’s disciplined bowling and near-faultless fielding resulted in regular dismissals for the home side.

When Dube fell for 42 off 37, India’s fate was sealed.

Jansen’s superb bowling earned him four wickets for 22 runs off 3.5 overs , while left-arm spin bowler Keshav Maharaj took three for 24 in his four overs.

All of South Africa’s bowlers were economical, with Lungi Ngidi leading the way by conceding only 15 runs in his four wicketless overs.

Earlier, player of the match David Miller’s crucial innings of 63 runs off 35 balls stabilised South Africa’s innings after they were reduced to 20-3 in four overs.

He shared a 97-run partnership with Dewald Brevis, who scored 45 off 29 balls, as the pair resurrected the Proteas after Markram decided to bat first after winning the toss in the first Super Eight match in Group 1.

Despite Miller’s dismissal in the 16th over, South Africa were able to post a formidable total of 187-7, thanks to a 24-ball 44 not out by Tristan Stubbs at the end of the innings.

Jasprit Bumrah picked up 3-15 off his four overs.

The loss propels South Africa to the top of Group 1 in the Super Eight stage, with India at the bottom with a net run rate of -3.80.

The defending champions must win their remaining two games to have a chance of qualifying for the semifinals.

West Indies and Zimbabwe are the other two teams in their group and will face each other on Monday.

South Africa face the West Indies on Thursday, while India play Zimbabwe on Friday.

Feb. 22 (UPI) — A nuclear deal will be the subject of negotiations between Washington and Iran Thursday, officials say.

Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner will meet with Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister, in Geneva following receipt of the proposal, which is expected Tuesday.

“If Iran gives a draft proposal, the U.S. is ready to meet in Geneva in order to start detailed negotiations to see if we can get a nuclear deal,” officials said, per Axios.

President Donald Trump had previously suggested that failure to reach a deal would lead to “bad things.”

Araghchi is slated to finish that proposal by Monday, the outlet reported.

“So there is no need for any military buildup, and military buildup cannot help it and annot pressurize us,” Araghchi said, CBS News reported.

He added that “If the U.S. attacks us, then we have every right to defend ourselves. Our missiles cannot hit the American soil. So obviously we have to do something else. We have to hit, you know, the Americans’ base in the region.”

Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr Al Busaidi has confirmed that further talks between the United States and Iran will take place on Thursday amid spiralling tensions between the two countries.

“Pleased to confirm US-Iran negotiations are now set for Geneva this Thursday, with a positive push to go the extra mile towards finalizing the deal,” Albusaidi said in a social media post on Sunday.

The announcement comes as the US continues to amass military assets in the Middle East, raising concerns about an all-out war against Iran.

Hours before Oman’s announcement, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Tehran was ready to put in place a “full monitoring mechanism” to guarantee the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme and ease tensions.

Asked by Face the Nation moderator Margaret Brennan why Iran would want to pursue enrichment on its soil rather than buy enriched uranium from abroad, given the US military build-up and risk of an escalation, Araghchi said the issue was a matter of “dignity and pride” for Iranians.

“We have developed this technology by ourselves, by our scientists, and it is very dear to us because we have created it – we have paid a huge expense for that,” he said.

Araghchi cited among the costs two decades of US sanctions, the targeted killings of Iranian scientists, and US-Israeli attacks on nuclear facilities in June.

“We’re not going to give [our nuclear programme] up; there is no legal reason to do that while everything is peaceful and safeguarded” by the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Araghchi said.

As a “committed member” of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which requires non-nuclear-weapon states not to seek or acquire nuclear weapons, Iran is “ready to cooperate with the agency in full”, Araghchi added.

But he stressed that under the treaty, Tehran also has “every right to enjoy a peaceful nuclear energy, including enrichment”.

“Enrichment is a sensitive part of our negotiations. The American team knows about our position, and we know their position. We have already exchanged our concerns, and I think a solution is achievable,” the minister noted.

Enrichment is the process of isolating and garnering a rare variant, or isotope, of uranium that can produce nuclear fission. At low levels, enriched uranium can power electric plants. If enriched to approximately 90 percent, it can be used for nuclear weapons.

US officials, including President Donald Trump, have previously suggested that Washington is seeking “zero enrichment” by Tehran.

Earlier this month, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said any deal with Iran would need to include agreements on ballistic missiles and support for its allies in the region.

Araghchi, however, said on Sunday that Iran was “negotiating only nuclear” at the present time.

“There is no other subject,” he told CBS News, adding that he was optimistic that a deal could be reached.

The second round of nuclear talks concluded in Geneva on February 17. The US and Iran also held indirect talks in Oman earlier this month.

The Iranian delegation is working ahead of the meeting to present a draft that includes “elements which can accommodate both sides’ concerns and interests” to reach a “fast deal”, Araghchi said.

The top Iranian diplomat added the agreement would likely be “better” than the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), negotiated by former US President Barack Obama in 2015.

“There are elements that could be much better than the previous deal,” he said, without elaborating. “Right now, there is no need for too much detail. But we can agree on our nuclear programme to remain peaceful forever and at the same time, for more sanctions [to be] lifted.”

Some observers were less optimistic about the chances of striking a deal. Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute, told Al Jazeera that Iran is likely to put forward a proposal that goes beyond anything they ever offered, but even that may not be enough.

“Trump has been sold a narrative by the Israelis that portrays Iran far, far weaker than it actually is. As a result, he’s adopting maximalist capitulation positions that are simply unrealistic based on how the power reality actually looks,” Parsi told Al Jazeera.

“Unless this gets corrected, even if the Iranians put forward a very far-leaning proposal that is extremely attractive to the US, Trump may still say no because he’s under the false belief that he can get something even better.”

A series of warnings from artificial intelligence (AI) industry insiders shows how the debate around AI drives extreme news cycles, swinging between hype and alarm.

The result is media coverage that overlooks the intricacies of this technology and its impact on everyday life. We examine the real risks, what’s being overstated, and what major tech companies stand to gain from all the fearmongering.

Contributors:
Rumman Chowdhury – Founder, Humane Intelligence
Mutale Nkonde – Founder, AI for the People
Chris Stokel-Walker – Author of the book How AI Ate the World

On our radar

Francesca Albanese, the United Nations’ special rapporteur for the occupied Palestinian territories, has found herself in the middle of a political firestorm, all because of comments she never actually made.

After a manipulated video of Albanese calling Israel the “enemy of humanity” went viral,  there were calls for her resignation across Europe. The UN has labelled these allegations part of a wider smear campaign to discredit Albanese and the UN itself.

A curated view of Israel for African journalists

For decades, the Israeli government and pro-Israel organisations have sponsored trips for politicians, celebrities and journalists, inviting them to visit and, as they put it, tell the “real story” about Israel. In the past, those invitations largely targeted figures from Western countries. But since October 7th, there has been a noticeable shift towards African journalists and social media influencers.

The objective is clear: to shape coverage in African media and influence audiences across the continent.

The Listening Post’s Nic Muirhead reports on the African journalists taking part in these fully funded, tightly managed visits to Israel.

Featuring:
Hassen Lorgat – Media critic and activist
Makhudu Sefara – Editor, Sunday Times
Timnit Gebru – Founder, the Distributed AI Research Institute (DAIR)
Njahira Gitahi – Reporter, The Standard