Home Blog Page 20

The Iran Deal Couldn’t Restore Old Maritime Order, Analyst Raydan Says

ash329
-
0
The Iran Deal Couldn’t Restore Old Maritime Order, Analyst Raydan Says



At the same time, there has been pushback against Iran. Regional countries have their reservations, as does the international shipping community, because we’ve seen Iran, from time to time, talk about transit fees or even maritime service fees.

For Noam Raydan, the William Sudhaus Senior Fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, the unravelling of the 60-day memorandum of understanding (MoU) was always likely to expose unresolved disputes over who controls one of the world’s most strategic waterways.

Speaking to RFE/RL, Raydan explains why Iran’s campaign at sea goes far beyond isolated ship attacks, what recent tanker strikes reveal about Tehran’s strategy, and why the coming days of ship-tracking data could determine whether a new maritime order is taking hold.

Looking back, was the MoU fatally flawed from the beginning, or did the speed of its unravelling surprise you?

Noam Raydan: There were several paragraphs in it that made it clear, at least to me, that they were going to cause some problems, specifically on the maritime scene in the Strait of Hormuz.

With respect to the future management of the Strait of Hormuz, the memorandum of understanding was very unclear. This has been one of the points Iran has been insisting on: Tehran wants to play a central role in drafting the future management of the Strait of Hormuz.

The paragraph dealing with the future maritime management of the Strait of Hormuz was not clear to me, as someone who focuses on energy and shipping, when I reviewed the memorandum of understanding. I believe we will continue to face uncertainty about how the Strait of Hormuz will be managed.

As I’ve been saying since March, there is a new navigational order in the region. There is no easy way to go back to the old maritime order. We should expect Iran to put up many barriers to ensure there are no alternative systems in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran wants ships to use the Iran-controlled

By that I mean Iran wants ships to use the Iran-controlled lanes instead of the alternative system — the routes guided by US forces in the region.

Has this high-stakes blame game effectively ended the possibility of diplomacy, or are we simply seeing the start of a much harder negotiation?

Raydan: I’ll be very honest with you: we’re not seeing a resolution yet. Every time we think things might gradually be resolved through diplomacy, we see developments — just like yesterday — that bring us back to where we started.

Regarding the Strait of Hormuz, I believe we will continue to see the reopening to international commerce and shipping, the end of all ship attacks by Iran, and the cessation of repeated threats to close the Strait again. I don’t see a resolution for the Strait of Hormuz. I don’t know whether diplomacy will actually help reach a resolution there.

What I am certain about is that Iran will ensure there won’t be an easy way to go back to the old navigational order. So we should expect Iran to continue its threats against shipping in the region. They’re already doing it. For instance, today they again threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz.

Are the latest attacks less about violating a ceasefire than about enforcing Iran’s claim over who controls the shipping lanes?

Raydan: Yes, because Iran wants to ensure that it plays a central role in deciding how ships transit the Strait of Hormuz.

Up until now, we haven’t been seeing ships using the old routes that commercial vessels used before the war. Right now, we see the northern route, which is controlled by Iran, and we see the southern route around Oman, which, as I said, is protected by US forces.

Iran is raising the risks on the Omani route to compel vessels to shift north into Iranian-controlled waters.

You might ask whether vessels are worried about using the Omani route. We should continue monitoring the data until tomorrow. Today we won’t have the full picture because many ships turn off their AIS signals while transiting these routes, so it takes time to add up all the numbers. What I can tell you today is that ships are using the Iran-controlled route.

And we should expect Iran, again, to continue issuing threats and to continue keeping the risks very high on the Omani route so that it makes sure vessels follow its orders under this new navigational order that Iran is trying to shape.

One of the vessels struck was the Qatari LNG carrier Al Rekayyat, sailing through the US-protected corridor near Oman. What does the targeting of a Qatari gas tanker, alongside Saudi-linked crude oil tankers, tell us?

Raydan: As someone who has been tracking ship attacks in the Middle East since 2017, yesterday’s attacks against the Qatari-owned liquefied natural gas tanker, as well as two crude oil tankers, represented an obvious escalation from Iran.

The reason I say ‘escalation’ is that this was the first time during this war that we saw Tehran launch an attack against a laden LNG tanker — meaning a tanker carrying cargo. That was very dangerous, as it could have caused an environmental disaster and many deaths among seafarers. Fortunately, that did not happen, although the ship seems to have sustained damage. The crude oil tankers were also laden.

Given my experience covering the Red Sea crisis, when the Houthis were carrying out their own maritime campaign, I can tell you that these kinds of attacks can eventually lead to an environmental disaster. We saw something similar in the Red Sea in 2024, when regional and international efforts came together to avert one.

What worries me right now is that Iran is going to continue escalating. What also worries me is that Iran may continue carrying out these dangerous attacks and eventually bring us to a point where we could see an environmental disaster, specifically on the Omani route.

The reason I’m concerned about that scenario is because, as I said earlier, Iran wants to ensure the risks remain very high on the Omani route so that ships ultimately decide to use the Iran-controlled route instead. We need to be prepared to see how Iran is going to continue using different methods and different tactics to keep the risks very high on the Omani route so that, in the end, vessels decide to follow the Iran-controlled route. This is where we are right now.

This is the phase I’m monitoring — how Iran is going to continue making it so difficult to return to a status quo that does not serve its objectives. Again, the Strait of Hormuz will remain at the heart of this war.

President Trump has suggested imposing a complete naval blockade on Iranian ports. Would that destroy Tehran’s ambition to turn the Strait of Hormuz into a source of political and economic leverage?

Raydan: There are questions right now about whether Iran’s leverage is still working. Based on what they are doing at this time, I would say yes, they still have leverage. They are still putting a lot of pressure on shipping, and by doing that they are also putting a lot of pressure on oil markets. As we saw, prices reacted to the latest escalation between the two sides. Iran still has leverage through the Strait of Hormuz.

On top of attacking shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, Iran is also willing to return to attacking critical energy infrastructure in the region. By that I mean critical energy infrastructure in Gulf states that play a very key role in the energy markets, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

A couple of months ago, I said we should continue watching how Iran would ensure that any alternative routes developed by regional countries to bypass the Strait of Hormuz would also come under pressure.

We need to continue preparing ourselves to see how Iran will escalate because, based on yesterday’s attacks, they are eager to take this escalation to an entirely different level.

Iran has again threatened to close the Strait entirely if the US launches additional strikes. You’ve argued previously that a complete closure would be economically suicidal for Tehran because Iran also depends on the waterway. Has Iran’s calculation fundamentally changed?

Raydan: I still don’t see Iran backing down. Even if a naval blockade returns, I don’t see Iran easily letting go of the most important card it has been playing in this war, which is the Strait of Hormuz. I don’t see Iran de-escalating. Even when the naval blockade was first implemented, we saw Iran continue its threats and attacks on ships. They didn’t back down.

Instead, they tried to come up with different ways to bypass the blockade, and we should expect that to continue if the United States decides to reimpose those restrictions.

Iran has been under sanctions for several decades. Those of us who track sanctioned ships and Iranian oil flows have repeatedly seen Tehran develop different ways to bypass sanctions. Although it may be difficult to bypass another naval blockade, we should still expect Iran to continue trying to circumvent restrictions on its energy exports.

Some analysts argue the world is unlikely to return to a full-scale regional war because the economic consequences would simply be too severe. Can global energy markets absorb a prolonged US naval blockade and lower Iranian exports?

Raydan: That’s an excellent question. Right now we’re seeing different trends in the oil market.

Over the past few weeks, we’ve seen more oil coming onto the market, and oil flows from the region have gradually been recovering. Now we have another issue. There is more oil available, but demand is not increasing in parallel. So we do have enough oil at this time.

With respect to Iranian oil, here’s something people may not be paying enough attention to: it is no longer being offered at the same discounts we saw in the past.

At the same time, other Middle Eastern crude grades are also offering discounts and competing directly with Iranian oil. For that reason, some buyers, particularly in Asia, have not been absorbing Iranian oil in the same way they did before. Here I’m referring specifically to China, which remains a key buyer of Iranian oil. As we know, however, China has significantly reduced its imports over the past two months. It is not importing Iranian oil as it did before the war.

So, to come back to your question, we have different trends taking place in the market. We are seeing enough oil, but at the same time demand is not recovering in parallel. Will prices jump the way they did at the beginning of the war? I’ll be very honest — I cannot predict how prices will behave, and I’ll leave it there.

NATO leaders have expressed varying levels of support for Washington’s latest military action. But from your perspective, what will tell you over the next 24 to 48 hours whether this conflict has crossed the point of no return?

Raydan: As someone who keeps her eyes on ships in the region, I’ll definitely be watching the behaviour of ships and the routes they choose — the northern route controlled by Iran and the southern route around Oman.

I’ll also be watching the behaviour of some regional countries. But my main focus remains ships, particularly energy flows.

The Omani route is where we saw at least three tankers attacked yesterday. By tomorrow we should have a much better idea of the status of shipping on that route. It will tell us whether Iran has succeeded in forcing ships either to reroute or to rethink using the Omani route and instead return to the Persian Gulf through the Iran-controlled lane. We’ll know more because many ships turn off their AIS signals, and that doesn’t allow us to track them in real time.

We have to wait for them to reappear in the Gulf of Oman before we know whether they actually transited the Omani route or chose the Iran-controlled route instead. By tomorrow, because we’ll have much more solid data, we’ll have a much better idea of whether Iran’s strategy is succeeding.



Source link

How much killing would it take to save the spotted owl?

ash329
-
0
How much killing would it take to save the spotted owl?

The answer is stark: federal officials estimate that saving the northern spotted owl from extinction will require the lethal removal of up to 450,000 barred owls over the next 30 years. This ambitious and intensely controversial strategy represents one of the largest planned lethal control efforts for a bird of prey in the world

The Scale of the Cull

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) finalised its barred owl management strategy in 2024, selecting a plan that could authorise the removal of approximately 15,000 barred owls annually across a maximum of about 23,000 square miles in California, Oregon, and Washington. The goal is to reduce the population of the larger, more aggressive barred owls, which are considered an invasive competitor that has expanded its range westward into the spotted owl’s territory.

Why the Barred Owl is Targeted

  • Competitive Advantage: Barred owls are larger, more aggressive, more adaptable, and have a higher reproductive rate than spotted owls.
  • Displacement: They displace spotted owls, disrupt their nesting, and compete with them for food.
  • Population Pressure: With an estimated 100,000 barred owls now living within the spotted owl’s range, which contains only about 7,100 spotted owls, the competitive pressure is immense.

A recent successful experiment in California, in which researchers removed 3,373 barred owls, demonstrated that this strategy can stabilise spotted owl populations. In areas where barred owls were removed, spotted owl occurrence and reproduction stabilised, while they continued to decline in untreated control areas.

The Controversy and Cost

Despite the promising results, the plan is highly controversial and faces significant opposition from animal welfare groups, some lawmakers, and scientists.

Arguments Against the Plan:

  • Ineffective and Costly: Critics argue that the plan is “impractical and grossly expensive.” A group of 19 lawmakers estimated the cost could exceed $1.3 billion, or roughly $3,000 per owl.
  • Ethical Concerns: Animal welfare groups argue that “we cannot victimise animals for adapting to human perturbations of the environment.” Some scientists also question the ethics of killing one native species to save another, especially when the habitat loss that initially endangered the spotted owl remains unaddressed.
  • A Never-Ending Problem: Critics point out that the killing would have to continue indefinitely, as barred owls will naturally recolonise areas from which they have been removed. They argue it’s like “keeping spotted owls on life support” rather than a permanent solution.
  • Despite the data, the plan is not without its critics, who raise several points:
  • The Ethics of Killing: 
  • Many animal welfare and conservation groups oppose the plan on principle, arguing that it is inhumane to kill one charismatic species to save another and that humans are simply “victimising animals for adapting to human perturbations of the environment.”
  • Cost and Scalability: 
  • Critics argue the plan is “impractical and grossly expensive,” with estimates ranging from $3,000 per owl to a potential total cost of $1.35 billion over 30 years.
  • A Perpetual Problem: 
  • Wildlife biologist Dr Eric Forsman noted that control would have to be maintained “forever”, as barred owl populations would recover as soon as management stops. “Ultimately, we’re going to have to let the two species work it out,” he stated.
  • The decision to implement the plan is seen by its supporters as a difficult but necessary choice—a “heartbreaking killing” that will “buy spotted owls the time they need”. This stark example of active human intervention shows how we manage ecosystems that human activity has already profoundly altered.

A Question of Values and Science

The debate over how much killing is “enough” ultimately hinges on a profound ethical question: is it justifiable to intentionally kill hundreds of thousands of animals to save a species from extinction? As one researcher who participated in the culling experiment noted, “Every time I went out there to do it, it was extremely difficult.”

While the science suggests that lethal control is an effective, if temporary, tool, the long-term solution likely requires a dual approach: managing the invasive population while simultaneously restoring the old-growth forest habitat that is essential for the spotted owl’s survival.

Spotted owls are at a critical point, and we need to manage both barred owls and habitat to save them. This issue isn’t about choosing one owl over the other. If we act now, future generations will be able to see both owls in our Western forests.” — Kessina Lee, FWS Oregon Office state supervisor 

The plan to save the spotted owl is a dramatic and emotionally charged act of conservation intervention, reflecting the difficult choices humans must sometimes make to mitigate the unintended consequences of our actions on the natural world.

Source link

I asked my son to stop playing basketball video games. That idea became a $20 million business.

ash329
-
0
I asked my son to stop playing basketball video games. That idea became a million business.
Craig Moody was inspired to create Shoot 360 by his son. Courtesy of Craig Moody

Craig Moody developed Shoot 360 after watching his son choose video games over basketball.

  • For six years, Moody ran a production company while also developing Shoot 360.
  • Moody’s says the business with outside investors is too big to manage with the family alone.

Told this essay is based on a conversation with Craig Moody, Founder and Chairman of ShThe text360. This has been edited for length and clarity.

About 15 years ago, my son was sitting at home playing a basketball video game. I said to him, “Why don’t you go outside and play?” I grew up shooting and coaching, and I could not imagine that he would enjoy playing basketball on screen.

I walked out of my game room thinking, “If I could make a gym like a video game, I could make it happen.”

This idea stuck with me. I did more research, and one morning I woke up and said to my wife, “I think I’ve found it.” I rented a warehouse and started building Shoot360 that night.

My father was an entrepreneur, and I learned from him

I was already familiar with entrepreneurship. My father was a contractor who ran several businesses. He owned an equipment rental yard that he developed into a regional chain and later sold to a national chain. I followed in his footsteps and was running a construction company.

When you work for yourself, there are no limits to what you can do. People would say it was the American dream – and I have always loved the freedom of it. Whether it’s building or gaming, the ability to go out on my own and create something that I think is special really appeals to me.

I ran both companies for 6 years

I launched Shoot 360 in 2012. In the first few years, growth was slow. I was developing a way to bring together physical hoops and balls with digital tracking and gamification in a way that would appeal to the younger generation.

I hired people to help with this and ploughed any profits back into the company. I kept my production company running to cover my expenses. Doing both was time-consuming: I was logging 16-hour days, seven days a week.

By 2018, Shoot 360 was beginning to grow significantly. I closed my construction company rather than selling it because I didn’t have an opportunity to manage the change. Shoot 360 was expanding very rapidly.

My kids understand business better than me in some ways

All three of my kids love basketball and have been involved in the business since the beginning. I had been working long days, but the kids were in the gym with me, testing the product. They were passionate about business, and it wove itself into the fabric of our lives.

Craig Moody and his family
Shoot 360 projects revenue of approximately $20 million in 2025. Courtesy of Craig Moody

When they went to college and started studying business, they realised how much opportunity we had. He has deep respect for what I’ve done, but he argues that he understands the business better than I do.

In a way, they are right. Shoot 360 is a technique based on video game culture. My kids understand what motivates people in the gaming world, and getting their input is an advantage.

I don’t plan to leave the business for my children

Today, all three of my children – now 31, 29 and 23 – are working in the business. When I started working for my father, I started at the grassroots level. Before helping run things I was washing equipment and managing the rental counter.

I’m taking the same approach with my kids. I’ve started them at the bottom and worked my way up. Being in different roles helps them find their area of ​​talent.

Although we all work together, we will not pass Shoot 360 on to the next generation. Once you bring in outside investors, you’re giving up some of that traditional family business structure.

Last year, Shoot 360 made nearly $20 million in revenue. To grow this business and make the greatest impact on the basketball community, we will keep it outside the scope of the family business. Really, it already is.



Source link

Rift Over World War II-Era Killings Rocks Crucial Ukraine-Poland Ties

ash329
-
0
Rift Over World War II-Era Killings Rocks Crucial Ukraine-Poland Ties

In July 2023, the presidents of Poland and Ukraine commemorated the victims of a wave of violence that left tens of thousands of people dead during World War II.

Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Andrzej Duda, then Poland’s president, knelt side by side and placed candles in front of a memorial near the altar of a church in Lutsk, the capital of the Volyn region in northwestern Ukraine. In their social media posts, both individuals sent a positive message:

That proposition is being put to a tough test three years later, as a rekindled dispute over what Poland calls the Volhynian Massacre and Ukraine calls the Volyn Tragedy rocks relations between the neighbours and risks repercussions for Kyiv’s defence against Russia and for Ukraine’s EU integration.

The fuel for the flare-up was Zelenskyy’s decision in May to give a military unit a name honouring the “Heroes of the UPA” — the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, which Poland says massacred some 100,000 Poles in the area, then under German control, in 1943-45, killings that Poland’s parliament has designated a genocide.

Ukraine rejects that designation and says Ukrainians also faced hatred from Poles. Thousands of Ukrainians were killed in reprisals.

The UPA was the military arm of nationalist resistance leader Stepan Bandera’s Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and fought against Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union at different times during the war. The groups are accused of carrying out murderous campaigns against Poles and Jews.

But many Ukrainians hail them as freedom fighters — a perception that has widened as the country tries to fight off a Russian invasion 35 years after it won independence from Moscow as the Soviet Union collapsed.

Poland, steeped in its own painful memories of the Nazi-Soviet invasion in 1939 and decades of dominance by Moscow after World War II, has been one of Ukraine’s strongest backers since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022.

‘Strategic Mistake’

As Zelenskyy’s appearance with Duda in 2023 indicated, both countries had largely managed to avoid historical tensions. But now, the public spat is injecting poison into bilateral relations and raising the prospect of broader problems at a crucial time.

“Wading into a conflict between politicians in Poland and Ukraine ‌is a strategic mistake that will harm both sides: business-wise, geopolitically, and reputationally,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk warned in a post on X last month.

Ukraine may have more to lose.

“Ukraine risks seriously hurting its support from Poland,” Lucian Kim, senior Ukraine analyst at the International Crisis Group, told RFE/RL, stressing that this support is “crucial” for several reasons.

“Western military aid for Ukraine goes through Poland. Poland hosts 1 million Ukrainian refugees,” Kim said. “Polish support will also be necessary for Ukraine’s European Union aspirations.”


Polish President Karol Nawrocki (left) and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Warsaw late last year.

The key players in the dispute are Zelenskyy and Duda’s successor, Polish President Karol Nawrocki, a populist historian who is the former director of a World War II museum and was heading the Institute of National Remembrance when the conservative Law and Justice party (PiS) tapped him as its candidate in the 2025 election.

On June 19, Nawrocki announced he was stripping Zelenskyy of the Order of the White Eagle, Poland’s highest state honour, over his “Heroes of the UPA” decision.

Zelenskyy returned the medal to Poland, and three of his predecessors who had received the same award — Leonid Kuchma, Viktor Yushchenko, and Petro Poroshenko — followed suit. Then, on June 28, he submitted legislation to parliament for the creation of a National Pantheon honouring key figures in Ukraine’s history, warning that “no one will ever tell us…which heroes to honour.”

A spokesman for Nawrocki, who had said Poland “must not remain indifferent to the affirmation of symbols of crime,” called the pantheon bill “the next stage of escalation.”

Campaign Trail

While rooted in bloodshed that occurred over 80 years ago, the spike in tensions stems in large part from domestic political considerations in both Ukraine and Poland, analysts and observers said.

In Poland, the dispute is part of a “pre-electoral environment” in which “the Ukraine factor can be used to win votes,” an EU official told RFE/RL, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the subject.

The opposition PiS is seeking to gain ground against Tusk’s more Ukraine-friendly Civic Coalition, which drove it from power in 2024, ahead of parliamentary elections that must be held by November 2027.

The dispute over the World War II-era killings could enable Nawrocki and the PiS to tap into substantial anti-Ukrainian sentiment in Poland, stoked by resentment over the influx of Ukrainians displaced by the Russian invasion. Opinion polls indicate that acceptance of Ukrainian refugees has declined dramatically as the war has dragged on.

In Ukraine, martial law has barred elections since the start of the full-scale invasion. But the prospect of a presidential vote in the not-so-distant future has loomed large amid intermittent external pressure and concerns among some Ukrainians over Zelenskyy’s seven-year grip on power. While his approval ratings remain strong, a kind of shadow campaign pitting Zelenskyy against potential rivals is underway.

“What’s clear is that Zelenskyy was acting purely on domestic motivation and was not considering how it might come across outside Ukraine,” Kim said of the decision to bestow the “Heroes of the UPA” name on a special operations unit of the armed forces.

“Zelenskyy is certainly wrapping himself in the cloak of Ukrainian nationalism and taking positions that he may not have taken earlier,” he said, adding that the Russian invasion has made forces like the UPA less controversial than they previously were inside Ukraine.

When Zelenskyy ran for president in 2019, “historical issues [and] the past were of no importance to him,” Ihor Hryniv, a political strategist who headed then-incumbent President Petro Poroshenko’s campaign headquarters in that election, told RFE/RL.

‘The Problems Ahead’

Now, Hryniv said, he is playing to the portion of the electorate that did not vote for him in 2019 and for whom historical memory is important — in part because his most prominent potential rivals “are all perceived as more patriotic than Zelenskyy himself”.

As a result, he argued, Zelenskyy now “sometimes runs faster than society itself” on issues involving nationalist figures of the past, and he “does not know the problems that may arise with neighbours or in Ukraine itself.”

The extent of those problems is not yet unclear.

Revoking Zelenskyy’s Order of the White Eagle “does not signify a change in the strategic direction of Polish security policy,” Nawrocki said in his announcement. “We have supported and continue to support Ukraine because we know that Russian aggression poses a threat to the security of Poland and all of Europe.”

But he warned that Ukraine’s EU path “requires a willingness to honestly confront the difficult chapters of its own history.

“A united Europe was built on the rejection of totalitarianism and the cult of violence. These principles must apply to everyone. For those who do not understand these principles, there can be no place in the European Union, and Poland will certainly not allow it,” Nawrocki said.

Asked if the dispute with Poland would affect Ukraine’s EU prospects, the EU official who spoke on condition of anonymity said: “Short term, no. Long term, possibly very much.”

Poland, one of the EU’s 27 members, recently gave its consent for the opening of a “cluster” of negotiation “chapters” for Ukraine next week, moving the painstaking process forward. But the official said that opening further clusters and closing chapters – that is, reaching agreement on them – might be difficult.

Whether or not the current dispute slows Ukraine’s path to the EU, Kim said, “it highlights the problems ahead” – problems that pertain to the present and the future rather than the past.

Polish farmers’ fears that Ukrainian supplies could put them out of business have led to protests, and Polish truckers have similar concerns about their livelihoods if Ukraine joins – worries that are shared in other countries in the region.

So far, there’s no sign that the flare-up between Kyiv and Warsaw will bleed into sometimes volatile US-Ukrainian relations or affect US President Donald Trump’s efforts to broker a peace deal between Russia and Ukraine. Trump praised Nawrocki at a meeting with Zelenskyy on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Turkey on July 8, but he didn’t mention the historical dispute.

Escalation Or De-Escalation

There have been efforts to de-escalate.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha met with his Polish counterpart, Radoslaw Sikorski, in Warsaw on July 3, where he proposed “a package of anti-crisis steps,” including meetings between diplomats and historians and outreach to religious leaders “to leverage their authority.” It was unclear if any agreements were reached.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (left) and Polish President Karol Nawrocki on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Ankara on July 8.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy (left) and Polish President Karol Nawrocki on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Ankara on July 8.

For the first time since the spat erupted, Zelenskyy and Nawrocki met for about an hour on July 8 on the sidelines of a NATO summit in Ankara. Nawrocki said they were “unable to resolve the historical issues,” but he suggested that he expected them to remain unresolved.

Zelenskyy called it an “important and necessary conversation,” and both presidents said that Russia is a common threat.

Tension persisted ahead of Poland’s annual commemoration of the victims on July 11. Zelenskyy’s chief of staff, former Ukrainian military intelligence chief Kyrylo Budanov, asserted in an interview with news outlet RBC-Ukraine earlier this week that he had information indicating that Poland was “preparing a whole series of…escalatory steps” and that the tension was likely to continue. He did not provide details or evidence.

While analysts say Zelenskyy may not have realised that naming a military unit after “Heroes of the UPA” would make waves outside Ukraine, Kyiv’s success in fighting Russian forces to a near standstill in a war many initially believed Ukraine would lose quickly may have bolstered his confidence, and that of other senior officials, on the world stage.

“Ukraine will not accept ultimatums from anyone in the world. The last [country] that tried to give us an ultimatum was the Russian Federation,” Budanov said. “No offence to Poland, but [Russia] is a little more powerful than Poland…. Do not speak to us with ultimatums.”



Source link

Avian Championship: Lottie Wood makes strong start to major as world No. 1

ash329
-
0
Avian Championship: Lottie Wood makes strong start to major as world No. 1

Lottie Woad made a strong start to her bid for a first major title at the Amundi Evian Championship, as Nelly Korda struggled on the opening day in France.

Wood, who finished third in last year’s event as an amateur, posted a final-hole eagle, carding a four-under 67 at Evian Resort Golf Club to stay within four shots of Japan’s Aki Iwai.

Awai posted eight birdies in a bogey-free 63 to take a three-shot clubhouse lead, tied for second with former major champion Mao Saigo and KPMG Women’s PGA Championship winner Hiran Ryu Jin Hye-um.

Wood is joined in the group at four under by former major winners Rongning Yen and Brooke Henderson, while world No. 1 Korda, who could complete the career Grand Slam with a victory, stumbled to an opening-round 74.

former Evian Championship winner Ayaka Fury

Charlie Hill is among the afternoon starters, alongside Lydia Coe and world No. 2 Gino Thetkol, while defending champion Grace Kim, former Evian Championship winner Ayaka Fury, and Celine Bottier are among the later starters.

Korda is struggling while Wood makes a strong start.

Markey, along with Wood, Korda and Reeve, started the morning three-ball on the back nine, birdied the 11th hole and picked up shots on the 15th and 18th to reach the turn in 33.

She combined back-to-back gains from the second to briefly move into the lead but bogeyed her next two holes, with Wood falling further behind when she failed to get up and down from the green at the eighth.

Wood responded by reaching the ninth green in par five and holing a 20-foot eagle putt, lifting him to four under, combining six birdies with a lone bogey in his opening-round 66 with playing partner Reeve to take a shot closer to the lead.

Image:
Nellie Korda, playing alongside Wood, has already won the Chevron Championship and the US Women’s Open this season.

“Pleased,” Wood said. “I played well from tee to green for most of the day. I was five under and hitting pretty well, but this golf course can take you places if you miss some fairways, and I finished with a good eagle.

Korda – chasing his third major win of the season – was one under after eight holes, but he dropped five shots in a six-hole stretch around the turn, including a double bogey on the first, before making a final-hole birdie to leave him 11 shots off the early lead.



Source link

Could ‘Death by Organ Donation’ ease shortage of organs for transplant?: NPR

ash329
-
0
Could ‘Death by Organ Donation’ ease shortage of organs for transplant?: NPR

Should surgeons be allowed to euthanise patients by removing their hearts and other organs while they are still alive?

Donated heart for transplant in hands

The idea, called “death by organ donation,” would enable euthanasia patients to donate their organs for transplantation in a way that would make them more likely to be usable. Due to this procedure he will also die.

“It would be an ethical thing to do because it’s something patients have chosen for themselves,” says Dr Robert Truog, a physician and bioethicist at Harvard Medical School who co-authored the paper ‘Outline of death by organ donation’ in the New England Journal of Medicine. “He has thought very generously: ‘How can my death help other people?’ This is a very charitable, generous act.”

But the idea is controversial for several reasons, including that it goes against the fundamental principles that have guided organ donation for decades. The deceased donor rule requires that the patient be dead before any organs can be removed. Doctors cannot even kill the patient during the organ removal process.

This rule has long generated intense debate, including controversy over how to accurately determine when a person has died, as well as the development of new methods to extend the lives of dying patients. Recover usable organs for transplant.

At the same time, many countries, including Canada, the Netherlands and Spain, have made it legal for doctors to help patients die through euthanasia.

“What if they chose to become an organ donor? The problem is that under current standards doctors are not supposed to cause death in the process of procuring organs for transplant,” Truog says.

Therefore, hearts, lungs, livers and kidneys can be removed from euthanised patients only after they have received lethal doses of drugs, making their organs, especially their hearts, much less useful for transplantation.

“Why wouldn’t it be OK for patients to say, ‘I choose to die by lethal injection? Is there no way I can help others?’ They should be able to donate organs as a permanent gift to others. And they don’t see any point in denying them that option,” Truog says. “I would say a more appropriate framework is that patients who wish to die by euthanasia can also combine euthanasia with organ donation.”

A “scary idea” that may have merit

In euthanasia, doctors administer lethal medicines that cause the death of the patient. The practice is illegal in the US, but a growing number of states have legalised assisted suicide, in which doctors give patients lethal drugs to take at home.

Instead of a doctor giving a patient a lethal drug, organ donation would end the lives of dying patients by anaesthetising them and then removing their organs while they were still working.

“So the organs will still be in ideal condition,” Truog says.

Some other bioethicists say the argument may have merit.

says, “The idea of death by donation is very disturbing at first. It’s a scary thought.” Ruth Faden: A bioethicist at Johns Hopkins University. But if you look at it critically in terms of fundamental ethical considerations, it’s not as troubling as it first seems.

She explains that the prevalence and acceptance of euthanasia, along with the willingness of some patients to become organ donors, is the reason.

Faden states, “If we are committed to respecting the autonomy of individuals at the end of their lives, we must also ensure that their choices are honoured and supported.” And if they choose to maximise their well-being at the end of their lives, that is a moral justification for death by donation. She says it will be important to implement strong safeguards to ensure full informed consent and protect patients from abuse.

A change could undermine patient trust

But some other bioethicists are horrified by the mere notion.

“This procedure is asking surgeons to take a living person into the operating room and bring a dead person out, which I think is murder,” says Lanny Friedman Ross, a bioethicist at the University of Rochester. “There are certain limits to consent. And one of the things we’re not allowed to do is consenting to say someone else can murder you.”

Others worry that this approach will undermine trust in both organ donation and end-of-life care at a time when some potential donors are already wary. There are controversies about this organ procurement effort.

“You can do real harm to both the physician-assisted suicide system and the organ donation system,” says Lori Andrews, a bioethicist and professor emerita at Chicago-Kent College of Law. “This approach may give people the image that these are vultures who don’t wait until you’re dead to attack. It harkens back to the philosophy of body snatchers of previous centuries.”

Critics also fear that allowing death by donation for euthanasia patients may someday mean that it will be an acceptable practice for physician-assisted suicide patients and even potentially hospice patients.

But others argue that this approach may currently be considered for at least some euthanised patients.

“If there are people who want to donate organs, such an approach would be a way to maximise their wishes and their altruistic goal of helping others,” says co-author Dr Carter Winberg, a Canadian critical care physician working on a master’s degree in bioethics at Harvard. New England Journal of Medicine paper. These are people who are already consenting to voluntary euthanasia and organ donation. It requires a new conversation about whether this is pthe practicebly ethical.”



Source link

Starmer hinted at a bank holiday if England wins the World Cup.

ash329
-
0
Starmer hinted at a bank holiday if England wins the World Cup.

Sir Keir Starmer is said to be taking a bank holiday if England wins the World Cup.

To celebrate his first win in 60 years, the prime minister has hinted at a day off for the country, but he is not expected to confirm any plans until the final.

It is believed that the bank holiday could be on Friday, July 24, giving the team plenty of time to recover from the final match last Sunday.

Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of the NATO summit on Wednesday, Sir Kerr said, “I would rather not spoil it, but ask me again if we’ve reached the final.”

After a 3-2 win over Mexico, England are set for a quarter-final clash with Norway in Miami on Saturday.

Keir Starmer and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Stover at the NATO summit in Ankara (A.P)

Should England win, they will face either Argentina or Switzerland in Atlanta on July 15.

Speaking from Ankara, Turkey, Sir Kerr hailed Monday’s win over Mexico as “one of England’s best performances.”

He jokingly reminded Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre that England only won the World Cup under a Labour government.

“I’m a good friend of his,” he told reporters.

“Norway-UK relations are as strong as they have ever been, and he is a key figure in the alliances we are building.

But for 90 minutes on Saturday evening, we must go our separate ways as we enter this match.

England have not won the World Cup in 60 years.
England have not won the World Cup in 60 years. (PA Wire)

He said he had resisted calls to try to overturn Jeral Kwanza’s red card against Mexico after Donald Trump persuaded FIFA to suspend American player Fowlerin Balogan’s ban and allow him to play against Belgium.

“I can’t tell you how many messages I received asking me to take back the red card I got early Monday,” he said.

“I hasten to add, I have not attempted to do so.”

Many English fans were left disappointed after a bank holiday was announced in Scotland in June to mark the country’s appearance in the men’s football finals for the first time in decades.

King Charles approved the proposal, put forward by First Minister John Sweeney, who wanted to allow the Scots to celebrate the Great Return.

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said she would “probably not” support a bank holiday if England won the World Cup.

“Sadly, we all know what happens with a bank holiday: the private sector will still be working, while the public sector takes the day off, and you’ll all have to pay the price.”



Source link

Wimbledon 2026 men’s and women’s seeding list and tracker

ash329
-
0
Wimbledon 2026 men’s and women’s seeding list and tracker

A new women’s champion will be crowned at Wimbledon after defeating Iga Świątek and second seed Elina Rybakina, followed by Naomi Osaka’s stunning straight-sets victory over world No. 1 Aryna Sabalenka.

With Barbora Krejcikova also knocked out before the quarter-finals, Wimbledon will crown a 10th different women’s champion in 10 years, with Coco Goff taking on Karolina Muchova as both players look to reach their first final at the All England Club.

Meanwhile, reigning men’s champion and top seed Janic Sinner is gathering form after a slow start at the Championships and will face Novak Djokovic in the semi-finals as the 39-year-old bids for a record-breaking 25th Grand Slam title.

On the men’s side, Wildcard has reached the quarter-finals of Wimbledon for the first time since 2014, with Britain’s Arthur Ferry opening a clash with ninth seed Flavio Cobolli and defeating Grigor Dimitrov in five sets.

Follow the progress of the top players with our seed tracker here:

The seeds of men

During the quarter finals

  1. Junk Sinner (ITA) – ✅ Novak Djokovic is playing. [7] In the semi-finals
  2. Alexander Zverev (GER) – Taylor plays Fritz [6] (USA) in the quarterfinals
  3. Felix Auger-Aliassime (CAN) ❌ – Knocked out in the quarterfinals by Novak Djokovic [7] (SRB) – 7-6 (10), 3-6, 6-3, 6-7 (4), 7-6 (10-4)
  4. Ben Shelton (USA) ❌ – 1st round knockout by Otto Virtanen: 4-6, 6-3, 7-6(8), 2-6, 7-6(9)
  5. Alex De Manor (AUS) – ❌ Fourth-round knockout by Flavio Coboli [9] (ITA) 7-5 7-6 6-3
  6. Taylor Fritz (USA) – Alexander Zverev plays [2] (GER) in the quarter-finals
  7. Novak Djokovic (SRB) – ✅ Jannik plays Sinner. [1] (ITA) in the semifinals
  8. Daniil Medvedev – ❌ Knocked out by Jan-Lennard Struff 7-6 (4) 7-6 (5) 7-5 in the third round
  9. Flavio Coboli (ITA) – Plays Arthur Fairey. [WC] (GBR) in the quarter-finals
  10. Alexander Boblik (KAZwas knocked out by Taylor Fritz (USA) in the 4th round, with scores of), 7-6 (1), 6-4, 6-4.
  11. Casper Ruud (NOR) ❌ – Knocked out in the first round by Hubert Hurkacz 4-6, 2-6, 6-7(7)
  12. Andrey Rublev ❌ – 1st round knockout by Roman Cefalin (Q): 4-6, 7-6(6) 6-3 3-6 6-7 (12)
  13. Jerry Lahika (CZE) – ❌ Knocked out in the 4th round by Alexander Zuriev [2] (GER) 6-4 7-5 3-6 7-6
  14. Luciano Darderi (ITA) ❌ – Knocked out in the first round by Ethan Quinn 7-6, 7-5, 6-2
  15. Jakub Mensik (CZE) ❌ – Knocked out by Grigor Dimitrov in the second round (7-6, 4-6, 7-5, 6-4)
  16. Lerner Tyne (USA) ❌ – Knocked out Martin Foxx 6-7, 6-4, 7-6, 6-3 in the second round
  17. Frances Tiafoe (USA) ❌ – Knocked out by Alexander Boblik in the third round. [10] (KAZ) 4-6 7-6 7-6 4-6 6-3
  18. Francisco Cerundolo (ARG) ❌ Knocked out Jaume Munnar 6-1 6-4 6-3 in the first round
  19. Karen Khachanov – ❌ Knocked out Flavio Cobolli 0-6, 7-6 (4), 6-7 (5), 6-2, 6-2 in the third round.
  20. Arthur Fils (FRA) ❌ – Knocked out by Matteo Berrettini in the second round 6-4 7-5 3-6 6-3
  21. Tommy Paul (USA) – ❌ Knocked out by Hubert Hurkacz (POL) 4-6 7-6 7-5 6-2 in the third round
  22. Alejandro Davidovich Fokina (ESP) – ❌ Knocked out in the fourth round by Felix Auger-Eliasime [3] (CAN) 6-7 7-6 6-3 3-6 6-1
  23. Rafael Joder (ESP) – ❌ Knocked out by Shintaro Mochizuki (Q) (JPN) 1-6, 7-6, 6-4, 6-4 in the third round
  24. Joao Fonseca (BRA) – ❌ Knocked out by Roman Safiullin (Q) 6-3 6-3 6-3 in the third round
  25. Arthur Rinderkinch (FRA) – ❌ Knocked out by Novak Djokovic [7] (SRB) 7-5 6-4 1-6 7-6 in the third round
  26. Cameron Norrie (GBR) ❌ Knocked out Michael Zeng (Q) 6-7, 6-2, 6-7, 6-3, 7-6 in first round
  27. Ugo Humbert (FRA) ❌ Knocked out by Zizou Bergs 6-2 7-5 4-6 3-6 6-3
  28. Brandon Nakashima (USA) ❌ Knocked out Jan-Lennard Struff 6-4, 6-7(6), 6-7(5), 7-6(6), 6-7(7) in second round
  29. Tomas Martin Etcheverry (ARG) ❌ Knocked out in first round by Lorenzo Sonego 4-6 4-6 7-6(2) 6-7(4)
  30. Alejandro Tabilo (CHI) ❌ Knocked out by Kamil Macerzak 6-3 7-5 7-5 in the first round
  31. Ignacio Buse (PER) ❌ Knocked out by Jenson Brooksby 6-2 6-2 6-3 in the second round
  32. Matteo Arnaldi (ITA) ❌ Knocked out in the first round by Quentin Halys 6-3, 1-6, 6-7(5), 3-6
Janek Snr defeated Carlos Alcaraz in last year’s final. (PA Wire)
Iga Swiatek was the defending women's champion but was knocked out by Alexandra Ella.
Iga Swiatek was the defending women’s champion but was knocked out by Alexandra Ella. (Getty)

Female seeds

During the quarter finals

  1. Aryna Sabalenka – ❌ Knocked out in the fourth round by Naomi Osaka [14] (JPN) 6-2 7-6
  2. Elena Rybakina (KAZ) – ❌ Knocked out in the third round by Elise Mertens [25] (BEL) 7-6, 6-1
  3. Iga Swiatek (POL) – ❌ Knocked out Alexandra Ayala in the third round. [29] (PHI) 7-6 6-2
  4. Jessica Pegula (USA) – ❌ Knocked out in the quarterfinals by Coco Gauff [7] (USA) 4-6 6-3 6-3
  5. Mirra Andreeva ❌ Knocked out by Barbora Krejkova 4-6 7-5 6-4 in the second round
  6. Amanda Anisimova (USA) – ❌ Knocked out in the third round by Madison Keys [26] 3-6, 6-2, 6-3
  7. Coco Gauff (USA) – ✅ Karolina plays the role of Mochowa. [10] (CZE) in semi-finals
  8. Elina Svitolina (UKR) ❌ – knocked out in the first round by Daria Snigur 5-7 2-6
  9. Linda Noskova (CZE) – plays Elise Mertens [25] (BEL) in the quarter-finals
  10. Karolina Muchova (CZE) – ✅ Coco plays Gauff (USA) in the semi-finals [7].
  11. Belinda Bencic (SUI) – ❌ Knocked out in the fourth round by Coco Gauff [7] (USA) 4-6 6-3 6-4
  12. Marta Kostyuk (UKR) – Jasmine plays Paolini [13] (ITA) in the quarterfinals
  13. Jasmine Paolini (ITA) – Marta plays Kostivka. [12] (UKR) in the quarter-finals
  14. Naomi Osaka (JPN) – ❌ Knocked out in the quarterfinals by Karolina Mochowa (CZE). [10] 7-6 6-4
  15. Diana Schneider ❌ – knocked out Lyudmila Samsonova 4-6, 6-4, 2-6 in the second round
  16. Iva Jovic (USA) – ❌ Fourth-round knockout by Jessica Pegula [4] (USA) 6-4 3-6 1-6
  17. Sorana Sarastia (ROU) ❌ 3rd round knockout by Linda Noskova [9] (CHZ): 2-6, 6-3, 7-6 (9)
  18. Ekaterina Alexandrova – ❌ Eva Jovic was knocked out in the third round. [16] 6-3 3-6 6-4
  19. Anna Kalinsky – ❌ Belina Bencic was knocked out in the third round. [11] 4-6 6-4 6-7(6)
  20. Maja Chalinska (POL) ❌ – Knocked out 2-6 7-5 6-2 in the first round by Mananchaya Savangkau
  21. Marie Bozkova (CZE) – ❌ Knocked out in the fourth round by Elise Mertens [25] (BEL) 6-4 6-4
  22. Leila Fernandez (CAN) ❌ – Knocked out in the first round by Janis Teigen 6-1, 7-6
  23. Emma Navarro (USA) – ❌ 3rd round KO by Marta Kostewicz [12] 6-2 4-6 6-1
  24. Clara Tauson (DEN) ❌ – Knocked out in the first round by Maria Sakkari 6-3 6-3
  25. Elise Mertens (BEL) – Linda plays Noskova. [9] (CZE) in the quarter-finals
  26. Madison Keys (USA) – ❌ Fourth-round knockout by Linda Noskova [9](CZE)-6, 4-7, 6-7
  27. Anastasia Potapova ❌ – Knocked out in the first round by Jessica Bozas Manero 6-2 6-3
  28. Ann Lee (USA) ❌ – knocked out Zeynep Sonmez 5-7, 6-1, 4-6 in the first round
  29. Alexandra Ella (PHI) – ❌ KO by Jasmine Paolini in the 4th round [13] (ITA) 6-4 4-6 6-3
  30. Emma Raducanu (GBR) ❌ – withdrew due to injury.
  31. Donna Vekic (CRO) ❌ – Knocked out in the first round by Ashlyn Kruger 6-3 6-7(3) 4-6
  32. Katerina Seniakova (CZE) ❌ – Knocked out by Nikola Bartonkova in the second round (6-3, 3-6, 7-5)



Source link

Iran Says It Targeted US Military Sites In Bahrain And Kuwait After New Strikes

ash329
-
0
Iran Says It Targeted US Military Sites In Bahrain And Kuwait After New Strikes



WASHINGTON — Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said it had targeted US military sites in Bahrain and Kuwait in response to the latest US military strikes against Iran.

Air raid sirens sounded in both countries, with Kuwait saying its air defences were responding to hostile missile and drone threats. Bahrain’s Interior Ministry urged residents to seek shelter after it activated warning sirens.

The United States launched a new round of military strikes against Iran and revoked a key sanctions waiver covering Iranian oil sales after accusing Tehran of attacking commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, putting a fragile cease-fire into peril.

The twin moves mark the most serious crisis since the United States and Iran signed a 60-day memorandum of understanding (MOU) last month aimed at ending hostilities and reopening one of the world’s most important maritime chokepoints.

The US military said the strikes were a direct response to what it described as Iranian attacks on three commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, including a Qatari liquefied natural gas tanker.

“The attacks were designed to impose heavy costs for targeting and attacking commercial shipping crewed by innocent civilians in an international waterway.” US Central Command (CENTCOM) said in a statement, calling Iran’s actions “unwarranted, dangerous, and a clear violation of the ceasefire.”

Iranian media reported multiple explosions in southern Iran, including on Qeshm Island, in the city of Sirik, and near the strategic port of Bandar Abbas. US officials did not immediately specify which targets had been struck.

The military action came as President Donald Trump attended the NATO summit in Ankara, where he was set to meet with fellow NATO leaders to discuss the Iran crisis, defence spending, and the alliance’s security priorities.

Washington Restores Economic Pressure

Alongside the military strikes, the US Treasury revoked its authorisation for Iranian oil sales, restoring sanctions relief that had been suspended under last month’s memorandum of understanding.

A US official told RFE/RL the decision reflected the administration’s long-standing position that any economic relief depended on Iranian compliance.

“As President Trump and the administration have repeatedly affirmed, the MOU in effect with Iran is entirely performance-based. Iran will only reap benefits if they exhibit good behaviour,” the official said.

The United States found Iran’s actions in the Strait wholly unacceptable and will impose consequences. Our negotiators are still working towards a final deal.

The waiver, originally scheduled to remain in force until August 21, had permitted limited Iranian crude exports and certain financial transactions as part of efforts to stabilise shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Washington says Tehran violated its commitment by attacking vessels that used a US-protected shipping corridor near Oman rather than a northern route that Iran has insisted ships should use.

According to maritime security officials, three commercial vessels came under attack during the latest incidents, including the Qatari LNG carrier Al Rekayyat, whose crew reportedly issued a distress call after a drone struck near its engine room.

The Joint Maritime Information Center subsequently raised the threat level for commercial shipping in the Hormuz Strait to “severe.”

Regional governments swiftly condemned the attacks.

Qatar called the strike on one of its vessels a “serious and explicit violation” of international law and said Iran would bear full legal responsibility. Saudi Arabia similarly accused Tehran of threatening international navigation and global energy supplies.

Iran Accuses US of Breaking Agreement

Tehran rejected Washington’s justification, accusing the United States of repeatedly violating the ceasefire framework.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry said that revoking the suspension of sanctions on Iranian oil sales breached Paragraph 10 of what it called the “Islamabad Understanding,” signed on June 18.

In a strongly worded statement, the ministry said the United States had committed “both minor and major violations” of the agreement over the past three weeks.

It warned that Iran would “take whatever measures it deems necessary to safeguard its national interests and security” and held Washington responsible for “the consequences of this breach of commitment.”

Iran also continues to argue that the memorandum gave Tehran, in consultation with Oman, primary responsibility for reopening and managing shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranian officials have defended proposals to charge vessels for maritime security services, arguing that protecting navigation carries significant costs.

Western governments and shipping interests, however, have rejected any compulsory transit fees, warning they could resemble coercive payments rather than legitimate maritime services.

Risks To Diplomacy

Analysts say revoking the sanctions waiver increases pressure on Tehran but also risks undermining the fragile diplomatic framework before negotiations have concluded.

Brett Erickson, a sanctions expert at Obsidian Risk Advisors, questioned whether cancelling the waiver delivers meaningful economic leverage.

“The evidence simply didn’t support the fear. During the life of General License X, Iran moved tens of millions of barrels of oil, but we never saw a wave of new buyers outside of China,” Erickson told RFE/RL.

“The economic concession turned out to be relatively modest. Revoking it now risks collapsing the entire Memorandum of Understanding over a benefit that never proved particularly significant.”

Zineb Riboua, a research fellow at the Hudson Institute’s Center for Peace and Security in the Middle East, told RFE/RL the administration may be using the waiver as additional negotiating leverage rather than abandoning diplomacy altogether.

She said disputes over frozen Iranian assets have remained unresolved throughout negotiations and suggested the latest move could be intended to strengthen Washington’s bargaining position before the 60-day negotiating period expires.

Riboua cautioned, however, that the strategy carries significant risks, particularly for global energy markets.

While additional pressure could influence negotiations, she warned that continued instability in the Strait of Hormuz would keep insurance costs elevated and could reignite inflationary pressures in Europe and elsewhere through higher energy prices.



Source link

How Iran Is Trying To Turn A Funeral Into A Vote Of Confidence

ash329
-
0
How Iran Is Trying To Turn A Funeral Into A Vote Of Confidence



Iran is staging a massive, weeklong funeral procession across the country to mourn long-time Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed at the outset of the war with the United States and Israel.

Drawing hundreds of thousands of people, the extravagant public events have been used by the authorities to project strength and unity, even as they face widespread discontent over a deepening economic crisis and a widening crackdown on dissent.

State media has used the high turnout for Khamenei’s mass funeral as proof of what they claim to be the popularity and legitimacy of Iran’s clerical rulers. But some inside the country — and several media outlets abroad — have reported pressure on workers and businesses to take part in the ceremonies, raising questions about the true situation.

Khamenei, who ruled Iran for more than three decades, was succeeded as supreme leader by his son, Mojtaba, who has not been seen in public since his appointment.

“A referendum was held; all you have to do is look at the streets,” wrote Mehr News Agency, a conservative outlet.

“Didn’t you ask for a referendum?” read the editorial by Mehr, addressing critics of the authorities who have long called for a referendum on major political issues in the country. “A referendum is not only held at the ballot box.”

The same arguments were made by other state-run outlets, including the official news agency IRNA, the conservative newspaper Farhikhtegan, and Fars News Agency, which is affiliated to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

But it’s also what the official media outlets aren’t saying.

Iran has been rocked by a spate of mass protests in recent years, most recently in January, and has faced growing calls for a referendum and a new constitution.

But Iranian leaders, including Khamenei when he was alive, rejected holding a popular vote on domestic, economic, and foreign policy matters to resolve public discontent in the country. The January unrest saw a security crackdown that killed thousands.

Keyhan, whose editor-in-chief is appointed by the supreme leader, wrote in a July 7 editorial that there was no need for a vote because turnouts at state-sponsored events serve as a “permanent referendum” on the Islamic republic.

‘Regime Propaganda’

For the families of Iranians who have suffered at the hands of the authorities, the funeral conveys a different message.

They say Khamenei’s extravagant burial procession highlights the impunity of the perpetrators of state violence, not national unity.

“I’m horrified by the presence of some ordinary people at Khamenei’s funeral procession,” said Mihan Rusta, whose husband, Reza Esmati, was executed in 1988 during the mass executions of political prisoners.

“The presence of politicians doesn’t horrify me — that’s their job. But the people’s presence gives this regime the power to carry out the criminal acts it has committed until now,” she told RFE/RL’s Radio Farda.

Others drew a direct line between their own suppressed mourning and the spectacle of Khamenei’s funeral, which the war delayed for months.

Soran Mansurnia’s brother, Borhan, was shot dead during the November 2019 protests in the western city of Kermanshah.

“The Islamic republic hasn’t just killed our loved one. It has always prevented us from mourning him publicly,” he told Radio Farda. “When I compare this funeral to my experience, I see nothing but discrimination.”

The funeral also appears, at least for a few days, to cover the broad discontent over the regime’s handling of the economy, which is in such tatters that it sparked the mass protests at the start of the year before they grew into a full-on antigovernment movement that rocked the country’s leadership.

The family of Mohammad Erfan Faraji, who was shot dead during protests in the capital, Tehran, in January, called Khamenei’s funeral “regime propaganda”.

His uncle, Majid Moqaddasi, said the families of victims of state violence have been unable to hold funerals of their own either due to financial constraints or government pressure.

“Watching these lavish ceremonies is very bitter,” he told Radio Farda.



Source link

1...192021...155Page 20 of 155