Connect with us

News

Israel-Iran Tensions Flare as Israel Launches Targeted Airstrikes, Iran Downplays Impact

Published

on

In the wake of Israel’s recent airstrikes against multiple Iranian military sites early Saturday, sources within Iran are dismissing the operation as ineffective. According to Israeli officials, the strikes successfully targeted around 20 Iranian military locations as part of a three-phase operation. Israeli sources indicate that the strikes came in response to recent attacks allegedly backed by Tehran, yet Iranian media and officials connected with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have portrayed Israel’s retaliation as exaggerated.

Iranian government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani provided limited details on the strikes, downplaying their effect as “limited” and assuring citizens that “the situation is normal.” Iran’s IRGC has further sought to control the narrative by issuing a public notice warning citizens against sharing images or information with foreign media under threat of severe punishment.

Despite these warnings, images and videos of the attacks circulated widely on social media, hinting at potential breaches in Iran’s information restrictions. The IRGC’s Organised Crime Investigation Centre reinforced these restrictions with a statement on Saturday warning of a 10-year prison sentence for individuals who provide visuals or information to foreign or opposition-affiliated media sources.

The attacks also follow diplomatic intervention by the United States, urging Israel to limit its response to conventional military targets. While Israel was reportedly considering more extensive attacks on critical infrastructure, including nuclear facilities and oil refineries, the U.S. discouraged actions that could lead to severe escalation. Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, have been under pressure from Washington to avoid a wider confrontation. The Biden administration has stated that it expects the airstrikes to conclude the recent exchange of hostilities.

For Israel, the strikes were a direct response to Tehran’s activities, while Iranian state media has painted them as merely a propaganda move by Israeli leaders, who, according to Tehran, are operating from secure bunkers out of concern for possible retaliatory strikes. Observers note that Israel’s strikes were restrained, focusing on missile storage and drone facilities, rather than on economic or nuclear sites, potentially to avoid provoking a more aggressive Iranian response. The New York Times reported that Iranian officials previously stated they would retaliate only if Israeli strikes inflicted severe damage.

The regional situation remains tense, with hardline factions within Iran pushing for a stronger response, even as the government signals restraint. With just days remaining before the U.S. presidential election, some analysts speculate that Iran may choose to avoid further escalation, aiming instead to project stability in sensitive areas like Lebanon and Gaza.

Both nations have complex domestic pressures, with factions within Iran’s leadership seeking confrontation, while other officials work to maintain stability amid mounting international scrutiny. Whether tensions will continue to simmer or ease following the recent strikes remains to be seen, as both Iran and Israel navigate their respective internal and international challenges.

News

Myanmar Struck by Aftershocks as Earthquake Death Toll Rises

Published

on

By

Myanmar continues to be rocked by aftershocks following the devastating 7.7-magnitude earthquake that struck on Friday, killing at least 1,644 people. The latest tremor, a 5.1-magnitude quake, hit near Mandalay on Sunday morning as rescue operations remained underway in the hardest-hit areas.

According to Myanmar’s ruling military junta, the earthquake has also left 2,376 people injured and 3,408 missing. While there were no immediate reports of further damage from Sunday’s aftershock, fears of continued tremors have kept thousands of people sleeping outdoors in Mandalay, Myanmar’s second-largest city.

Rescue Efforts Hindered by Damage and Conflict

Rescue operations remain challenging due to widespread destruction, damaged roads, and unreliable communication networks. The impact of the ongoing civil war has further complicated efforts, leaving civilians and local volunteers to handle much of the initial search and recovery work. Many affected areas remain inaccessible, and people have been digging through rubble by hand in scorching 41-degree Celsius heat.

“It’s mainly been local volunteers, local people who are just trying to find their loved ones,” said Cara Bragg, the Yangon-based manager of Catholic Relief Services in Myanmar. She added that while some countries are now sending search and rescue teams to Mandalay, hospitals are overwhelmed with the injured, and medical supplies are running low. Many survivors are also struggling to find food and clean water.

Mandalay, home to 1.5 million people, saw many buildings destroyed, including infrastructure such as bridges and the city’s airport. The disaster has left many residents homeless or too afraid to return to their homes due to the risk of further aftershocks.

Regional Impact and International Response

The earthquake’s effects were also felt in neighboring countries. In Thailand, at least 17 people were reported dead, with 83 still missing. The tremors even caused a tower to collapse in Bangkok. China also experienced the quake’s impact, though reports of casualties remain unclear.

Myanmar’s Shadow National Unity Government (NUG), which leads the resistance against the military junta, announced a partial ceasefire on Saturday to allow for rescue operations. The NUG’s armed wing, the People’s Defence Force (PDF), will suspend offensive military operations in the earthquake-affected areas starting Sunday.

While some international aid is beginning to reach Mandalay, the scale of the disaster has left many survivors in dire conditions. The coming days will be critical for search and rescue efforts, as well as for providing essential supplies to those left homeless by the quake.

Continue Reading

News

Federal Judge Blocks Trump Administration’s Effort to Dismantle Voice of America

Published

on

By

A federal judge has temporarily halted the Trump administration’s attempt to dismantle Voice of America (VOA), calling the move a “classic case of arbitrary and capricious decision-making.” The decision prevents the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees VOA, from firing more than 1,200 employees or shutting down its affiliated services.

Judge Blocks Mass Firings and Funding Cuts

Judge James Paul Oetken issued a restraining order blocking the USAGM from taking further action to terminate, furlough, or place employees on leave. The order also prevents the agency from cutting grant funding to other international broadcasters, including Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, and Radio Free Afghanistan.

The decision came after a coalition of VOA journalists, labor unions, and the nonprofit advocacy group Reporters Without Borders filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration. The plaintiffs argued that the administration’s efforts violated a legal precedent protecting VOA journalists from political interference.

Following the ruling, USAGM announced it was restoring funding to Radio Free Europe after another court in Washington, D.C., ordered it to do so.

White House Justifies Defunding VOA

The Trump administration has been critical of VOA, claiming it harbors a “leftist bias” and fails to project “pro-American” values. The White House labeled the broadcaster “The Voice of Radical America” and justified its defunding as an effort to prevent taxpayers from supporting what it called “radical propaganda.”

Citing coverage it deemed too favorable to former President Joe Biden, as well as reports on topics like white privilege, racial profiling, and transgender asylum seekers, the administration sought to slash funding for USAGM and six other federal agencies.

VOA, founded in 1942, is mandated by Congress to function as a non-partisan news organization, providing independent journalism to global audiences. Critics argue that the Trump administration’s actions threatened press freedom and democracy.

Judge Criticizes Administration’s “Sledgehammer” Approach

During a hearing in Manhattan, Judge Oetken condemned the administration for dismantling a long-established agency with “no consideration of the effects.” He also singled out USAGM special adviser Kari Lake for making sweeping changes “seemingly overnight” without a clear strategy.

“This is a decisive victory for press freedom and the First Amendment,” said Andrew G. Celli Jr., the plaintiffs’ attorney. He described the ruling as a strong rebuke to the Trump administration’s disregard for democratic principles.

The plaintiffs also warned that VOA’s absence from the airwaves could leave a vacuum that might be filled by propaganda from authoritarian regimes.

Congressional Funding and Future Implications

Congress has allocated nearly $860 million (€794 million) for USAGM in the current fiscal year, signaling bipartisan support for the agency’s mission. However, the future of VOA and its affiliated networks remains uncertain as legal battles continue.

With this court ruling, the Trump administration’s push to defund VOA faces a significant legal hurdle, but the broader debate over the role of government-funded international broadcasting is far from over.

Continue Reading

News

Russia Demands SWIFT Reconnection as Condition to Revive Black Sea Initiative

Published

on

By

Russia has set forth a key demand for the restoration of the Black Sea Initiative—reconnecting its Agricultural Bank, Rosselkhozbank, to the SWIFT financial system. This request, which falls under the jurisdiction of the European Union (EU), comes amid ongoing negotiations between global powers on the war in Ukraine.

Partial Ceasefire and Black Sea Security Agreement

Following recent talks in Saudi Arabia, the United States announced that Russia and Ukraine had agreed to a partial ceasefire specifically covering energy facilities. While this fell short of the broader ceasefire pushed by former President Donald Trump, the parties also agreed on measures to ensure the safe navigation of commercial vessels in the Black Sea and to prevent their use for military purposes.

However, the Kremlin quickly detailed additional conditions, demanding the lifting of sanctions on food exports, fertilizers, agricultural machinery, and cargo insurance. Most notably, Russia is insisting that Rosselkhozbank and other financial institutions involved in agricultural trade be reinstated on SWIFT, a global messaging system that facilitates secure financial transactions.

EU’s Role and Sanctions History

SWIFT, headquartered in Belgium, falls under EU regulations. In response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the EU removed several Russian banks from SWIFT in 2022, including Sberbank, Credit Bank of Moscow, and Rosselkhozbank. The exclusion was a significant blow to Russia’s financial system, as it restricted the country’s ability to conduct international transactions.

Rosselkhozbank, a state-owned institution, plays a critical role in facilitating payments for Russia’s agricultural exports, a major revenue source through the global sale of wheat, barley, and corn. While the EU has not directly sanctioned Russian agricultural exports, the banking restrictions have complicated payments for these transactions, leading to the collapse of the initial Black Sea Initiative brokered by Turkey and the United Nations.

Diplomatic Tensions and Uncertain Outcomes

The demand to reinstate Rosselkhozbank puts the EU in a difficult position. Granting this request could signal a willingness to make concessions, potentially encouraging Russia to seek further sanctions relief. However, refusing it could provoke tensions with the Trump administration, which is eager to secure a ceasefire.

President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has consistently opposed easing sanctions, arguing that they must remain in place until Russia ends its military aggression. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed this stance, stating that sanctions would only be lifted after Russia takes concrete steps toward peace.

As EU sanctions require unanimous renewal every six months, any member state could disrupt the process. Hungary, which has previously expressed opposition to sanctions, could leverage this situation to push for changes when restrictions are up for review on July 31.

Future of SWIFT and Global Financial Pressures

While the EU holds the power to reinstate Rosselkhozbank’s SWIFT access, the U.S. could signal leniency by ensuring that those engaging with the bank avoid legal repercussions. Analysts suggest that Russia’s demand may be a strategic move to test both Washington and Brussels, pressuring the EU to reconsider its stance on financial restrictions.

For now, the EU remains firm in its approach. France has indicated that sanctions should remain unless Russia agrees to a full ceasefire, reparations, and security guarantees for Ukraine. However, with negotiations ongoing and international pressure mounting, the debate over SWIFT and broader sanctions relief is unlikely to fade anytime soon.

Continue Reading

Trending