Category: 2. World

The International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC) strongly condemns the recent attack by groups outside the UGTT headquarters, which included open calls for the union’s dissolution . This alarming incident represents an unprecedented deterioration in the climate for freedoms and democracy in Tunisia.

This is not an isolated event but part of a continuing pattern of violations against UGTT members over the past three years, including judicial prosecutions, arbitrary transfers, the suspension of collective bargaining, the refusal of social dialogue, and the unilateral amendment of labour laws.

Luc Triangle, General Secretary of the ITUC, said: “The UGTT has always stood at the heart of Tunisia’s democratic and social achievements. Any attempt to weaken or silence it is an attack not only on workers but on democracy itself. The ITUC stands in full solidarity with the UGTT and will mobilise our global movement to ensure that trade union freedoms in Tunisia are defended and respected. We call on the Tunisian government to immediately put an end to these attacks and to return to genuine social dialogue.”

The ITUC stresses that trade union freedoms are a cornerstone of democracy. Any attempt to weaken or silence the UGTT is a direct attack on Tunisia’s democratic experience itself, which has long been a beacon of hope for people across the region. Defending the UGTT means defending independent civil society and safeguarding Tunisia’s democratic path.

Despite these pressures, the ITUC salutes the courage and determination of UGTT members and leaders, who have responded with resilience and responsibility, remaining committed to peaceful struggle and respect for constitutional legitimacy. Their call for a national trade union march on 21 August is a powerful message of unity against attempts at domination and exclusion.

This march is not only a national act of protest but also a global trade union call for democracy and freedom of association. It reflects the wider struggle against authoritarianism, populism, and the global rollback of democratic and trade union rights.

Accordingly, the ITUC:

• Holds the Tunisian government fully responsible for undermining trade union freedoms and threatening the foundations of democracy.
• Demands an immediate return to genuine social dialogue as the only path to stability and the preservation of Tunisia’s democratic transition.
• Reminds Tunisia of its international obligations under ILO conventions guaranteeing freedom of association and the right to collective bargaining.
• Calls on all member organisations worldwide to intensify solidarity actions—political, media, and grassroots—with the UGTT in every national and international forum.

An attack on the UGTT is an attack on the global trade union movement and on democracy itself. We remain united and determined in the face of any attempt to silence the voice of workers.

EPA

Diplomatic risks

PA Media

Negotiation preparations

The eldest son of Norway’s crown princess has been charged with 32 offences, including four counts of rape, a prosecutor says.

The charges against Marius Borg Høiby, 28, include the abuse of a former partner and violations of restraining orders against another former partner.

He was born from a relationship before Crown Princess Mette-Marit married Crown Prince Haakon, who is the future king of Norway.

Mr Høiby denies the most serious accusations against him, but plans to plead guilty to some lesser charges when the trial starts, his lawyer Petar Sekulic told Reuters news agency.

He could face up to 10 years in prison if found guilty of the most serious charges.

He has also been charged with filming the genitals of a number of women without their knowledge or consent, prosecutor Sturla Henriksbø told reporters.

“He does not agree with the claims regarding rape and domestic violence,” Mr Sekulic said of his client, according to Reuters.

Speaking about the charges against his stepson, Norwegian Crown Prince Haakon on Tuesday said it was up to the courts what would happen, adding that everyone involved in the case “probably finds it challenging and difficult”, Norwegian public broadcaster NRK reported.

The four alleged rapes are said to have occurred between 2018 and 2024, with one of them allegedly taking place after his arrest, according to NRK.

Mr Høiby, who does not have a royal title or official duties, was arrested three separate times last year, in August, September and November. He had been under investigation since his August arrest on suspicion of assault. In June, police said he was suspected of three rapes and 23 other offences.

The prosecutor said the trial could take place in January and last some six weeks.

If you have been a victim of sexual abuse or violence, details of help and support are available at bbc.co.uk/actionline, or you can call for free, at any time to hear recorded information on 0800 077 077.

Press Release
Four Years of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan: Governance, Domestic Trajectories, and International Engagement”
August 19, 2025

The Centre for Afghanistan Middle East and Africa (CAMEA) at the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI) hosted a webinar, titled “Four Years of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan: Governance, Domestic Trajectories, and International Engagement”. The webinar was moderated by Ms. Amina Khan, Director CAMEA. Speakers included Ambassador Khalid Mahmood, Chairman BoG, ISSI; Sardar Ahmad Shakeeb, Ambassador of Afghanistan to Pakistan; Ambassador Mansoor Ahmad Khan, Pakistan’s Former Ambassador to Afghanistan; Adam Weinstein, Deputy Director of the Middle East Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, Washington D.C., and  Flavius Caba Maria, President and Director of the Political Department, Middle East Political and Economic Institute (MEPEI), Romania.

Ambassador Khalid Mahmood, in his opening remarks said that four years after the Taliban’s return, Afghanistan has witnessed consolidation of rule and expanded external engagement, including symbolic recognition from Russia. He noted, however, that broader recognition remains withheld over concerns of human rights, inclusivity, and terrorism. Domestically, he observed that while the Taliban have maintained authority, the presence of groups like ISKP, Al-Qaida, and TTP remains troubling. On Pakistan-Afghanistan ties, he highlighted both challenges such as cross-border attacks and positive steps including ambassador-level appointments and revival of the Joint Coordination Committee. He concluded that despite difficulties, renewed diplomatic engagement shows a pragmatic recognition of the need for cooperation and regional connectivity.

Ms. Amina Khan, Director CAMEA at ISSI, said that August 15, 2025, marked four years since the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA) assumed power as the de facto authority in Afghanistan. She noted that while the IEA has brought stability, curbed corruption, banned poppy cultivation, and expanded diplomatic outreach, these gains have been overshadowed by its failure to honor reform pledges under the Doha Agreement, particularly on human and women’s rights, inclusivity, and counter-terrorism. She concluded that the group’s performance remains transitional and marked by persistent shortcomings.

Ambassador Shakeeb said that Afghanistan stands at the threshold of a new chapter under the Islamic Emirate. He noted that over the past four years, nationwide security has been ensured, narcotics cultivation eradicated, and a justice system established across all provinces. He highlighted Afghanistan’s move toward economic self-reliance and major projects in agriculture, energy, and infrastructure, alongside social programs for orphans, widows, and persons with disabilities. On foreign relations, he emphasized Afghanistan’s balanced diplomacy, citing engagement with over 100 countries and Russia’s recognition as a milestone in its international integration.

Ambassador Mansoor Khan  said that four years on, the Taliban have brought stability and consolidated control, yet sanctions, lack of recognition, and failure to ensure women’s rights, girls’ education, and counter-terrorism remain major concerns. He noted divisions between hardliners and moderates, stressing that Afghanistan faces a choice between reforms leading to integration or isolation if shortcomings persist. On Pakistan-Afghanistan ties, he emphasized that terrorism remains a hurdle to economic cooperation and that constitutional reforms reflecting the aspirations of the Afghan people are essential.

Adam Weinstein said that while the U.S. remains the largest donor, providing part of nearly $10 billion in aid since 2021, Afghanistan has become a low priority for Washington under the Trump administration. He noted that the Taliban and Afghan people have shown resilience to aid cuts, but stressed that the Taliban must meet the international community halfway by choosing reforms and regional integration over isolation. He described U.S. policy as ad hoc and impulsive, and added that the Doha process has become piecemeal and largely dead.

Dr. Flavius Caba-Maria said that four years after the Taliban’s return, Afghanistan remains largely isolated internationally despite expanded regional engagement and recognition from Russia. He noted that while security has improved and drug flows curbed, the humanitarian situation is dire and refugees continue to be returned. On the EU’s policy, he stated that although Europe remains focused on Ukraine, it continues coordination on aid and refugees without extending recognition. He added that some EU states are considering greater engagement, but the Union must adopt a more pragmatic approach aligned with realities on the ground.

In his concluding remarks, Ambassador Khalid Mahmood said that Afghanistan stands at an important juncture. He noted that while challenges remain, the Taliban’s regional and international engagement reflects recognition of the need for cooperation. He emphasized that inclusive policies and responsiveness to international concerns are essential for Afghanistan’s stability, development, and integration into the global community.

 

European leaders are holding fresh talks after their White House meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy amid uncertainty over Vladimir Putin’s readiness to meet the Ukrainian president.

The so-called “coalition of the willing” will first meet virtually, co-chaired by Keir Starmer and Emmanuel Macron, before joining a video conference hosted by the European Council president, António Costa.

Europe’s flurry of diplomacy, after an unprecedented joint visit alongside Zelenskyy to the White House, is aimed at pushing Donald Trump to take a tougher line with Putin, days after their friendly summit in Alaska.

Trump, along with several European leaders in Washington on Monday, said Putin had agreed to face-to-face talks with Zelenskyy in the coming weeks in an attempt to end the three-and-a-half-year war in Ukraine.

Macron on Tuesday proposed Geneva as a venue for the meeting, and a senior US official told Reuters that Hungary was also being considered. Moscow, however, has yet to confirm that any such meeting – which would be the first between the two leaders since the invasion – is in the works.

The Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov has said only that Putin and Trump discussed the idea of “raising the level of representatives” in Ukraine talks. In remarks late on Monday, Ushakov did not clarify what that would entail and made no mention of a possible trilateral meeting with Trump and Zelenskyy.

On Tuesday the Russian foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, told state TV that any meeting between the Russian and Ukrainian presidents would have to be prepared “very thoroughly”.

At the heart of Tuesday’s talks among European allies is the question of what security guarantees can be offered to Ukraine. On Monday, Zelenskyy described security guarantees as “a key issue, a starting point towards ending the war” and he appreciated Trump’s indication that the US was ready to be part of that guarantee.

Zelenskyy said those guarantees would be “formalised in some way in the next week or 10 days”, which could prove to be a long time when it comes to diplomacy involving Trump’s White House.

In a social media post late on Monday, Trump said the White House talks included plans for European countries to provide security assurances to Ukraine with the US acting as “coordinator”.

Britain and several European allies have floated the idea of a “reassurance force” that could be sent to Ukraine under a future peace deal to deter renewed Russian aggression. Their plans would need firm US backing and Trump has been resistant to deploying US troops as guarantors of any settlement.

Moscow issued a statement on Monday evening rejecting any prospect of Nato personnel being deployed in Ukraine. “We reaffirm our categorical opposition to any scenarios involving the stationing of a Nato contingent in Ukraine,” Russia’s foreign ministry said.

Other proposals for security guarantees include western allies offering Ukraine article 5-style protection, similar to Nato’s collective defence pledge that treats an attack on one member as an attack on all.

In a statement after Monday’s White House meeting, Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, said that while Ukraine would not be joining Nato, western allies would commit to “a collective security clause that would allow Ukraine to benefit from the support of all its partners, including the United States, ready to take action if it is attacked again.”

Zelenskyy has made clear that Ukraine would reject any deal limiting the size of its armed forces, insisting that “a strong Ukrainian army” must be part of the country’s security guarantees. These proposals run counter to the conditions Putin has previously outlined as acceptable for ending the war.

While western leaders adopted an upbeat, congratulatory tone toward Trump at the White House, the gulf between Russia’s demands and Ukraine’s willingness to concede remains vast. There remains widespread confusion over what exactly Trump proposed and what, if anything, Putin agreed to during the Alaska summit. Some fear Trump may have overstated the outcome and misjudged Moscow’s willingness to compromise.

Monday’s White House meeting shed little light on Putin’s territorial terms. The Russian leader has demanded Ukraine’s withdrawal from Donetsk and Luhansk, but Zelenskyy has set a firm red line against ceding land beyond the present occupation or legitimising Moscow’s control.

Some observers say that for all the diplomatic manoeuvring, there has been little real movement towards ending the war. “Nothing had happened in Anchorage on Aug. 15th. Nothing happened yesterday in Washington DC,” Gérard Araud, the former French ambassador to the US, wrote on X. “Putin, Zelenskyy and the European leaders were all relieved: they had avoided Trump taking unwelcome decisions. It was the triumph of empty vagueness and meaningless commitments.”

For Volodymyr Zelenskyy, a whirlwind day in Washington ended with something close to relief. After hours of talks with Donald Trump and a parade of European leaders, NATO chief Mark Rutte declared a “breakthrough”: Trump was willing to consider security guarantees for Ukraine. On the global stage, that alone marks a reset — between the US and Ukraine, between Zelenskyy and Trump, and between Washington and its transatlantic allies. Inside Trump world, though, the reaction is more complicated.

The Oval Office mood shift

February’s disastrous Trump–Zelenskyy encounter is now being described as ancient history. This time, the optics were warmer: Trump praised Zelenskyy’s suit, Vice President JD Vance found easy chemistry with the Ukrainian leader, and officials described the atmosphere as “terrific” and “really productive.” For Zelenskyy, it was the reset he had been pressing for all year.

Europe’s crowded table

Trump’s team went into the meetings wanting to show Europe who was in charge. By their own account, they largely succeeded. “Like a happy family,” one official said of the two-hour huddle, even if seven heads of state meant inevitable jostling. The Europeans, once dismissed as tedious, were unexpectedly constructive. And, officials noted, the earlier Trump–Putin talks in Alaska created just enough space for Monday’s pledges on security guarantees.

The security guarantee puzzle

Trump committed the US to being part of a security framework for Ukraine, but nothing beyond that. Who pays? Who provides troops? Would American peacekeepers be on the table? Insiders admit all this remains undecided, with one official suggesting Trump could accept a temporary US role “if it was the final piece of the puzzle.” That ambiguity has unsettled his base.

Bannon’s warning shot

As Zelenskyy met Trump, Steve Bannon was on his “War Room” podcast warning MAGA against entanglement. An Article 5–style commitment to Ukraine, he argued, would tether America to a European conflict indefinitely. Later, he told POLITICO that Trump had already done enough: “If we don’t fund this, it stops happening. The Europeans don’t have the hardware or the money.” Bannon’s message was clear — security guarantees are a red line for the populist right.

Testing the MAGA bench

Trump’s Truth Social post naming JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and Trump confidant Steve Witkoff as coordinators with Russia and Ukraine raised eyebrows. It was the first time the vice president and secretary of state had been paired on a high-stakes foreign policy file. Inside Trump world, the question is who gets credit if it works — and who takes the fall if it doesn’t. For Europe, the day was a breakthrough. For Zelenskyy, it was vindication. For Trump world, it opened a fault line: a presidency that thrives on avoiding foreign entanglements may be edging toward one — with MAGA’s loudest voices already pushing back.