- China’s support for multilateralism is vital, says UN’s Guterres Reuters
- China supports UN’s global role, Xi tells Guterres before SCO summit Al Jazeera
- Chinese FM meets UN chief China Daily
- Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) Summit 2025 in Tianjin Colorado Springs Gazette
- China’s Xi calls for ‘restoring’ UN’s authority, vitality on 80th anniversary of world body Anadolu Ajansı
Category: 2. World
-
China's support for multilateralism is vital, says UN's Guterres – Reuters
-
What happens next after court rules them illegal?
Getty Images
A federal appeals court has ruled that most of Donald Trump’s tariffs are an overreach of his use of emergency powers as president.
The so-called reciprocal tariffs – imposed on nearly every country the US trades with – are being illegally imposed, the US Court of Appeals said on Friday.
The decision upholds a ruling in May from the Court of International Trade, which also rejected Trump’s argument that his global tariffs were permitted under an emergency economic powers act.
Many of the tariffs that would be affected by the ruling stem from an announcement in April of a flat 10% rate on imports from all countries, which Trump said would even out “unfair” trade relations with the US.
The court did not halt the tariffs but instead said they would remain in place until mid-October, setting up a further legal challenge in the US Supreme Court.
There are still a lot of unknowns, but here’s what we understand so far about the ruling – and what it could mean for the US president’s flagship policy.
What did the appeals court say?
In its 7-4 decision, the appellate court backed a lower court’s finding that Trump did not have the authority to impose global tariffs.
This was largely because of the law Trump used to justify the policies, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), which the judges said did not grant “the power to impose tariffs, duties, or the like, or the power to tax”.
The US Court of Appeals rejected Trump’s argument that the tariffs were permitted under his emergency economic powers, calling the levies “invalid as contrary to law”.
Trump immediately criticised the judgement, taking to Truth Social in the hours after it landed to call the appeals court “highly partisan” and the ruling a “disaster” for the country.
“If allowed to stand, this Decision would literally destroy the United States of America,” he wrote.
What is the IEEPA?
The decades-old act, which has repeatedly been deployed by Trump during both his terms in office, grants a US president significant authority to respond to a national emergency or a major threat from overseas.
The 1977 law states that a president can pull a number of economic levers “to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy or economy”.
It’s been used by both Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who invoked the act to impose sanctions on Russia after the illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014, and then again after the full-scale invasion of Ukraine eight years later.
But the appeals court stated in its decision that the emergency law “did not give the president wide-ranging authority to impose tariffs”.
The IEEPA “neither mentions tariffs (or any of its synonyms) nor has procedural safeguards that contain clear limits on the president’s power to impose tariffs”, they said.
Trump argued when he unveiled his global tariffs that a trade imbalance was harmful to US national security, and was therefore a national emergency.
But the court ruled that imposing tariffs is not within the president’s mandate, and “the power of the purse (including the power to tax) belongs to Congress”.
Why is this important?
Beyond being a significant setback to a centrepiece of Trump’s agenda, the federal appeals court ruling could have an immediate impact on the US economy, with knock-on effects felt in global markets.
Tariffs are taxes companies have to pay for importing certain goods from foreign countries – so they can have an affect on sales and profit margins.
“Businesses are going to be subject to uncertainty,” Dr Linda Yueh, an economist at Oxford University and the London Business School, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.
Tariffs are aimed at deterring domestic firms from buying foreign goods, in turn affecting international trade.
As countries wait to see if the US Supreme Court will take up the case – which seems likely – they could decide to hold off on conducting business with the US.
If this happens, Dr Yueh said, it could “dampen down economic activity”.
There are also significant ramifications that could be felt within the political sphere.
For instance, if the Supreme Court reverses the federal appeals court decision and sides with the Trump administration, it could set a precedent that emboldens the president to use the IEEPA more aggressively than he has done so far.
What happens next?
The case will now most likely proceed to the highest US court, a challenge that Trump signalled on Truth Social.
“Tariffs were allowed to be used against us by our uncaring and unwise Politicians,” Trump wrote. “Now, with the help of the United States Supreme Court, we will use them to the benefit of our Nation, and Make America Rich, Strong, and Powerful Again!”
The conservative majority on the US Supreme Court could potentially make it more likely to side with the president’s view.
Six of the nine justices were appointed by Republican presidents, including three who Trump selected during his first term in the White House.
But the court has also been more critical of presidents when it seems they’re overreaching on policies not directly authorised by Congress.
During Joe Biden’s presidency, for example, the court expanded on what it called the “major questions doctrine” to invalidate Democratic efforts to use existing laws to limit greenhouse gas emissions by power plants and to forgive student loan debt for millions of Americans.
What if the tariffs are ruled illegal?
The federal appeals court was divided 7-4 in its decision that Trump’s nearly universal tariffs are illegal. It has now given the US administration until mid-October to appeal to the US Supreme Court on a case with implications for both the US economy and its trade relationship with the rest of the world.
If the Supreme Court affirms the decision, it could trigger uncertainty in financial markets.
There will be questions over whether the US will have to pay back billions of dollars that have been gathered by import taxes on products.
It could also throw into question whether major economies – including the UK, Japan and South Korea – are locked into the individual trade deals they secured with the US ahead of the August deadline. Other trade deals currently being negotiated could also be thrown into chaos.
If allowed to stand, the appeals court decision would also be a tremendous blow to Trump’s political authority and reputation as a dealmaker. But if it were overturned by the Supreme Court, it would have the opposite effect.
Are there still tariffs in place?
This ruling affects Trump’s “reciprocal tariffs”, which includes a patchwork of different rates on most countries around the world, including taxes slapped on products from China, Mexico and Canada.
Those levies on nearly all goods from nearly every country with which the US conducts trade will remain in place until mid-October.
After 14 October, they will no longer be enforceable, the appeals court has said.
Separately, the tariffs on steel, aluminium and copper, which were brought in under a different presidential authority, will remain intact and unaffected by the court’s ruling.
Continue Reading
-
US approves $150m Starlink, $179m Patriot defence sale to Ukraine – World
The US State Department has approved the potential sale of Starlink services and related equipment and Patriot air defence sustainment and related equipment to Ukraine, the Pentagon said on Friday.
The transactions are worth $150 million and $179 million, respectively.
On Thursday, the Pentagon announced US approval for the sale of air-launched cruise missiles and related equipment to Ukraine for an estimated $825 million.
The Trump administration has agreed with European allies to step up military support for Kyiv as US President Donald Trump seeks to pressure Russia into agreeing to a peace deal to end its war in Ukraine.
Under the agreement, European governments will pay for US weapons on Ukraine’s behalf.
Starlink has been integral to Ukraine’s communications on the battlefield, including its control of drones, the backbone of its military’s strikes on Russian forces.
The Patriot systems have proven effective at destroying Russian ballistic missiles aimed at Ukraine’s cities.
Despite approval by the State Department, the notifications do not indicate that contracts have been signed or that negotiations have concluded.
Continue Reading
-
Yemen’s Houthis say Israeli airstrike killed prime minister of rebel-controlled government
An Israeli airstrike killed the prime minister of Yemen’s rebel-controlled government, the Iran-backed Houthi militant group said Saturday.
Ahmed al-Rawahi was killed Thursday alongside other ministers during a strike on the Yemeni capital, Sanaa, the rebels said in a statement.
“We declare the martyrdom of the fighter Ahmed Ghalib Al-Rahawi, Prime Minister in the Government of Change and Construction, along with a number of his fellow ministers,” it said.
Al-Rahawi, who had served as prime minister to the Houthi-led government since 2024, was killed during a government workshop evaluating “its activities and performance during a year of its work,” the statement added.
Following his death, Houthi President Mahdi Al-Mashat appointed Mohammed Ahmed Ahmed Muftah, the first deputy prime minister, to serve as acting prime minister.
The Israeli military said Thursday it “precisely struck a Houthi terrorist regime military target in the area of Sanaa in Yemen.”
The Houthis have repeatedly fired missiles at Israel during its war with Hamas, framing their attacks on Israel and Red Sea shipping as part of an allied defense of Palestinians in Gaza.
In response to Houthi attacks, Israel has bombarded rebel-held areas in Yemen.
Continue Reading
-
US Denies Visas to Abbas, Palestinian Officials for UN Meeting
The Trump administration said it will deny visas to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and 80 other Palestinian officials in a move that will likely make it impossible for them to attend next month’s meeting of the UN General Assembly.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the authority and the Palestinian Liberation Organization “must consistently repudiate terrorism — including the October 7 massacre.” He also said Palestinian leaders must stop efforts “to secure the unilateral recognition of a conjectural Palestinian state.”
Continue Reading
-
Israel targeted top Iranian leaders by hacking, tracing their bodyguards’ phones — report – The Times of Israel
- Israel targeted top Iranian leaders by hacking, tracing their bodyguards’ phones — report The Times of Israel
- Targeting Iran’s Leaders, Israel Found a Weak Link: Their Bodyguards The New York Times
- Israeli Hack of Iranian Bodyguards’ Phones Led to Strike on Tehran Bunker – NYT The Media Line
- Israel tracked top Iranian officials by hacking bodyguards’ phones – NYT | Iran International ایران اینترنشنال
- Israel’s ‘decapitation team’ targeted Iran’s top leadership through their bodyguards The Telegraph
Continue Reading
-
Iran says eight arrested for suspected links to Israel’s Mossad spy agency
Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said on Saturday they had arrested eight people suspected of trying to transmit the coordinates of sensitive sites and details about senior military figures to Israel’s Mossad, Iranian state media reported.
They are accused of having provided the information to the Mossad spy agency during Israel’s air war on Iran in June, when it attacked Iranian nuclear facilities and killed top military commanders as well as civilians in the worst blow to the Islamic Republic since the 1980s war with Iraq.
Iran retaliated with barrages of missiles on Israeli military sites, infrastructure and cities. The United States entered the war on June 22 with strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.
A Guards statement alleged that the suspects had received specialized training from Mossad via online platforms. It said they were apprehended in northeastern Iran before carrying out their plans, and that materials for making launchers, bombs, explosives and booby traps had been seized.
State media reported earlier this month that Iranian police had arrested as many as 21,000 “suspects” during the 12-day war with Israel, though they did not say what these people had been suspected of doing.
Security forces conducted a campaign of widespread arrests and also stepped up their street presence during the brief war that ended in a U.S.-brokered ceasefire.
Iran has executed at least eight people in recent months, including nuclear scientist Rouzbeh Vadi, hanged on August 9 for passing information to Israel about another scientist killed in Israeli airstrikes.
Human rights groups say Iran uses espionage charges and fast-tracked executions as tools for broader political repression.
Continue Reading
-
Iran arrests 8 suspected of spying for Israel’s Mossad – samaa tv
- Iran arrests 8 suspected of spying for Israel’s Mossad samaa tv
- Iran arrests eight suspected of spying for Israel’s Mossad in 12-day war Al Jazeera
- Iran says eight arrested for suspected links to Israel’s Mossad spy agency Reuters
- Iran’s Revolutionary Guard: We dismantled a cell linked to Mossad that planned to target civilian and military officials وكالة صدى نيوز
- Spy Versus Spy: Iran’s Playbook for Espionage in Israel The Washington Institute
Continue Reading
-
Palestinian president’s office urges US to reinstate his visa ahead of key UN meetings
Are Israel’s internal probes into Gaza war crimes just a smokescreen of accountability?
LONDON: As international concern has grown over alleged Israeli war crimes in the occupied Palestinian territories since October 2023, Israel has repeatedly pledged to investigate and hold perpetrators to account. But what, if anything, have those investigations achieved?
The latest incident to spark global outrage occurred on Aug. 25, when Israel struck Al-Nasser Hospital, Gaza’s main medical facility in the south. At least 20 people were killed, including rescuers, critically ill patients, medical staff, and five journalists, and 50 others were injured, according to the World Health Organization.
A livestream by Al Ghad TV captured a second airstrike hitting a crowd outside the hospital, where victims, rescuers, and journalists had gathered. Medical staff told the BBC that the same spot had already been struck just ten minutes earlier.
Rights groups and world leaders condemned the twin strike and called for immediate investigations.
The Foreign Press Association in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories described the attack as a “turning point,” urging Israel to “halt its abhorrent practice of targeting journalists.”
For its part, the Committee to Protect Journalists warned that the killing of the five journalists, including staff for The Associated Press, Al Jazeera, and Reuters, could constitute a war crime.
“Journalists are civilians. They must never be targeted in war. And to do so is a war crime,” Jodie Ginsberg, CPJ’s chief executive, said in a statement.
As on many previous occasions when accused of potential war crimes, Israel quickly promised to investigate. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the double attack on Al-Nasser was a “tragic mishap,” which his country “deeply regrets.”
He added that the military authorities were “conducting a thorough investigation.”
But the next day, the UN pressed Israel to go beyond pledges and deliver results.
“There needs to be justice,” UN Human Rights Office spokesman Thameen Al-Kheetan told AFP in Geneva, stressing that the large number of journalists killed in the Gaza war “raises many, many questions.”
He added that while Israel has previously announced inquiries into such killings, “we haven’t seen results or accountability measures yet.”
Hours later, Israel released an “initial inquiry,” saying its troops had “identified a camera that was positioned by Hamas in the area of Al-Nasser Hospital.”
They claimed the camera was “being used to observe the activity of Israeli Defense Forces troops,” and so they “operated to remove the threat by striking and dismantling the camera.”
When Israel does not launch inquiries, it resorts to outright denials. Despite arguing its forces do not target journalists, its officials’ own public remarks contradict this.
Earlier this month, following the killing of Al Jazeera journalist Anas Al-Sharif and four colleagues outside Al-Shifa Hospital, Israeli officials claimed without evidence that Al-Sharif was part of a Hamas cell.
IN NUMBERS
• 88% Israeli probes into Gaza abuses stalled or closed without findings.
• 6 War-crime cases ended with admission of error out of 52.
• 7 Closed with findings of no violation.
• 39 Remain “under review” or lack reported outcomes.
(Source: Action on Armed Violence)
Critics say Israel’s self-investigation into high-profile allegations of wrongdoing follows a familiar pattern. Research published in early August by UK-based charity Action on Armed Violence found the IDF’s system of probes riddled with impunity.
AOAV’s research highlighted that of 52 high-profile investigations into suspected war crimes in Gaza and the occupied West Bank since October 2023, 88 percent remain “under review” or were closed with no findings. Only one resulted in a prison sentence.
Those cases involved more than 1,300 deaths, 1,880 injuries, and two cases of torture. Only three incidents led to dismissals or reprimands.
Critics warn that Israel’s system of self-investigation enables continued abuses and hollow claims to democratic rule of law. But can this “political theater,” as AOAV put it, withstand growing international scrutiny?
“We’ve basically had years, if not decades, of established fact that this is the trend for the Israeli military and security forces in general — the pattern of systematic impunity has been very evident,” said Amjad Iraqi, senior Israel-Palestine analyst at the International Crisis Group.
“Both Palestinian and Israeli organizations have documented this for ages, so this latest study is only (re)affirming what has been a longstanding pattern,” Iraqi told Arab News. “What this means is that the knowledge is there; the evidence is there.”
What is missing, Iraqi said, is political will abroad. “With such a highly documented war — (marked by) countless suspected war crimes and possible crimes against humanity — there is very little wiggle room,” he added, referring to the onslaught on Gaza.
“There is an abundance of facts and evidence, and Israeli authorities cannot escape them.”
Since Oct. 7, 2023, when the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel triggered the war in Gaza, the UN Human Rights Council, the Commission of Inquiry, and the International Criminal Court have all accused Israel of crimes ranging from indiscriminate attacks on civilians to deliberate starvation and torture — allegations Israel has denied.
On Aug. 22, the UN-backed Integrated Food Security Phase Classification confirmed famine in Gaza City and surrounding areas, with more than half a million people — a quarter of the population — across the enclave facing “catastrophic” levels of hunger. The report described the crisis as “entirely man-made.”
Israel dismissed the findings as an “outright lie” and went as far as to accuse the IPC of using unreliable data controlled by Hamas. But bodies including Medecins Sans Frontieres have also been collecting their own data on acute malnutrition.
In addition, aid agencies have long accused Israel of obstructing food deliveries and even “weaponizing aid.” The UN reported that between late May and late June, at least 1,373 Gazans were killed while seeking food at aid distribution sites run by the US- and Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.
Israel consistently responds to criticism about its internal investigations by asserting that its inquiries are prompt, independent, and in line with both Israeli and international law, and that they demonstrate the country’s commitment to accountability.
In official statements given to AOAV, the IDF emphasized the existence of a permanent independent fact-finding mechanism, which it claims operates “outside the chain of command” and is “subordinate to the Chief of Staff,” with “professional independence.”
The IDF states that “exceptional incidents” are reviewed to clarify circumstances and, where there is “a prima facie reasonable suspicion of a criminal offense,” a criminal investigation is opened and run by Military Police.
Israeli officials claim that international courts like the ICC have no jurisdiction precisely because Israel’s domestic mechanism is “robust and credible,” referencing the international law principle of complementarity.
Despite Israel’s denials, international scrutiny continues to mount. Iraqi noted that “even as the Israeli military carries out these policies and practices, its leaders have openly expressed concern.”
“Much of what has happened over the past two years has crossed multiple lines under international law,” he said. “And generals themselves have acknowledged fears of greater exposure to international prosecution.
“The fact that governments are speaking more openly, and that lawsuits invoking universal jurisdiction are being filed against senior commanders and generals, has begun to worry the Israeli military.”
Indeed, Canada’s federal police opened a “structural investigation” in June into alleged crimes in Gaza. The Times of Israel reported that several Canadian citizens who served in the IDF now fear returning home where they could face prosecution.
Iraqi said that IDF personnel “have been accustomed to impunity, relying on the facade of complementarity to shield themselves from outside accountability.”
“But as the ICC arrest warrants and the findings of many governments show, the facade is widely recognized,” he added, reiterating that the question is “whether they will ultimately act on it.”
On Nov. 21 last year, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his former defense minister, Yoav Gallant, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza since Oct. 2023.
Though no ICC member state has acted to detain them, Netanyahu has avoided travel to countries bound by the Rome Statute. But when he visited Hungary in April, its leadership welcomed him and said it would leave the ICC because it has become “political.”
And while many governments around the world have condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza, they have stopped short of action.
For example, a joint statement by the UK, Australia, Germany, Italy, France, Canada, Austria, Norway, and New Zealand criticized Israel’s latest Gaza offensive, warning that it will “aggravate the catastrophic humanitarian situation… endanger the lives of hostages,” and “risk violating international humanitarian law.”
Iraqi stressed that “change is urgently needed because real consequences abroad could begin to shift political and military behavior.”
“It comes down to international actors calling the bluff of internal Israeli investigations, which rarely lead to anything substantial, and pressing for genuine accountability to curb Israeli policies and practices,” he said.
“It may not be immediate, and the legal process will always take time. But the psychological effect is already significant, as it could influence behavior and help curb some of the worst excesses, especially at this moment.”
Continue Reading
-
West Asia is lurching toward war
Billboard of pictures of nuclear scientists and centrifuges captioned ‘Science is the power’, Enqelab square, Tehran, August 29, 2025
There is extremely alarming news about the situation around Iran. In consultations with the Trump administration — rather, in deference to the command from Washington — the E3 countries (Britain, France and Germany) who are the remaining western signatories of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal known as JCPOA, have initiated the process of triggering the so-called snapback mechanism with the aim to reimpose all UN sanctions against Iran on the plea that it has breached the terms of the ten-year old agreement.
A joint statement issued in the three European capitals on Thursday notified the UN Security Council that Tehran is “in significant non-performance of its commitments under the JCPoA” to give a 30-day notice “before the possible reestablishment of previously terminated United Nations Security Council resolutions.”
The E3 statement is patently an act of sophistry since it was the US which unilaterally abandoned the JCOPA in 2018 and the three European powers themselves have been remiss in ignoring their own commitments to lift the sanctions against Iran through the past 15-year period, which only had ultimately prompted Tehran to resume the uranium enrichment activity — although the Iranian side was ready to reinstate the JCOPA as recently as in December 2022.
A strange part of the E3 move is that they short-circuited the prescribed procedure in regard of the snapback mechanism with the intent to reduce the two other permanent member countries of the Security Council to be mere bystanders with no role whatsoever in the matter. Unsurprisingly, Russia and China have taken exception to this and in a lengthy statement on Friday, the Russian Foreign Ministry has demanded (with China’s backing) an extension of the time line by another six months by the Security Council as an interim measure so as to avoid a standoff with dangerous and tragic consequences.
Tehran has welcomed the Russia-China proposal as a “practical step.” Iran, of course, has explicitly warned that any such attempt by the E3 to reimpose the UN sanctions against it may compel it to reconsider its membership of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
It remains to be seen whether the E3 — or more precisely, the US-Israeli nexus which is the driving force behind the precipitate move — will be amenable to a compromise. All indications are that Israel with the full support of the Trump administration is spoiling for a fight with Iran and make a second attempt to force regime change in Tehran and the restoration of the erstwhile Pahlavi dynasty to replace the Islamic system that got established after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Simply put, it is a make-or-break attempt by the US and Israel to bring about a geopolitical realignment in the West Asian region.
The US and Israel have drawn lessons out of the miserable failure of their first attempt in June to overthrow the Islamic system in Iran, and Israel suffered huge losses as Iran retaliated. This time around, the US and Israel seem to be preparing for a fight to the finish, although the outcome remains to be seen. Indeed, a protracted war may ensue. The US is rearming Israel with advanced weaponry. At some point, early enough in the war, a direct American intervention in some form can also be expected.
Unlike in June when the Trump administration in an elaborate ploy of deception lulled Tehran into a state of complacency when the Israeli attack began, this time around, Iran is on guard and has been strengthening its defenses. Make no mistake, Iran will fight back no matter what is takes. Iran is also getting help from Russia for beefing up its air defence system and there are reports that Russian advisors are helping Iran’s armed forces to augment their capability to resist the US-Israeli aggression.
Many western experts, including Alastair Crooke, have predicted that an Israeli attack on Iran can be expected sooner rather than later. The Israeli-American expectation could be that Russia’s military operations in Ukraine will have reached a climactic point by autumn which would almost certainly preclude any scope for Moscow to get involved in a West Asian conflict, and that, in turn, will give them a free hand to take the regime change agenda to its finish.
Besides, in a policy reversal, Iran has taken up the standing Russian offer to provide an integrated air defence system. Such a system will possibly be in position by the middle of next year or so and it is expected to be a force multiplier for Iran. Israel will most certainly try to attack Iran before the integrated system which is connected to Russian satellites becomes fully operational. It remains to be seen whether the Trump administration will be able to withstand Israeli pressure, given the Mossad’s alleged involvement in the Epstein scandal.
A West Asian war of titanic scale will be unprecedented. Apart from large scale loss of lives and destruction, the regional turmoil that ensues will also affect the surrounding regions — India in particular. The point is, an estimated 6 million Indians live in the Gulf region. Their safety and welfare will be in serious jeopardy if the Gulf states get sucked in to the war at some point.
The probability is high that Iran’s retaliation this time around may involve the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz through which tankers carry approximately 17 million barrels of oil each day, or 20 to 30 percent of the world’s total consumption. If that happens, oil price will sky rocket and India’s energy security, which is heavily dependent on oil imports, will be affected. India’s main sources of oil supplies are Russia (18-20%), Saudi Arabia (16-18%), UAE (8-10%) and the US (6-7%).
Clearly, if the oil supplies from the Gulf region get disrupted, India’s dependence on oil flows from Russia will only increase further. In fact, there will be a scramble for Russian oil and, paradoxically, Trump’s best-laid plans to hollow out “Putin’s war chest” will remain a pipe dream.
Significantly, according to Israel’s Kanal 13, Russia has evacuated its diplomatic personnel and their families in its embassy in Tel Aviv in anticipation of a “dramatic” change in the security situation and growing signs of an outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Iran.
Related
Continue Reading