șÚÁÏÉçÇű

India and Pakistan ceasefire shaken by overnight border fighting in disputed Kashmir region

India and Pakistan ceasefire shaken by overnight border fighting in disputed Kashmir region
People walk through the market near a bus station in the main town of Poonch district in Jammu region on May 11, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 11 May 2025

India and Pakistan ceasefire shaken by overnight border fighting in disputed Kashmir region

India and Pakistan ceasefire shaken by overnight border fighting in disputed Kashmir region
  • Residents and officials in the disputed Kashmir region say there was overnight border fighting between Pakistani and Indian troops
  • As part of the ceasefire, agreed a day earlier, the nuclear-armed neighbors agreed to immediately stop all firing and military action on land, in the air and at sea
  • They accused each other of repeatedly violating the deal hours later

ISLAMABAD: A ceasefire to end the conflict between India and Pakistan was shaken by overnight border fighting in the disputed Kashmir region.
People on both sides of the Line of Control, which divides the territory, reported heavy exchanges of fire between Indian and Pakistani troops. The fighting subsided by Sunday morning.
The two countries agreed to a truce a day earlier after talks to defuse the most serious military confrontation between them in decades following a gun massacre of tourists that India blames on Pakistan, which denies the charge.
As part of the ceasefire, the nuclear-armed neighbors agreed to immediately stop all firing and military action on land, in the air and at sea. They accused each other of repeatedly violating the deal just hours later.
Drones were spotted Saturday night over Indian-controlled Kashmir and the western state of Gujarat according to Indian officials.
In the Poonch area of Indian-controlled Kashmir, people said the intense shelling from the past few days had traumatized them.
“Most people ran as shells were being fired,” said college student Sosan Zehra who returned home Sunday. “It was completely chaotic.”
In Pakistan-controlled Kashmir’s Neelum Valley, which is three kilometers from the Line of Control, people said there were exchanges of fire and heavy shelling after the ceasefire began.
Resident Mohammad Zahid said: “We were happy about the announcement but, once again, the situation feels uncertain.”
US President Donald Trump was the first to post about the deal, announcing it on his Truth Social platform. Indian and Pakistani officials confirmed the news shortly after.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi chaired a high-level meeting on Sunday with top government and military officials.
India, unlike Pakistan, has not said anything about Trump or the US since the deal was announced. Nor has India acknowledged anyone beyond its military contact with the Pakistanis.
Both armies have engaged in daily fighting since Wednesday along the rugged and mountainous Line of Control, which is marked by razor wire coils, watchtowers and bunkers that snake across foothills populated by villages, tangled bushes and forests.
They have routinely blamed the other for starting the skirmishes while insisting they were only retaliating.
India and Pakistan’s two top military officials are due to speak again on Monday.


Hegseth says US will stand by Indo-Pacific allies against ‘imminent’ threat of China

Hegseth says US will stand by Indo-Pacific allies against ‘imminent’ threat of China
Updated 30 sec ago

Hegseth says US will stand by Indo-Pacific allies against ‘imminent’ threat of China

Hegseth says US will stand by Indo-Pacific allies against ‘imminent’ threat of China

SINGAPORE: US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reassured allies in the Indo-Pacific on Saturday that they will not be left alone to face increasing military and economic pressures from China.
He said Washington will bolster its defenses overseas to counter what the Pentagon sees as rapidly developing threats by Beijing, particularly in its aggressive stance toward Taiwan. China has conducted numerous exercises to test what a blockade would look like of the self-governing island, which Beijing claims as its own and the US has pledged to defend.
China’s army “is rehearsing for the real deal,” Hegseth said in a keynote speech at a security conference in Singapore. “We are not going to sugarcoat it — the threat China poses is real. And it could be imminent.”
China has a stated goal of having its military be able to take Taiwan by force if necessary by 2027, a deadline that is seen by experts as more of an aspirational goal than a hard war deadline.
But China also has developed sophisticated man-made islands in the South China Sea to support new military outposts and built up highly advanced hypersonic and space capabilities, which are driving the US to create its own space-based “Golden Dome” missile defenses.
Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue, a global security conference hosted by the International Institute for Security Studies, Hegseth said China is no longer just building up its military forces to take Taiwan, it’s “actively training for it, every day.”
Hegseth also called out China for its ambitions in Latin America, particularly its efforts to increase its influence over the Panama Canal.
He repeated a pledge made by previous administrations to bolster US military capabilities in the region to provide a more robust deterrent. While both the Obama and Biden administrations had also committed to pivoting to the Pacific — and even established new military agreements throughout the region — a full shift has never been realized.
Instead, US military resources from the Indo-Pacific have been regularly pulled to support military needs in the Middle East and Europe, especially since the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. In the first few months of President Donald Trump’s second term, that’s also been the case.
The Indo-Pacific nations caught in between have tried to balance relations with both the US and China over the years. Beijing is the primary trading partner for many, but is also feared as a regional bully, in part due to its increasingly aggressive claims on natural resources such as critical fisheries.
Hegseth cautioned that playing both sides, seeking US military support and Chinese economic support, carries risk.
“Beware the leverage the CCP  seeks with that entanglement,” Hegseth said.
China usually sends its own defense minister to this conference — but in a snub this year to the US and the erratic tariff war Trump has ignited with Beijing, its minister Dong Jun did not attend, something the US delegation said it intended to capitalize on.
“We are here this morning. And somebody else isn’t,” Hegseth said.
He urged countries in the region to increase defense spending to levels similar to the 5 percent of their gross domestic product European nations are now pressed to contribute.
“We must all do our part,” Hegseth said.
It’s not clear if the US can or wants to supplant China as the region’s primary economic driver. But Hegseth’s push follows Trump’s visit to the Middle East, which resulted in billions of dollars in new defense agreements.
Hegseth said committing US support for Indo-Pacific nations would not be based on any conditions on local governments aligning their cultural or climate issues with the West.


Homeland Security chief said an immigrant threatened to kill Trump. The story quickly fell apart

Homeland Security chief said an immigrant threatened to kill Trump. The story quickly fell apart
Updated 47 min 14 sec ago

Homeland Security chief said an immigrant threatened to kill Trump. The story quickly fell apart

Homeland Security chief said an immigrant threatened to kill Trump. The story quickly fell apart
  • Law enforcement officials believe the man, Ramon Morales Reyes, never wrote a letter that Noem and her department shared on social media
  • Probers found that the hand-writing in the letter was different from the man's handwriting sample, and that he did not know how to speak English

A claim by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem that an immigrant threatened the life of President Donald Trump has begun to unravel.
Noem announced an arrest of a 54-year-old man who was living in the US illegally, saying he had written a letter threatening to kill Trump and would then return to Mexico. The story received a flood of media attention and was highlighted by the White House and Trump’s allies.
But investigators actually believe the man may have been framed so that he would get arrested and be deported from the US before he got a chance to testify in a trial as a victim of assault, a person familiar with the matter told The Associated Press. The person could not publicly discuss details of the investigation and spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity.

Law enforcement officials believe the man, Ramon Morales Reyes, never wrote a letter that Noem and her department shared with a message written in light blue ink expressing anger over Trump’s deportations and threatening to shoot him in the head with a rifle at a rally. Noem also shared the letter on X along with a photo of Morales Reyes, and the White House also shared it on its social media accounts. The letter was mailed to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement office along with the FBI and other agencies, the person said.

This image provided by the Department of Homeland Security shows a handwritten letter that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem claimed an immigrant threatened the life of President Donald Trump. (AP)

As part of the investigation, officials had contacted Morales Reyes and asked for a handwriting sample and concluded his handwriting and the threatening letter didn’t match and that the threat was not credible, the person said. It’s not clear why Homeland Security officials still decided to send a release making that claim.
In an emailed statement asking for information about the letter and the new information about Morales Reyes, the Department of Homeland Security said “the investigation into the threat is ongoing. Over the course of the investigation, this individual was determined to be in the country illegally and that he had a criminal record. He will remain in custody.”
His attorneys said he was not facing current charges and they did not have any information about convictions in his record.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s records show Morales Reyes is being held at a county jail in Juneau, Wisconsin, northwest of Milwaukee. The Milwaukee-based immigrant rights group Voces de la Frontera, which is advocating for his release, said he was arrested May 21. Attorney Cain Oulahan, who was hired to fight against his deportation, said he has a hearing in a Chicago immigration court next week and is hoping he is released on bond.
Morales Reyes had been a victim in a case of another man who is awaiting trial on assault charges in Wisconsin, the person familiar with the matter said. The trial is scheduled for July.
Morales Reyes works as a dishwasher in Milwaukee, where he lives with his wife and three children. He had recently applied for a U visa, which is carved out for people in the country illegally who become victims of serious crimes, said attorney Kime Abduli, who filed that application.
The Milwaukee Police Department said it is investigating an identity theft and victim intimidation incident related to this matter and the county district attorney’s office said the investigation was ongoing. Milwaukee police said no one has been criminally charged at this time.
Abduli, Morales Reyes’ attorney, says he could not have written the letter, saying he did not receive formal education and can’t write in Spanish and doesn’t know how to speak English. She said it was not clear whether he was arrested because of the letters.
“There is really no way that it could be even remotely true,” Abduli said. “We’re asking for a clarification and a correction from DHS to clear Ramon’s name of anything having to do with this.”


The world’s most unpopular president? Peru’s leader clings to power

The world’s most unpopular president? Peru’s leader clings to power
Updated 31 May 2025

The world’s most unpopular president? Peru’s leader clings to power

The world’s most unpopular president? Peru’s leader clings to power
  • The Ipsos polling agency found Dina Boluarte had a two-percent approval rating, down from 21 percent when she took office
  • The 63-year-old is the target of a dozen probes, including for her alleged failure to declare gifts of luxury jewels and watches

LIMA: With an approval rating of just two percent, Peru’s President Dina Boluarte may be the world’s most unpopular leader, according to pollsters.
Protests greeted her rise to power 29 months ago, and have marked her entire term — joined by assorted scandals, investigations, controversies and a surge in gang violence.
The 63-year-old is the target of a dozen probes, including for her alleged failure to declare gifts of luxury jewels and watches, a scandal inevitably dubbed “Rolexgate.”
She is also under the microscope for a two-week undeclared absence for nose surgery — which she insists was medical, not cosmetic — and is being investigated for her role in a police crackdown that caused the deaths of 50 protesters.
Against that bleak backdrop, Boluarte’s never-high popularity hit rock bottom this month.
The Ipsos polling agency found she had a two-percent approval rating, down from 21 percent when she took office.
“We might be talking about a world record of sustained presidential disapproval,” Ipsos Peru president Alfredo Torres told AFP.
It is the lowest score Ipsos has measured in any of the other 90 countries it surveys, Torres said.
Yet as far as recent Peruvian presidents go, she is not just a survivor, but positively an elder stateswoman.
The South American nation has had six presidents in eight years and if Boluarte lasts to the end of her term next year, she would be the longest-serving of them all.

Backed by corrupt majority rightwing parties
Despite not having a party in Congress, she has managed to stay in power with the backing of Peru’s majority right-wing parties.
Analysts say voter lethargy and political expediency have so far helped Boluarte buck the trend of prematurely ousted Peruvian leaders.
“In Peru, there is a political paradox: Boluarte is the weakest president of the last decade,” political analyst Augusto Alvarez of the University of the Pacific told AFP.
But her weakness is “also her strength,” he said, explaining that a lame-duck president is politically useful for Congress.
“It is a great business to have a fragile president whom they (lawmakers) use” to entrench their own power and pass laws beneficial to allies and backers, said Alvarez.
Transparency International’s Peruvian chapter Proetica has cited Congress for “counter-reforms, setbacks in anti-corruption instruments... and shielding of members of Congress who are ethically questioned.”
Boluarte has other factors counting in her favor.
Congress is seemingly keeping her around for lack of a better, consensus, candidate.
Another plus for Boluarte: Peru’s economy has been performing well, with GDP growing 3.3 percent last year and 3.9 percent in the first quarter of 2025 — a steep improvement from the 2020 recession blamed on Covid pandemic lockdowns.
Peru’s inflation rate is one of the lowest in the region.
“The economy continues to function, there is enormous resilience, and the population’s income is growing,” said Alvarez.
But this may have little to do with policy, observers say, and more with external factors such as rising copper prices. Peru is one of the top producers of the metal.

Little love for her from the street
On the street, there is little love for Boluarte, as Peru battles a surge in gang violence characterized by a wave of killings linked to extortion rackets.
Boluarte “has no empathy, she is an incapable president, she does not solve the security problem,” Saturnino Conde, a 63-year-old teacher, told AFP.
At frequent marches against the president, the catchphrase: “Dina, Asesina!” (Dina, Murderer!) has become a popular refrain.
But a full-out rebellion appears unlikely, say analysts.
Peruvians “feel it’s not worth it: if she resigns or is dismissed, she would be replaced by a member of Congress, but Congress also has a terrible image,” said Ipsos manager Torres.
In addition, “there is no other candidate that captivates, which is why people are not in a hurry to remove her from power.”
 


Chinese student struck a chord emphasizing humanity during Harvard commencement speech

Chinese student struck a chord emphasizing humanity during Harvard commencement speech
Updated 31 May 2025

Chinese student struck a chord emphasizing humanity during Harvard commencement speech

Chinese student struck a chord emphasizing humanity during Harvard commencement speech
  • Without international students, it would be a challenge for Harvard to achieve its mission, Yurong Jiang said
  • Trump's attacks on Harvard’s funding and threats to deport people studying in the US have left many foreign students unsettled

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts: A day after her emotional speech at Harvard University’s commencement, Yurong “Luanna” Jiang kept running into classmates who praised her message that people should see everyone’s common humanity rather than demonize others for their differences.
“We’re starting to believe those who think differently, vote differently or pray differently — whether they’re across the ocean or sitting right next to us — are not just wrong. We mistakenly see them as evil. But it doesn’t have to be this way,” she said in her address, which drew wide applause.
“The message itself, if I have to put it into one sentence, will be humanity rises and falls as one,” Jiang told The Associated Press on Friday. “We are living in a very difficult time. There’s a lot of divisions in terms of ideas, ethnicities, identities. This is a time where we can use a little bit more moral imagination and imagine ourselves being connected with one another.”
The 25-year-old Jiang’s speech never directly mentioned the Trump administration nor its multi-pronged attack on the nation’s oldest and richest university. But she said the turmoil beyond their campus and its impact on her classmates was on her mind as she delivered her speech.
“Students can be very emotionally charged because they care deeply about a lot of issues,” said Jiang, who comes from China and graduated with a masters degree in public administration in international development. “When you are emotionally charged and activated, it’s very easy to demonize another person.”
She said the relentless attacks from the Trump administration on the school’s funding and threats to detain and deport people studying in the US on student visas have left her unsettled, adding huge uncertainty to her future plans.
“In terms of the plan going forward, I would say everything is up in the air at this point,” Jiang said, who had hoped to remain in the United States for a few years but now is open to working in international development overseas. “At this point, it’s difficult to say what will happen.”
This week, the Trump administration asked federal agencies to cancel about $100 million in contracts with the university. The government already canceled more than $2.6 billion in federal research grants, moved to cut off Harvard’s enrollment of international students and threatened its tax-exempt status. Then it widened the pressure campaign, suspending visa applications worldwide and threatening to deny US visas to thousands of Chinese students nationwide.
These actions resonate with Jiang and her classmates — about 30 percent of Harvard’s students are international, and China has among the highest numbers.
“The anxiety is real,” said Jiang, who knows two international students from China who are weighing whether to travel for work in Kenya and Rwanda.
“Because of the uncertainty of their visas, they are facing a very tricky situation,” she said. “They can either go abroad, go to Kenya and Rwanda to do their internship and work on poverty alleviation and public health but risking not being able to make it back to campus safely. Or they can stay on campus and do their internships remote.”
“It’s pretty heartbreaking,” she continued“They wanted to help humanity and, to see them entangled in politics they didn’t choose, is hard.”
Jiang, who went to high school in the United Kingdom and earned her undergraduate degree at Duke University, said there should be more, not fewer, academic exchanges between China and the United States.
“Humanity is facing a lot of crisis,” she said. “There are conflicts. There is climate. There are a lot things that not only one country can tackle. China and the US are the two most powerful economies or countries in the world. They have to work with each other to be able to combat the problems or the issues that affect every single human being.”
Jiang also defended the importance of international students at Harvard, recalling how 60 percent of the students stood up at the Kennedy School of Government commencement when the dean, Jeremy Weinstein, asked how many came from outside the United States. Then he asked if they had learned something from their international classmates, and most everyone stood.
“A lot of us clapped and cheered. A lot of us were in tears,” she said, as Weinstein told them to “look around, this is your school.”
Without international students, it would be a challenge for Harvard to achieve its mission, Jiang said. Campus culture depends on its globally diverse student body, studying and hanging out together.
“Harvard wants its students to go and change the world and you can’t change the world without understanding the world,” she said. “You can’t understand the world without truly having a personal connection with people from all sorts of countries.”


US top court lets Trump revoke legal status for 500,000 migrants

US top court lets Trump revoke legal status for 500,000 migrants
Updated 31 May 2025

US top court lets Trump revoke legal status for 500,000 migrants

US top court lets Trump revoke legal status for 500,000 migrants

WASHINGTON: The US Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a major victory Friday in his immigration crackdown, giving his administration the green light to revoke the legal status of half a million migrants from four Caribbean and Latin American countries.
The decision puts 532,000 people who came from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua and Venezuela to the United States under a two-year humanitarian “parole” program launched by former president Joe Biden at risk of deportation.
And it marked the second time the highest US court has sided with Trump in his aggressive push to deliver on his election pledge to deport millions of non-citizens, through a series of policy announcements that have prompted a flurry of lawsuits.
But the opinion sparked a scathing dissent from two justices in the liberal minority who said the six conservatives on the bench had “plainly botched” their ruling and undervalued the “devastating consequences” to those potentially affected.
The revoked program had allowed entry into the United States for two years for up to 30,000 migrants a month from the four countries, all of which have dismal human rights records.
But as Trump takes a hard line on immigration, his administration moved to overturn those protections, winning a ruling from the Supreme Court earlier this month that allowed officials to begin deporting some 350,000 Venezuelans.
The latest case resulted from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem canceling an 18-month extension of the temporary protected status of the migrants, citing in particular the “authoritarian” nature of Nicolas Maduro’s government in Venezuela.
The department gave them 30 days to leave the country unless they had legal protection under another program.
“The court has plainly botched this assessment today,” Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sonia Sotomayor wrote in their dissent.
The justices said the migrants face being wrenched from family and returning to potential danger in their native countries — or opting to stay and risking imminent removal.
“At a minimum, granting the stay would facilitate needless human suffering before the courts have reached a final judgment regarding the legal arguments at issue, while denying the government’s application would not have anything close to that kind of practical impact,” Jackson said.
None of the other justices gave reasons for their decision, and the court was not required to make the vote public.
The district court that barred the administration from revoking the migrants’ status had argued that it was unlawfully applying a fast-track deportation procedure aimed at illegal immigrants to non-citizens protected by government programs.
At the Supreme Court, Justice Department lawyers said the “district court has nullified one of the administration’s most consequential immigration policy decisions” by issuing the stay.
The high court’s decision means the Trump administration can go ahead with its policy change, even as the litigation on the merits plays out in lower courts.
Trump campaigned for the White House on a pledge to deport millions of undocumented migrants, evoking an “invasion” of the United States by hordes of foreign criminals.
Among other measures, he invoked an obscure wartime law to fly more than 200 alleged Venezuelan gang members to a prison in El Salvador.
But his program of mass deportations has been thwarted or restricted by numerous court rulings, including from the Supreme Court and notably on the grounds that those targeted should be able to assert their due process rights.
And the administration has been berated over its efforts to restrict immigration from poor countries with human rights concerns like Afghanistan and Haiti, while accepting white South African refugees amid baseless claims that they face “genocide.”
The Trump administration systematically accuses judges who oppose his immigration decisions of plundering his presidential national security powers.