Germany’s Merz says court ruling will not stop migration crackdown

Germany’s Merz says court ruling will not stop migration crackdown
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz delivers a speech at the German Association of Towns and Municipalities event in Berlin, Germany. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 03 June 2025

Germany’s Merz says court ruling will not stop migration crackdown

Germany’s Merz says court ruling will not stop migration crackdown

BERLIN: Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Tuesday a court ruling that German authorities acted unlawfully when border police expelled three Somali asylum seekers could restrict his government’s migration crackdown but would not stop it altogether.
People would continue to be turned away at the German border, he said.
A Berlin administrative court said on Monday the expulsion of the three unnamed Somalis, who were sent back to Poland after arriving at a train station in eastern Germany, was “unlawful.”
It said the asylum application should have been processed by Germany under the European Union’s so-called Dublin rules that determine which country is responsible for processing a claim.
The ruling was a setback for Merz’s government, which won a federal election in February after promising a crackdown on migration that has caused concern in neighboring countries.
The court ruling has “possibly further restricted the scope for maneuver here,” Merz told a local government congress. “But the scope is still there. We know that we can still reject people.”
“We will, of course, do this within the framework of European law, but we will also do it to protect public safety and order in our country and to relieve the burden on cities and municipalities,” he said.
Migration is among German voters’ biggest concerns and a backlash against an influx of new arrivals has contributed to a rise in the popularity of the far-right Alternative for Germany party, which came second in February’s election.
It is a big shift since Germany’s “Refugees Welcome” culture during Europe’s migrant crisis in 2015 under Merz’s conservative predecessor, Angela Merkel.
Merz’s government issued an order in May to reject undocumented migrants, including asylum seekers, at Germany’s borders.
Monday’s ruling was seized on by critics as evidence that Merz’s migration policy was unworkable.
“The administrative court has determined that Dobrindt’s policy of rejecting asylum seekers is unlawful, contrary to European law, and now the Federal Ministry of the Interior should really start thinking about how to finally put an end to this nonsense,” Karl Kopp of the pro-immigration advocacy group Pro Asyl told Reuters.
Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt defended the expulsions, saying he would provide the court with justifications for banning entry.


India’s Modi says US ties ‘very positive’ after strains with Trump over Pakistan ceasefire

India’s Modi says US ties ‘very positive’ after strains with Trump over Pakistan ceasefire
Updated 06 September 2025

India’s Modi says US ties ‘very positive’ after strains with Trump over Pakistan ceasefire

India’s Modi says US ties ‘very positive’ after strains with Trump over Pakistan ceasefire
  • Modi’s statement comes after Donald Trump called relationship with New Delhi ‘special’
  • Tensions still persist over US tariffs on Indian goods and New Delhi’s Russian oil imports

NEW DELHI: Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said Saturday New Delhi and Washington still shared “very positive” ties, after US President Donald Trump reaffirmed their personal friendship and downplayed his earlier remarks about “losing India” to China.

The exchange comes amid strains after Washington imposed tariffs of up to 50 percent on Indian imports, accusing New Dehli of fueling Moscow’s deadly attacks on Ukraine by purchasing Russian oil.

But Trump and Modi, both right-wing populists, have shared a strong bond since the US president’s first term.

“Deeply appreciate and fully reciprocate President Trump’s sentiments and positive assessment of our ties,” Modi wrote on X, adding that India and the United States shared a “very positive and forward-looking comprehensive and global strategic partnership.”

Earlier, Trump told reporters that he “will always be friends with Modi.”

“India and the United States have a special relationship. There is nothing to worry about,” Trump said, downplaying his earlier remarks about “losing India” to China.

Last week, Modi visited China to attend a gathering of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, his first visit to the country in seven years signalling a thaw between the two Asian powers.

Trump has appeared irritated at New Delhi as he seeks credit for what he said was Nobel Prize-worthy diplomacy for brokering peace between Pakistan and India following the worst conflict in decades between the nuclear-armed neighbors in May.

India, which adamantly rejects any third-party mediation on Kashmir, has since given the cold shoulder to Trump.


Coalition launched to push for UN override of US vetoes protecting Israel

Coalition launched to push for UN override of US vetoes protecting Israel
Updated 06 September 2025

Coalition launched to push for UN override of US vetoes protecting Israel

Coalition launched to push for UN override of US vetoes protecting Israel
  • ‘Uniting for Peace’ mechanism can circumvent Security Council’s failure to act, ex-UN official tells webinar attended by Arab News
  • Support for Palestine must ‘not fade in the face of incredible US and Israeli opposition,’ says ex-presidential candidate

Chicago: A campaign was launched on Friday to push the UN to impose sanctions on Israel and override American vetoes that protect the country at the Security Council.

The Lifeline for Palestine coalition, led by former US presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein, is backed by leading pro-Palestinian activists and groups. 

During a webinar attended by Arab News, Stein and former UN human rights official Craig Mokhiber explained how the organization’s member states have the legal authority to circumvent the Security Council and impose sanctions on Israel, suspend its membership, impose an arms embargo, and assign a UN peacekeeping force to Gaza and the West Bank.

Mokhiber, who served 30 years with the UN, said Israel’s actions in Gaza far exceed the violence and oppression of apartheid South Africa.

He added that UN member states “have the power” under a 1950s resolution called “Uniting for Peace” to circumvent the Security Council’s failure to act.

“The world doesn’t have to surrender to a US veto in the Security Council. The UN General Assembly is empowered when it meets to convene under ‘Uniting for Peace.’ There are historical precedents for doing so, and they can take extraordinary action,” Mokhiber said, adding that the UNGA needs a two-thirds majority to act, or 127 of its 193 members.

Last year, 124 nations approved a resolution demanding Israel withdraw from Gaza and the West Bank by Sept. 28, 2025.

In the face of a Security Council veto or failure to act, “any member state can then call for an emergency special session of the General Assembly under ‘Uniting for Peace,’” said Mokhiber.

“A resolution can be proposed … it can be adopted with a two-thirds majority, then the UN can start soliciting troop contributions from member states to participate and deploy troops.”

Stein said pro-Palestine activists “have the power right now to end the genocide” in Gaza. “The essential pieces of a strong resolution are establishing a military embargo and comprehensive sanctions … stripping Israel’s UN credentials as was done to apartheid South Africa in the General Assembly, and then establishing a war crimes tribunal and anti-apartheid mechanisms,” she added.

“It’s time for us to demand that support for Palestine be maintained and that it not fade in the face of incredible US and Israeli opposition, intimidation, threats and bribes.”

The webinar’s participants criticized the US denial of visas to Palestinian leaders to attend the UNGA’s 80th session in New York later this month.

When the same thing happened in 1988, “the entire General Assembly voted to pick up and move to Geneva in order to express its sovereignty, (declaring that) no single member state will dictate to it,” said Ali Abunimah, a Palestinian-American journalist and co-founder of The Electronic Intifada website.

He added that UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has failed to challenge last week’s US decision to deny entry to Palestinian leaders.

The coalition will convene a follow-up webinar on Sunday. Its website is www.lifelineforpalestine.com.


’Large shark’ kills man off Sydney beach

’Large shark’ kills man off Sydney beach
Updated 06 September 2025

’Large shark’ kills man off Sydney beach

’Large shark’ kills man off Sydney beach
  • A “large shark” mauled a surfer to death at a popular Sydney beach on Saturday, Australian police and rescuers said, in a rare fatal attack that led to a string of beach closures

SYDNEY: A “large shark” mauled a surfer to death at a popular Sydney beach on Saturday, Australian police and rescuers said, in a rare fatal attack that led to a string of beach closures.
The 57-year-old local man had gone surfing with five or six friends in the Pacific waters off northern Sydney’s adjoining Long Reef and Dee Why beaches, police and rescuers said.
The man — an experienced surfer with a wife and a young daughter — lost “a number of limbs,” New South Wales police superintendent John Duncan told a news conference.
“I do understand that both him and his board disappeared underwater,” he told reporters.
“The body was found floating in the surf.”
A couple of surfers saw him in the water and got him to shore, Duncan said.
“Unfortunately, by that time we understand he lost probably a lot of blood and attempts to resuscitate him were unsuccessful.”
People nearby saw the ocean predator, leaving police “fairly confident” that it was shark attack.
The man’s surfboard was broken in half, Duncan said.
Government experts will examine the remains of the surfboard and the man’s body to help them determine the species of shark involved, police said.
Most serious shark bites in ocean-loving Australia are from great whites, bull sharks, and tiger sharks.
Images of the scene on local media showed police gathered on the shore and ambulances parked nearby.
Beaches between the northern suburbs of Manly and Narrabeen have been closed for at least 24 hours, Surf Life Saving NSW said.
“For now, please remain clear of the water at beaches in the vicinity and follow the direction of lifeguards and lifesavers,” the organization’s chief executive Steven Pearce said in a statement.
“Our deepest condolences go to the family of the man involved in this terrible tragedy.”
Surf lifesaving clubs nearby have canceled all water activity and training for the weekend.
‘Critical injuries’ 
Drones and surf lifesavers on water skis were patrolling the beaches for shark activity.
It was the first fatal shark attack in Sydney since 2022, when 35-year-old British diving instructor Simon Nellist was killed off Little Bay.
The previous fatal attack in the city was in 1963.
An unnamed surfer told Sydney’s Daily Telegraph newspaper that he saw the aftermath of the attack.
“Four or five surfers pulled him out of the water and it looked like a significant part of his lower half had been attacked,” the surfer said.
People were ordered out of the water, he told the paper.
“There was a surf lifesaving guy waving a red flag,” the surfer said. “I didn’t know what it was ... but thought I should probably go in (to shore).”
Australia’s last deadly shark attack was in March, when a surfer was taken off the remote Wharton Beach of Western Australia.
There have been more than 1,280 shark incidents around Australia since 1791, of which over 250 resulted in death, according to a database of the predators’ encounters with humans.


US yet to approve any help following Afghanistan earthquake, sources say

US yet to approve any help following Afghanistan earthquake, sources say
Updated 06 September 2025

US yet to approve any help following Afghanistan earthquake, sources say

US yet to approve any help following Afghanistan earthquake, sources say
  • Trump administration ended virtually all aid to Afghanistan in April
  • UN aid chief says quake latest crisis to expose impact of funding cuts on humanitarian work

WASHINGTON: Nearly a week after an earthquake killed more than 2,200 people in Afghanistan and left tens of thousands homeless, the United States has not taken the first step to authorize emergency aid, and it was unclear if it plans to help at all, two former senior US officials and a source familiar with the situation told Reuters.
The lack of response by Washington to one of Afghanistan’s deadliest quakes in years underscores how President Donald Trump has forfeited decades of US leadership of global disaster relief with his deep foreign aid cuts and closure of the main US foreign assistance agency, said the source and the former officials.
The US Agency for International Development was officially shuttered on Tuesday.
The State Department on Monday extended its “heartfelt condolences” to Afghanistan in an X post.
As of Friday, however, the State Department had not approved a declaration of humanitarian need, the first step in authorizing US emergency relief, said the former officials, both of whom worked at USAID, and the third source, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal.
Such a declaration is usually issued within 24 hours of a major disaster.
The sources said State Department officials had considered recommendations for US disaster aid for Afghanistan. One former senior official said the White House also has considered the issue, but decided against reversing a policy of ending aid to Afghanistan. When asked if the US would provide any emergency aid to Afghanistan following the magnitude 6 quake on Sunday, which was followed by powerful aftershocks on Thursday and Friday, a State Department spokesperson said: “We have nothing further to announce at this time.”
The United States was, until this year, the largest aid donor to Afghanistan, where it fought a 20-year war that ended with a chaotic US withdrawal and the Taliban’s seizure of Kabul in 2021. But in April, the Trump administration ended virtually all aid — totaling $562 million — to Afghanistan, citing a US watchdog report that humanitarian groups receiving US funds had paid $10.9 million in taxes, fees, and duties to the Taliban.
Asked whether the US would provide emergency relief for earthquake survivors, a White House official said, “President Trump has been consistent in ensuring aid does not land in the hands of the Taliban regime, which continues to wrongfully detain US citizens.”
’STUCK IN STORAGE’
United Nations aid chief Tom Fletcher said the Afghan earthquake was “the latest crisis to expose the cost of shrinking resources on vital humanitarian work.”
“Massive funding cuts have already brought essential health and nutrition services for millions to a halt; grounded aircraft, which are often the only lifeline to remote communities; and forced aid agencies to reduce their footprint,” he said in a statement on Thursday.
The Trump administration also has yet to respond to a request by the International Rescue Committee humanitarian organization to send $105,000 worth of US-funded medical supplies following the first earthquake.
The materials include stethoscopes, first aid supplies, stretchers, and other essentials, said Kelly Razzouk, vice president of policy and advocacy for the IRC.
“The stocks are stuck in storage,” said Razzouk, who served on former US President Joe Biden’s National Security Council. “In recent memory, I can’t remember a time when the US did not respond to a crisis like this.”
The IRC needs Washington’s permission to send the equipment to Afghanistan because it had been funded by an unrelated US grant that the Trump administration had since canceled.
“Beyond the loss of life, we have also seen basic infrastructure and livelihoods destroyed,” Stephen Rodriguez, the representative in Afghanistan for the UN Development Programme, told reporters on Friday.
He said donations of money, goods, and services have come from Britain, South Korea, Australia, India, Pakistan, Iran, Turkiye, and other countries.
“Far more is needed.”


Pentagon rebrand as Department of War a ‘message of strength’, says Trump

Pentagon rebrand as Department of War a ‘message of strength’, says Trump
Updated 06 September 2025

Pentagon rebrand as Department of War a ‘message of strength’, says Trump

Pentagon rebrand as Department of War a ‘message of strength’, says Trump
  • “I’ve gotten peace because of the fact that we’re strong,” Trump said, echoing the “peace through strength” motto associated with Reagan
  • Congress has to formally authorize a new name, and Trump supporters in Congress said they will move to make it happen

WASHINGTON: After months of campaigning for the Nobel Peace Prize, President Donald Trump sent a sharply different message on Friday when he signed an executive order aimed at rebranding the Department of Defense as the Department of War.
Trump said the switch was intended to signal to the world that the United States was a force to be reckoned with, and he complained that the Department of Defense’s name was “woke.”
“I think it sends a message of victory. I think it sends, really, a message of strength,” Trump said of the change as he authorized the Department of War as a secondary title for the Pentagon.
Congress has to formally authorize a new name, and several of Trump’s closest supporters on Capitol Hill proposed legislation earlier Friday to codify the new name into law.
But already there were cosmetic shifts. The Pentagon’s website went from “defense.gov” to “war.gov.” Signs were swapped around Hegseth’s office while more than a dozen employees watched. Trump said there would be new stationery, too.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, whom Trump has begun referring to as the “secretary of war,” said during the signing ceremony that “we’re going to go on offense, not just on defense,” using “maximum lethality” that won’t be “politically correct.”
The attempted rebranding was another rhetorical salvo in Trump’s efforts to reshape the US military and uproot what he has described as progressive ideology. Bases have been renamed, transgender soldiers have been banned and websites have been scrubbed of posts honoring contributions by women and minorities to the armed forces.
He’s also favored aggressive — critics say illegal — military action despite his criticism of “endless wars” under other administrations. He frequently boasts about the stealth bomber strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, and he recently ordered the destruction of a boat that the US says was carrying drugs off the coast of Venezuela.
The Republican president insisted that his tough talk didn’t contradict his fixation on being recognized for diplomatic efforts, saying peace must be made from a position of strength. Trump has claimed credit for resolving conflicts between India and Pakistan; Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo; and Armenia and Azerbaijan, among others. (He’s also expressed frustration that he hasn’t brought the war between Russia and Ukraine to a conclusion as fast as he wanted.)
“I think I’ve gotten peace because of the fact that we’re strong,” Trump said, echoing the “peace through strength” motto associated with President Ronald Reagan
When Trump finished his remarks on the military, he dismissed Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, from the room.
“I’m going to let these people go back to the Department of War and figure out how to maintain peace,” Trump said.
Florida Republican Rep. Greg Steube proposed legislation in the House to formally change the name of the department.
“From 1789 until the end of World War II, the United States military fought under the banner of the Department of War,” Steube, an Army veteran, said in a statement. “It is only fitting that we pay tribute to their eternal example and renowned commitment to lethality by restoring the name of the ‘Department of War’ to our Armed Forces.”
Sens. Rick Scott, R-Fla., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, are introducing companion legislation in the Senate.
The Department of War was created in 1789, then renamed and reorganized through legislation signed by President Harry Truman in 1947, two years after the end of World War II. The Department of Defense incorporated the Department of War, which oversaw the Army, plus the Department of the Navy and the newly created independent Air Force.
Hegseth complained that “we haven’t won a major war since” the name was changed. Trump said, “We never fought to win.”
Trump and Hegseth have long talked about restoring the Department of War name.
In August, Trump told reporters that “everybody likes that we had an unbelievable history of victory when it was Department of War. Then we changed it to Department of Defense.”
When confronted with the possibility that making the name change would require an act of Congress, Trump told reporters that “we’re just going to do it.”
“I’m sure Congress will go along,” he said, “if we need that.”
Trump and Hegseth have been on a name-changing spree at the Pentagon, sometimes by sidestepping legal requirements.
For example, they wanted to restore the names of nine military bases that once honored Confederate leaders, which were changed in 2023 following a congressionally mandated review.
Because the original names were no longer allowed under law, Hegseth ordered the bases to be named after new people with similar names. For example, Fort Bragg now honors Army Pfc. Roland L. Bragg, a World War II paratrooper and Silver Star recipient from Maine, instead of Confederate Gen. Braxton Bragg.
In the case of Fort A.P. Hill, named for Confederate Lt. Gen. Ambrose Powell Hill, the Trump administration was forced to choose three soldiers to make the renaming work.
The base now honors Union soldiers Pvt. Bruce Anderson and 1st Sgt. Robert A. Pinn, who contributes the two initials, and Lt. Col. Edward Hill, whose last name completes the second half of the base name.
The move irked Republicans in Congress who, in July, moved to ban restoring any Confederate names in this year’s defense authorization bill.
Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, a Republican who co-sponsored the earlier amendment to remove the Confederate names, said that “what this administration is doing, particularly this secretary of defense, is sticking his finger in the eye of Congress by going back and changing the names to the old names.”