A large group of migrants protested at the U.S. border in the northwest Mexican city of Tijuana on Saturday (April 24), demanding they be allowed to cross and claim asylum in the United States.

'We want asylum,' Migrants protest at Mexico border city, seeking entry to U.S.

The U.S has opened a probe into 500 scientists believed to be compromised by China. WION’s Palki Sharma tells you how Beijing is using espionage to steal American tech in the R&D race.

Gravitas: China infiltrating U.S research

A U.S commission has urged the State Department to put India on a religious freedoms blacklist. Amid a series of police shootings of black Americans, does the U.S have the moral authority to judge others? WION’s Palki Sharma decodes American double standards on social justice.

Gravitas: U.S commission wants India on religious freedoms blacklist

The histories, poems and novels were all there, lining the shelves of one of the best known activist bookstores in the United States. And the talk filling cultural hubs like Busboys and Poets in Washington on Wednesday (April 21) was about the latest chapter in U.S. civil rights: the murder conviction of a white police officer for killing a Black man.

At Black-owned activist bookstore, talk of the next chapter in U.S. civil rights

The US House has passed a new bill. The House of Representatives has voted on a bill that would admit Washington DC as the 51st state of the United States.

United States: US House passes bill to make Washington DC the 51st state

The border situation in Russia-Ukraine could turn into a full-blown war any moment.

Russians have deployed tens of thousands of troops on the border with Ukraine, and the US says Russia's military buildup is bigger than in 2014.

It was then when Russia had annexed Crimea from Ukraine.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-russia-is-massing-120000-troops-along-the-ukraine-border-379129/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has invited his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin for talks.

But the Russian president is in no mood for a compromise.

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/ukraines-president-zelenskiy-asks-putin-to-meet-him-for-peace-talks-in-conflict-zone-378900">Ukraine's President Zelenskiy asks Putin to meet him for peace talks in conflict zone</a>

There are satellite images that show the Russian military activity in Crimea.

They show how Russia is stepping up its deployments near Ukraine with aircraft, vehicles at airbases and training areas.

Ukraine assesses that Russia will soon have more than 120,000 troops on the border.

Left with no options, Zelensky sent a message from Kiev to Moscow, inviting Putin for talks.&nbsp;

But, it doesn't look like Moscow wants a dialogue.

Tensions escalated this week when Russia carried out more military exercises in the Black Sea.

Reports say the Russians are planning to block parts of these waters, a move that could impact access to Ukrainian ports.

Those living near the borders are afraid and many people have begun to leave their homes.

People who are still around fear that war could soon break out.

For the US, Russia still remains the aggressor.

Ukraine's other ally, the European Union, believes it would take just a spark to set off a confrontation.

An assessment that was validated by Putin himself.

The Russian president used his annual state of the union speech to deliver a warning to the West.

The Russian military build-up has been going on for weeks now, but what's motivating Moscow's aggression still remains unclear.

Either Russia is posturing&nbsp;by putting pressure on Kiev, or this is a serious bid to launch an offensive against Ukraine, a former state of the erstwhile Soviet Union.

Either way, it is another test for US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>.

The border situation in Russia-Ukraine could turn into a full-blown war any moment. Russians have deployed tens of thousands of troops on the border with Ukraine, and the US says Russia's military buildup is bigger than in 2014.

The border situation in Russia-Ukraine could turn into a full-blown war any moment. Russians have deployed tens of thousands of troops on the border with Ukraine, and the US says Russia's military buildup is bigger than in 2014. It was then when Russia had annexed Crimea from Ukraine. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has invited his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin for talks. But the Russian president is in no mood for a compromise. Also read | Ukraine's President Zelenskiy asks Putin to meet him for peace talks in conflict zone There are satellite images that show the Russian military activity in Crimea. They show how Russia is stepping up its deployments near Ukraine with aircraft, vehicles at airbases and training areas. Ukraine assesses that Russia will soon have more than 120,000 troops on the border. Left with no options, Zelensky sent a message from Kiev to Moscow, inviting Putin for talks. But, it doesn't look like Moscow wants a dialogue. Tensions escalated this week when Russia carried out more military exercises in the Black Sea. Reports say the Russians are planning to block parts of these waters, a move that could impact access to Ukrainian ports. Those living near the borders are afraid and many people have begun to leave their homes. People who are still around fear that war could soon break out. For the US, Russia still remains the aggressor. Ukraine's other ally, the European Union, believes it would take just a spark to set off a confrontation. An assessment that was validated by Putin himself. The Russian president used his annual state of the union speech to deliver a warning to the West. The Russian military build-up has been going on for weeks now, but what's motivating Moscow's aggression still remains unclear. Either Russia is posturing by putting pressure on Kiev, or this is a serious bid to launch an offensive against Ukraine, a former state of the erstwhile Soviet Union. Either way, it is another test for US President Joe Biden.

As Ukraine-Russia crisis worsens, threat of war looms

Derek Chauvin, the white police officer, has been proven guilty for the murder of George Floyd.&nbsp;

It's a watershed moment not just for Americans, but for millions around the world.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-americas-virus-of-racism-yet-to-be-eradicated-379126/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

All the people who were mobilised after seeing the video of Floyd's death now celebrate this 'historic' verdict.

However, there are some questions that need answers.&nbsp;

What does the verdict really change? Does it put an end to racism? Does it eradicate the disproportionate use of force?

As the verdict was being announced, the US felt the sting of another killing, a Black teenage girl who was shot dead by white cops in Columbus, Ohio.

She was just 15-years-old.

It tells you that the US's pandemic of racism is far from being over.&nbsp;

Let's first look at some reactions to the verdict of Floyd's murder.&nbsp;

"This is a stunning moment in history", Eliza Orlins, candidate for Manhattan district attorney said.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-president-joe-biden-slams-systemic-racism-calls-floyd-verdict-a-relief-378899">US President Joe Biden slams 'systemic racism'; calls Floyd verdict a 'relief'</a> 
&nbsp;

"With the verdict today, I feel like a weight lifted off my shoulders," Semhra Solomon, Minneapolis area resident, said.&nbsp;

London Williams, a DC resident said: "Thank god, thank you Jesus."

"No one should be above the law. And today's verdict sends that message," US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden </a>said.&nbsp;

US Vice President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/kamala-harris">Kamala Harris </a>said: "Today we feel a sigh of relief. Still, it cannot take away the pain."

The US is breathing a sigh of relief and the world can't help but discuss it.

The news is truly worthy of global coverage because it's rare for a white American cop to be convicted for the murder of a Black man.

However, when Chauvin was being pronounced guilty, 764 miles away in Columbus, Ohio, a Black teenager was shot dead by white cops.

Makiyah Bryant was trying to fend off a physical assault by a group of adult women.

She called the police and picked a knife to defend herself.

When the cops arrived, they shot Bryant instead, assuming her to be the assailant.

Let's listen to the conversation during her killing.&nbsp;

Officer's voice: "Hey, what's going on? Hey, hey, get down! Get down!"

(sound of four gunshots, voices screaming)

Officer's voice: "She had a knife. She just went at her."

Man's voice: "She's just a (expletive) kid. A (expletive) kid."

(sound of people screaming)

Officer's voice: "She came at her with a knife."

Another black life has been lost and another hashtag has been born: #JusticeForMakiyahBryant.

Yet another protest has begun.

Will Bryant get justice just as Floyd did?

There's no guarantee and the figures tell us the reason.&nbsp;

Since 2005, 139 police officers have been arrested for murder, of these only 44 have been convicted.&nbsp;Also, out of these 44, only 7 have been convicted for murder.&nbsp;The rest got away with prison sentences for a few months.

The rate of police shooting between 2015 and 2021 also shows a disparity based on ethnicity.

Among Black Americans, the figure stands at 35 police shootings per million of the population and for Hispanics, it is 26 per million of the population.

And for White Americans, the figure is just 14 police shootings per million of the population.

The conviction of Chauvin is indeed a pivotal moment and undoubtedly calls for a celebration.

But, it will take far more than one conviction to eradicate the virus of racism in America.

Derek Chauvin, the white police officer, has been proven guilty for the murder of George Floyd. It's a watershed moment not just for Americans, but for millions around the world.

Derek Chauvin, the white police officer, has been proven guilty for the murder of George Floyd. It's a watershed moment not just for Americans, but for millions around the world. All the people who were mobilised after seeing the video of Floyd's death now celebrate this 'historic' verdict. However, there are some questions that need answers. What does the verdict really change? Does it put an end to racism? Does it eradicate the disproportionate use of force? As the verdict was being announced, the US felt the sting of another killing, a Black teenage girl who was shot dead by white cops in Columbus, Ohio. She was just 15-years-old. It tells you that the US's pandemic of racism is far from being over. Let's first look at some reactions to the verdict of Floyd's murder. "This is a stunning moment in history", Eliza Orlins, candidate for Manhattan district attorney said. Also read | US President Joe Biden slams 'systemic racism'; calls Floyd verdict a 'relief' "With the verdict today, I feel like a weight lifted off my shoulders," Semhra Solomon, Minneapolis area resident, said. London Williams, a DC resident said: "Thank god, thank you Jesus." "No one should be above the law. And today's verdict sends that message," US President Joe Biden said. US Vice President Kamala Harris said: "Today we feel a sigh of relief. Still, it cannot take away the pain." The US is breathing a sigh of relief and the world can't help but discuss it. The news is truly worthy of global coverage because it's rare for a white American cop to be convicted for the murder of a Black man. However, when Chauvin was being pronounced guilty, 764 miles away in Columbus, Ohio, a Black teenager was shot dead by white cops. Makiyah Bryant was trying to fend off a physical assault by a group of adult women. She called the police and picked a knife to defend herself. When the cops arrived, they shot Bryant instead, assuming her to be the assailant. Let's listen to the conversation during her killing. Officer's voice: "Hey, what's going on? Hey, hey, get down! Get down!" (sound of four gunshots, voices screaming) Officer's voice: "She had a knife. She just went at her." Man's voice: "She's just a (expletive) kid. A (expletive) kid." (sound of people screaming) Officer's voice: "She came at her with a knife." Another black life has been lost and another hashtag has been born: #JusticeForMakiyahBryant. Yet another protest has begun. Will Bryant get justice just as Floyd did? There's no guarantee and the figures tell us the reason. Since 2005, 139 police officers have been arrested for murder, of these only 44 have been convicted. Also, out of these 44, only 7 have been convicted for murder. The rest got away with prison sentences for a few months. The rate of police shooting between 2015 and 2021 also shows a disparity based on ethnicity. Among Black Americans, the figure stands at 35 police shootings per million of the population and for Hispanics, it is 26 per million of the population. And for White Americans, the figure is just 14 police shootings per million of the population. The conviction of Chauvin is indeed a pivotal moment and undoubtedly calls for a celebration. But, it will take far more than one conviction to eradicate the virus of racism in America.

Despite George Floyd verdict, US still needs to fight hard the 'racism virus'

US President Joe Biden on Thursday opened an international climate summit in which he said that Washington "isn't waiting" to lead on a "moral and economic imperative" issue.&nbsp;

"The cost of inaction keeps mounting. The United States isn't waiting," Biden said in his address of the two-day summit being hosted virtually by the White House.

Biden said that he aims to build infrastructure that can produce and deploy cleaner technology for "those we harness today and those we will invent tomorrow".&nbsp;

He said that he has spoken to climate experts and sees a "prosperous" and an "equitable" future.&nbsp;

The US president also talked about a host of actions that the US is taking to fight climate change, in which he talked about the manufacturing of electric vehicles and their infrastructure, the building of green hydrogen, among others.&nbsp;

"The US sets out on the road to cut greenhouse gases by half at the end of this decade," Biden said.

"These steps will set America on a path at net zero emissions of the economy by no later than 2050."

But, he warned, "no nation can solve this crisis on their own".&nbsp;

Biden also told the summit that the US will double aid to developing nations who are battling the climate crisis.

"To help them meet that goal, the United States will double... by 2024 our annual public climate financing development to developing countries," he said.

US President Joe Biden on Thursday opened an international climate summit in which he said that Washington "isn't waiting" to lead on a "moral and economic imperative" issue.

US President Joe Biden on Thursday opened an international climate summit in which he said that Washington "isn't waiting" to lead on a "moral and economic imperative" issue. "The cost of inaction keeps mounting. The United States isn't waiting," Biden said in his address of the two-day summit being hosted virtually by the White House. Biden said that he aims to build infrastructure that can produce and deploy cleaner technology for "those we harness today and those we will invent tomorrow". He said that he has spoken to climate experts and sees a "prosperous" and an "equitable" future. The US president also talked about a host of actions that the US is taking to fight climate change, in which he talked about the manufacturing of electric vehicles and their infrastructure, the building of green hydrogen, among others. "The US sets out on the road to cut greenhouse gases by half at the end of this decade," Biden said. "These steps will set America on a path at net zero emissions of the economy by no later than 2050." But, he warned, "no nation can solve this crisis on their own". Biden also told the summit that the US will double aid to developing nations who are battling the climate crisis. "To help them meet that goal, the United States will double... by 2024 our annual public climate financing development to developing countries," he said.

'No nation can solve this crisis on their own,' says Biden as he opens virtual climate summit

The United States continues to evade warning on a ban on the export of raw material used for the production of COVID-19 vaccine.

Your Story: US yet to respond on ban on export of COVID-19 vaccine raw material

China's President Xi Jinping has called for a more fair and equitable world order in a clear message to the United States.

China's President Xi Jinping speaks at the Boao Forum

The Afghanistan government believes that it can hold its ground without the help of foreign forces.&nbsp;

But the question is what about the Taliban?

Is it prepared to participate in a democratic process?

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-is-afghanistan-ready-for-americas-exit-378068/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Would it agree to share power in the republic of Afghanistan? Or does it still insist on leading an Islamic Emirate?

We asked Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif about this.

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghan-indian-nsas-speak-in-the-backdrop-of-bidens-announcement-of-troop-withdrawal-377984">Afghan, Indian NSAs speak in the backdrop of Biden's announcement of troop withdrawal</a>

He mentioned of the threat of violence. Because the risk of an escalation is real.

The Taliban has promised fresh attacks If the foreign forces don't meet the deadline to withdraw.&nbsp;

Is the Taliban just waiting for the Americans to leave before it makes its first moves?

Afghanistan feels that would be a mistake.

Afghan National Security Advisor Hamdullah Mohib said that there has been "no change in the Taliban".

The world saw a Taliban regime more than 20 years ago and it's a different world now.

Is it also a different Taliban? Is it more in tune with the times?

Iran does not believe this as Zarif said the Taliban wants to take Afghanistan back to the 90s.

Has the Taliban not changed?

India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar was guarded in his response.

He did say very clearly that Afghanistan has certainly changed.

And that any agreement made now should not undo the gains made in the past. 
&nbsp;

The Afghanistan government believes that it can hold its ground without the help of foreign forces. But the question is what about the Taliban? Is it prepared to participate in a democratic process?

The Afghanistan government believes that it can hold its ground without the help of foreign forces. But the question is what about the Taliban? Is it prepared to participate in a democratic process? × Would it agree to share power in the republic of Afghanistan? Or does it still insist on leading an Islamic Emirate? We asked Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif about this. Also read | Afghan, Indian NSAs speak in the backdrop of Biden's announcement of troop withdrawal He mentioned of the threat of violence. Because the risk of an escalation is real. The Taliban has promised fresh attacks If the foreign forces don't meet the deadline to withdraw. Is the Taliban just waiting for the Americans to leave before it makes its first moves? Afghanistan feels that would be a mistake. Afghan National Security Advisor Hamdullah Mohib said that there has been "no change in the Taliban". The world saw a Taliban regime more than 20 years ago and it's a different world now. Is it also a different Taliban? Is it more in tune with the times? Iran does not believe this as Zarif said the Taliban wants to take Afghanistan back to the 90s. Has the Taliban not changed? India's External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar was guarded in his response. He did say very clearly that Afghanistan has certainly changed. And that any agreement made now should not undo the gains made in the past.

Has Taliban really changed?

In the United States' Indianapolis, at least eight people, including four Sikhs, were killed and five others were left injured in a mass shooting at a FedEx facility.

Indianapolis Shooting: 19-year-old gunman killed 8 workers at a FedEx facility

The US has imposed sanctions on six Pakistani nationals and four of their organisations for aiding Russian companies to evade sanctions by fraudulent measures.&nbsp;

The US Department of Treasury in a statement said that Pakistan nationals who are sanctioned are: Mohsin Raza, Mujtaba Raza, Syed Hasnain, Muhammad Hayat, Syed Raza and Shahzad Ahmed. &nbsp;&nbsp;

It also mentioned the companies, namely, Second Eye Solution (SES), also known as Forwarderz, along with its three other frontals Fresh Air Farm House, Like Wise, and MK.

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="http://wionews.com/videos/gravitas-why-do-sanctions-fail-373197/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The sanctions were part of measures taken against individuals and entities that tried to allegedly influence the 2020 US presidential election.&nbsp;

"Treasury will target Russian leaders, officials, intelligence services, and their proxies that attempt to interfere in the US electoral process or subvert US democracy," Treasury Secretary Janet L Yellen was quoted as saying by news agency PTI.&nbsp;

She added that this is the beginning of a new Washington campaign against the Kremlin's malign behaviour.

Also read | <a href="http://wionews.com/world/us-slaps-sanctions-on-russia-expels-10-diplomats-377760">US slaps sanctions on Russia, expels 10 diplomats over poll meddlling, cyber attack</a>

The US department alleged that Second Eye Solution (SES) is an organisation that specialises in making and selling fraudulent identities and has helped the banned Russian Internet Research Agency or IRA, the troll farm, in hiding its identity to evade sanctions.

 
&nbsp;

The US has imposed sanctions on six Pakistani nationals and four of their organisations for aiding Russian companies to evade sanctions by fraudulent measures. The US Department of Treasury in a statement said that Pakistan nationals who are sanctioned are: Mohsin Raza, Mujtaba Raza, Syed Hasnain, Muhammad Hayat, Syed Raza and Shahzad Ahmed.

The US has imposed sanctions on six Pakistani nationals and four of their organisations for aiding Russian companies to evade sanctions by fraudulent measures. The US Department of Treasury in a statement said that Pakistan nationals who are sanctioned are: Mohsin Raza, Mujtaba Raza, Syed Hasnain, Muhammad Hayat, Syed Raza and Shahzad Ahmed. It also mentioned the companies, namely, Second Eye Solution (SES), also known as Forwarderz, along with its three other frontals Fresh Air Farm House, Like Wise, and MK. Watch | The sanctions were part of measures taken against individuals and entities that tried to allegedly influence the 2020 US presidential election. "Treasury will target Russian leaders, officials, intelligence services, and their proxies that attempt to interfere in the US electoral process or subvert US democracy," Treasury Secretary Janet L Yellen was quoted as saying by news agency PTI. She added that this is the beginning of a new Washington campaign against the Kremlin's malign behaviour. Also read | US slaps sanctions on Russia, expels 10 diplomats over poll meddlling, cyber attack The US department alleged that Second Eye Solution (SES) is an organisation that specialises in making and selling fraudulent identities and has helped the banned Russian Internet Research Agency or IRA, the troll farm, in hiding its identity to evade sanctions.

US imposes sanctions on 6 Pakistani nationals for aiding Russian companies

Against the backdrop of US President Joe Biden's announcement of the withdrawal of American troops, Afghan National Security Advisor Hamdullah Mohib and India's NSA Ajit Doval spoke on Friday morning. This is the first-ever high-level engagement between the two sides and comes just two days after the announcement came from Washington.

Mohib, speaking at an event virtually, confirmed the call and said, "I spoke to Ajit Doval this morning about our views and shared what we think should go and happen".

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-troops-in-afghanistan-the-20-year-war-377951/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

India supports "Afghan-led , Afghan-owned, and Afghan controlled" peace process. In the last two decades, since the fall of the Taliban in 2001 in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks in New York, New Delhi had emerged as the country's major development partner.&nbsp;

The Afghan NSA, speaking at the event, slammed Pakistan for its support to the Taliban. Without taking the country by name, he pointed out, "any further push means that there is direct involvement in, by a neighbour which can be very dangerous. Nationalistic forces in Afghanistan are very angry, upset over this."

Warning that If this "limit is passed, then I think, there would be a huge problem for the said neighbour in their country by all Afghans who are there and from within Afghanistan. There could be huge blowback which can be destructive for the neighbour".

In the past, Taliban top leadership like Mullah Baradar have been coming to Pakistan, and not only holding a meeting with foreign minister Qureshi and Pakistani Prime minister Imran Khan but also their fighters in the country. This has irked the Afghan government, which has strongly raised the matter with Islamabad.

On Taliban, he said, "Taliban has no reason to continue violence in Afghanistan, the reason, why they continued, are totally out the picture and its time they make real peace with Afghan govt, become part of the mainstream political society".

"They need to know, they can't take power by force, they can start a civil war but not come to power through that."

He expressed confidence in the capabilities of Afghan National Defense and Security Force (ANDSAF).

He said, "I see it as a time where Afghan take care of the full security situation in our country...Afghanistan doesn't need US combat troops on the ground, what we need is support to ANDSAF, which we have been told will continue."&nbsp;

Since 2014, ANDSAF has been in charge, and since the US Taliban pact of last year, 94 per cent&nbsp;of combat offensive operations have been done by them independently.

Dismissing the parallels in Afghanistan when it comes to the 1990s, Mohib said, "Afghanistan is not what it was, but one thing is for certain, those parallels do not reflect the realities of Afghanistan".

Against the backdrop of US President Joe Biden's announcement of the withdrawal of American troops, Afghan National Security Advisor Hamdullah Mohib and India's NSA Ajit Doval spoke on Friday morning.

Against the backdrop of US President Joe Biden's announcement of the withdrawal of American troops, Afghan National Security Advisor Hamdullah Mohib and India's NSA Ajit Doval spoke on Friday morning. This is the first-ever high-level engagement between the two sides and comes just two days after the announcement came from Washington. Mohib, speaking at an event virtually, confirmed the call and said, "I spoke to Ajit Doval this morning about our views and shared what we think should go and happen". Watch | India supports "Afghan-led , Afghan-owned, and Afghan controlled" peace process. In the last two decades, since the fall of the Taliban in 2001 in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks in New York, New Delhi had emerged as the country's major development partner. The Afghan NSA, speaking at the event, slammed Pakistan for its support to the Taliban. Without taking the country by name, he pointed out, "any further push means that there is direct involvement in, by a neighbour which can be very dangerous. Nationalistic forces in Afghanistan are very angry, upset over this." Warning that If this "limit is passed, then I think, there would be a huge problem for the said neighbour in their country by all Afghans who are there and from within Afghanistan. There could be huge blowback which can be destructive for the neighbour". In the past, Taliban top leadership like Mullah Baradar have been coming to Pakistan, and not only holding a meeting with foreign minister Qureshi and Pakistani Prime minister Imran Khan but also their fighters in the country. This has irked the Afghan government, which has strongly raised the matter with Islamabad. On Taliban, he said, "Taliban has no reason to continue violence in Afghanistan, the reason, why they continued, are totally out the picture and its time they make real peace with Afghan govt, become part of the mainstream political society". "They need to know, they can't take power by force, they can start a civil war but not come to power through that." He expressed confidence in the capabilities of Afghan National Defense and Security Force (ANDSAF). He said, "I see it as a time where Afghan take care of the full security situation in our country...Afghanistan doesn't need US combat troops on the ground, what we need is support to ANDSAF, which we have been told will continue." Since 2014, ANDSAF has been in charge, and since the US Taliban pact of last year, 94 per cent of combat offensive operations have been done by them independently. Dismissing the parallels in Afghanistan when it comes to the 1990s, Mohib said, "Afghanistan is not what it was, but one thing is for certain, those parallels do not reflect the realities of Afghanistan".

Afghan, Indian NSAs speak in the backdrop of Biden's announcement of troop withdrawal 

Russia on Thursday said that the US sanctions for alleged election interference and hacking will "not help" a possible summit between US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden </a>and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.&nbsp;

The reaction came after the US media reported that Washington on Thursday will impose sanctions on over 30 Russian entities, expel more than 10 Russian diplomats&nbsp;from the US, and push an existing ban on US banks transacting in Russian government debt.

Watch |&nbsp;

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/nato-warned-russia-against-military-build-up-near-ukrainian-border-377642/embed" width="560"></iframe>

"What is currently being discussed -- likely sanctions -- will in no way help such a meeting. That is unambiguous," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists, as reported by news agency AFP.&nbsp;

On Tuesday, Biden invited Putin in a phone call for a summit on the neutral ground after tensions between the West and Russia intensified in recent weeks over the conflict in Ukraine.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-slap-new-sanctions-on-russia-for-election-interference-cyber-attack-sources-377685">US to slap new sanctions on Russia for election interference, cyber attack: Sources</a>

The Kremlin spokesperson, however, said that it will up to both the president to decide whether the summit could go ahead or not.&nbsp;

A Russian troop formation on the Ukrainian border, where the government forces have been fighting pro-Russia separatists since 2014 has caused concerns in the West and issued warnings by NATO.&nbsp;

Though, in the Putin-Biden phone call, both leaders called for continual dialogue after ties between both the nations reached a new low when Biden described his Russian counterpart as a "killer" last month.

&nbsp; 
(With inputs from agencies)

Russia on Thursday said that the US sanctions for alleged election interference and hacking will "not help" a possible summit between US President Joe Biden and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.

Russia on Thursday said that the US sanctions for alleged election interference and hacking will "not help" a possible summit between US President Joe Biden and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin. The reaction came after the US media reported that Washington on Thursday will impose sanctions on over 30 Russian entities, expel more than 10 Russian diplomats from the US, and push an existing ban on US banks transacting in Russian government debt. Watch | "What is currently being discussed -- likely sanctions -- will in no way help such a meeting. That is unambiguous," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told journalists, as reported by news agency AFP. On Tuesday, Biden invited Putin in a phone call for a summit on the neutral ground after tensions between the West and Russia intensified in recent weeks over the conflict in Ukraine. Also read | US to slap new sanctions on Russia for election interference, cyber attack: Sources The Kremlin spokesperson, however, said that it will up to both the president to decide whether the summit could go ahead or not. A Russian troop formation on the Ukrainian border, where the government forces have been fighting pro-Russia separatists since 2014 has caused concerns in the West and issued warnings by NATO. Though, in the Putin-Biden phone call, both leaders called for continual dialogue after ties between both the nations reached a new low when Biden described his Russian counterpart as a "killer" last month. (With inputs from agencies)

US sanctions on Russia won't 'help' Biden-Putin summit: Kremlin

President Joe Biden announced Wednesday it's "time to end" America's longest war with the unconditional withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan where they have spent two decades in a bloody, largely fruitless battle against the Taliban.

Dubbed the "forever war," the US military onslaught in Afghanistan began in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States.

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/biden-to-pull-out-all-us-troops-from-afghanistan-by-september-11-377553/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

&nbsp;

Now, 20 years later -- after almost 2,400 US military and tens of thousands of Afghan deaths -- Biden is naming September 11 as the deadline by which the last US soldiers will have finally departed.

The war is at best at a stalemate.

The internationally backed government in Kabul has only tenuous control in swaths of the country, while the Taliban are growing in strength, with many predicting the insurgency will seek to regain total power once the government's US military umbrella is removed.

In a speech later Wednesday, Biden was to tell Americans that it's time to accept the reality that there's no alternative to a clean break.

"We cannot continue the cycle of extending or expanding our military presence in Afghanistan hoping to create the ideal conditions for our withdrawal, expecting a different result," he was to say, according to excerpts released ahead of his speech.

"I am now the fourth American president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan. Two Republicans. Two Democrats," he said. "I will not pass this responsibility to a fifth."

Biden's decision is not a shock. The war is hugely unpopular among voters and Biden's predecessor Donald Trump had committed to an even earlier exit of May 1.

Biden ally Senator Bernie Sanders called it "brave."

However, there was immediate criticism from some quarters that the United States is abandoning the Afghan government and encouraging jihadist insurgencies.

"Wars don't end when one side abandons the fight," influential Republican Representative Liz Cheney said.

"Withdrawing our forces from Afghanistan by Sept 11 will only embolden the very jihadists who attacked our homeland on that day 20 years ago."

'Recipe' for forever war&nbsp;

Biden was set to say in his speech that Washington will continue to support the Afghan government, only not "militarily."

This will mark a profound shift in clout for the beleaguered government and its US and coalition-trained security forces.

A senior administration official said the US military exit would be completed by September 11.

Biden had earlier considered stationing a residual US force to strike at Al-Qaeda or other international jihadist groups in Afghanistan or making withdrawal contingent on progress on the ground or in slow-moving peace talks.

In the end, he decided to leave only personnel to guard installations like the US embassy in Kabul, a senior official said.

"The president has judged that a conditions-based approach, which has been the approach of the past two decades, is a recipe for staying in Afghanistan forever," the official told reporters on condition of anonymity.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the moment had arrived to bring forces back home, and Washington would work out a "coordinated" withdrawal plan with its NATO allies.

"Together, we have achieved the goals that we set out to achieve and now it is time to bring our forces home," Blinken said ahead of talks with NATO partners in Brussels.&nbsp;

German Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said Wednesday that NATO would likely join the US in withdrawing its troops by September.&nbsp;

The Times newspaper said Britain would withdraw its roughly 750 troops, citing sources as saying "they would struggle without American support because of a reliance on US bases and infrastructure."

Taliban 'confident'&nbsp;

The Biden official said the withdrawal would begin in May and that the delay was largely logistical, with troops possibly out of Afghanistan well before September 11.

The official warned the Taliban -- who are observing a truce with US but not with Afghan forces -- not to strike coalition forces as they leave, saying that in response to any attack "we will hit back hard."

But a threat assessment report published Tuesday by the director of US national intelligence said the Taliban "is confident it can achieve military victory."&nbsp;

The upheaval raises big questions over the future of attempts to modernize Afghanistan, especially for Afghan women who have benefited from increased rights, like access to education.

The Taliban, who enforce an austere brand of Sunni Islam, banned women from schools, offices, music and most of daily life during their 1996-2001 rule over much of Afghanistan. Two decades later, 40 percent of schoolchildren are girls.

Peace effort in Turkey&nbsp;

Biden's decision came as Turkey said it will host a US-backed peace conference from April 24 to May 4 that would bring together the Afghan government, the Taliban and international partners.

But Mohammad Naeem, spokesman for the Taliban office in Qatar, said the insurgents will not participate in any conference on Afghanistan's future "until all foreign forces completely withdraw."

A decade ago, the United States had about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan.

The troop figure by the end of Trump's presidency had gone down to 2,500. As of February this year, NATO had around 10,000 troops in Afghanistan. 
&nbsp;

President Joe Biden announced Wednesday it's "time to end" America's longest war with the unconditional withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan where they have spent two decades in a bloody, largely fruitless battle against the Taliban.

President Joe Biden announced Wednesday it's "time to end" America's longest war with the unconditional withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan where they have spent two decades in a bloody, largely fruitless battle against the Taliban. Dubbed the "forever war," the US military onslaught in Afghanistan began in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States. Watch | Now, 20 years later -- after almost 2,400 US military and tens of thousands of Afghan deaths -- Biden is naming September 11 as the deadline by which the last US soldiers will have finally departed. The war is at best at a stalemate. The internationally backed government in Kabul has only tenuous control in swaths of the country, while the Taliban are growing in strength, with many predicting the insurgency will seek to regain total power once the government's US military umbrella is removed. In a speech later Wednesday, Biden was to tell Americans that it's time to accept the reality that there's no alternative to a clean break. "We cannot continue the cycle of extending or expanding our military presence in Afghanistan hoping to create the ideal conditions for our withdrawal, expecting a different result," he was to say, according to excerpts released ahead of his speech. "I am now the fourth American president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan. Two Republicans. Two Democrats," he said. "I will not pass this responsibility to a fifth." Biden's decision is not a shock. The war is hugely unpopular among voters and Biden's predecessor Donald Trump had committed to an even earlier exit of May 1. Biden ally Senator Bernie Sanders called it "brave." However, there was immediate criticism from some quarters that the United States is abandoning the Afghan government and encouraging jihadist insurgencies. "Wars don't end when one side abandons the fight," influential Republican Representative Liz Cheney said. "Withdrawing our forces from Afghanistan by Sept 11 will only embolden the very jihadists who attacked our homeland on that day 20 years ago." 'Recipe' for forever war Biden was set to say in his speech that Washington will continue to support the Afghan government, only not "militarily." This will mark a profound shift in clout for the beleaguered government and its US and coalition-trained security forces. A senior administration official said the US military exit would be completed by September 11. Biden had earlier considered stationing a residual US force to strike at Al-Qaeda or other international jihadist groups in Afghanistan or making withdrawal contingent on progress on the ground or in slow-moving peace talks. In the end, he decided to leave only personnel to guard installations like the US embassy in Kabul, a senior official said. "The president has judged that a conditions-based approach, which has been the approach of the past two decades, is a recipe for staying in Afghanistan forever," the official told reporters on condition of anonymity. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the moment had arrived to bring forces back home, and Washington would work out a "coordinated" withdrawal plan with its NATO allies. "Together, we have achieved the goals that we set out to achieve and now it is time to bring our forces home," Blinken said ahead of talks with NATO partners in Brussels. German Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer said Wednesday that NATO would likely join the US in withdrawing its troops by September. The Times newspaper said Britain would withdraw its roughly 750 troops, citing sources as saying "they would struggle without American support because of a reliance on US bases and infrastructure." Taliban 'confident' The Biden official said the withdrawal would begin in May and that the delay was largely logistical, with troops possibly out of Afghanistan well before September 11. The official warned the Taliban -- who are observing a truce with US but not with Afghan forces -- not to strike coalition forces as they leave, saying that in response to any attack "we will hit back hard." But a threat assessment report published Tuesday by the director of US national intelligence said the Taliban "is confident it can achieve military victory." The upheaval raises big questions over the future of attempts to modernize Afghanistan, especially for Afghan women who have benefited from increased rights, like access to education. The Taliban, who enforce an austere brand of Sunni Islam, banned women from schools, offices, music and most of daily life during their 1996-2001 rule over much of Afghanistan. Two decades later, 40 percent of schoolchildren are girls. Peace effort in Turkey Biden's decision came as Turkey said it will host a US-backed peace conference from April 24 to May 4 that would bring together the Afghan government, the Taliban and international partners. But Mohammad Naeem, spokesman for the Taliban office in Qatar, said the insurgents will not participate in any conference on Afghanistan's future "until all foreign forces completely withdraw." A decade ago, the United States had about 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. The troop figure by the end of Trump's presidency had gone down to 2,500. As of February this year, NATO had around 10,000 troops in Afghanistan.

Biden says 'time to end' US war in Afghanistan with total pullout

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday said that the moment has arrived to bring the foreign troops home, adding that Washington would engage with NATO allies on a "coordinated" pull-out.&nbsp;

"Together, we have achieved the goals that we set out to achieve and now it is time to bring our forces home," Blinken was quoted as saying by news agency AFP ahead of talks with NATO nations in Brussels.&nbsp;

Watch |&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/antony-blinken-to-return-to-brussels-for-talks-on-ukraine-afghanistan-377207/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Blinken's comments came on a day when US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden </a>is set to formally announce that all US troops will be pulled out from Afghanistan no later than September 11, a senior official has confirmed.&nbsp;

Meanwhile, the US's NATO ally Germany has supported the move of withdrawal by September with its Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer saying: "We always said: we'll go in together, we'll leave together". &nbsp;

A report in The Times claimed that Britain is also planning to pull out its troops from the country around the same time.

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/biden-set-to-complete-withdrawal-of-remaining-us-troops-from-afghanistan-before-911-anniversary-377408">Biden set to complete withdrawal of remaining US troops from Afghanistan before 9/11 anniversary</a> 
&nbsp;

It said that UK would pull out about 750 troops, citing sources that without the US, Britain would "struggle" because of "a reliance on US bases and infrastructure."

Meanwhile, Turkey has announced an international peace conference in Afghanistan to reach a solution to end nearly 40 years of violence and chaos that has ravaged the nation.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday said that the moment has arrived to bring the foreign troops home, adding that Washington would engage with NATO allies on a "coordinated" pull-out.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday said that the moment has arrived to bring the foreign troops home, adding that Washington would engage with NATO allies on a "coordinated" pull-out. "Together, we have achieved the goals that we set out to achieve and now it is time to bring our forces home," Blinken was quoted as saying by news agency AFP ahead of talks with NATO nations in Brussels. Watch | Blinken's comments came on a day when US President Joe Biden is set to formally announce that all US troops will be pulled out from Afghanistan no later than September 11, a senior official has confirmed. Meanwhile, the US's NATO ally Germany has supported the move of withdrawal by September with its Defence Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer saying: "We always said: we'll go in together, we'll leave together". A report in The Times claimed that Britain is also planning to pull out its troops from the country around the same time. Also read | Biden set to complete withdrawal of remaining US troops from Afghanistan before 9/11 anniversary It said that UK would pull out about 750 troops, citing sources that without the US, Britain would "struggle" because of "a reliance on US bases and infrastructure." Meanwhile, Turkey has announced an international peace conference in Afghanistan to reach a solution to end nearly 40 years of violence and chaos that has ravaged the nation.

'Time to bring our forces home': US on Afghan pullout

US State Department has issued its report on human rights condition in different countries across the world. It has also discussed Pakistan, in terms of different issues including human rights violation, freedom of expression, the plight of minorities, militancy and other issues.

In the chapter on Pakistan, the report has mentioned "threats of violence, or unjustified arrests or prosecutions against journalists, use of criminal libel laws to prosecute social media speech and censorship, and site blocking."

A prominent feature of the rights report is the plight of women in Pakistan. The US State Department underlined a wide array of reasons for the plummeting women`s rights in Pakistan and the increase in female marginalisation in the country.

The report said that the reasons include bureaucratic corruption, a dearth of accountability and investigation, especially when it comes to violence against women, reported Pakistan Today.The report also highlighted human trafficking as a crime that directly impacted women in the country. As per Pakistan Today, this was considered a major contributor to the marginalisation of racial and ethnic minorities. Furthermore, violence and threats of violence, in addition to women, also impact other gender and sexual minorities including LGBTQ.

Talking about the rights of minorities, the report mentioned that there are incidents of attack on them in different parts of Pakistan."There were occasionally reports of mob violence against religious minorities, including Christians, Ahmadi Muslims, and Hindus. Shia Muslim activists reported continuing instances of targeted killings and enforced disappearances in limited parts of the country," the report mentioned.Linked to this, the report also talked about the state misbehaviour with different ethnic leaders and activities.

As per the report, "human rights organizations reported some authorities disappeared or arrested Pashtun, Sindhi, and Baloch human rights activists, as well as Sindhi and Baloch nationalists without cause or warrant."The situation on the freedom of expression, attitude with journalists and media, Pakistan Today reported citing the report, was not so encouraging. As per US State Department, unknown actors abducted journalists including the likes of Matiullah Jan, Bilal Farooq and Ali Imran.

Furthermore, the department mentioned the attack on journalists by terrorists."In addition, threats, harassment, abductions, violence, and killings led journalists and editors to practice self-censorship. Government failure to investigate and prosecute attacks on human rights defenders and peaceful protesters led to de facto restrictions on freedom of assembly and association," the report stated.The major concern was especially with freedom of expression and the plight of ethnicities and minorities.

Quoting Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M), the report said: "Only 450 of 5,128 missing persons had been found since 2018, and a further 1,800 disappeared during this period."The issue of missing persons has been there in Pakistan for the last two decades, as relatives of these people have been demanding justice from the government to Supreme Court, but the issue has remained unresolved.Also, the censorship on media has increased in the last few years, the latest bill about "intentional disrespect of Pakistan Army" is a fresh example.Under this new bill, "anyone who shall be guilty of said offence could face up to two years imprisonment or fine that may extend to Rs 500,000, or both."

US State Department has issued its report on human rights condition in different countries across the world. It has also discussed Pakistan, in terms of different issues including human rights violation, freedom of expression, the plight of minorities, militancy and other issues.

US State Department has issued its report on human rights condition in different countries across the world. It has also discussed Pakistan, in terms of different issues including human rights violation, freedom of expression, the plight of minorities, militancy and other issues. In the chapter on Pakistan, the report has mentioned "threats of violence, or unjustified arrests or prosecutions against journalists, use of criminal libel laws to prosecute social media speech and censorship, and site blocking." A prominent feature of the rights report is the plight of women in Pakistan. The US State Department underlined a wide array of reasons for the plummeting women`s rights in Pakistan and the increase in female marginalisation in the country. The report said that the reasons include bureaucratic corruption, a dearth of accountability and investigation, especially when it comes to violence against women, reported Pakistan Today.The report also highlighted human trafficking as a crime that directly impacted women in the country. As per Pakistan Today, this was considered a major contributor to the marginalisation of racial and ethnic minorities. Furthermore, violence and threats of violence, in addition to women, also impact other gender and sexual minorities including LGBTQ. Talking about the rights of minorities, the report mentioned that there are incidents of attack on them in different parts of Pakistan."There were occasionally reports of mob violence against religious minorities, including Christians, Ahmadi Muslims, and Hindus. Shia Muslim activists reported continuing instances of targeted killings and enforced disappearances in limited parts of the country," the report mentioned.Linked to this, the report also talked about the state misbehaviour with different ethnic leaders and activities. As per the report, "human rights organizations reported some authorities disappeared or arrested Pashtun, Sindhi, and Baloch human rights activists, as well as Sindhi and Baloch nationalists without cause or warrant."The situation on the freedom of expression, attitude with journalists and media, Pakistan Today reported citing the report, was not so encouraging. As per US State Department, unknown actors abducted journalists including the likes of Matiullah Jan, Bilal Farooq and Ali Imran. Furthermore, the department mentioned the attack on journalists by terrorists."In addition, threats, harassment, abductions, violence, and killings led journalists and editors to practice self-censorship. Government failure to investigate and prosecute attacks on human rights defenders and peaceful protesters led to de facto restrictions on freedom of assembly and association," the report stated.The major concern was especially with freedom of expression and the plight of ethnicities and minorities. Quoting Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M), the report said: "Only 450 of 5,128 missing persons had been found since 2018, and a further 1,800 disappeared during this period."The issue of missing persons has been there in Pakistan for the last two decades, as relatives of these people have been demanding justice from the government to Supreme Court, but the issue has remained unresolved.Also, the censorship on media has increased in the last few years, the latest bill about "intentional disrespect of Pakistan Army" is a fresh example.Under this new bill, "anyone who shall be guilty of said offence could face up to two years imprisonment or fine that may extend to Rs 500,000, or both."

US report reveals troubling human rights abuses in Pakistan

Mexico has reportedly doubled the detention of migrants after deploying 10,000 troops across the southern border, White House recently said.

Jen Psaki, the White House Press Secretary, on Monday announced the move as US counts on local governments to slow down arrivals at the US border.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-smugglers-are-dropping-kids-over-the-us-mexico-border-wall-374852/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

Earlier in March, Mexico had began upping its enforcement operations to catch immigrants attempting to leave the country illegally towards the US. In addition, Reuters also reported that Mexico was working to better regulate the movement of people along the border with Guatemala.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-caught-a-huge-number-of-migrants-at-mexico-border-in-march-report-says-375108" hreflang="en">US caught a huge number of migrants at Mexico border in March, report says</a>

Mexico has deployed members of the National Guard along with soldiers from the immigrant office and the navy.

By March 22, Mexico claimed to have 9,000 troops across the border from its defence ministry, its navy and the National Guard stationed across northern and southern borders. A member of the Mexican National Guard had said that the force’s daily arrests had doubled over the last few weeks.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/traffickers-are-dropping-children-over-us-mexico-border-wall-374707" hreflang="en">Traffickers are dropping children over US-Mexico border wall</a>

Before Joe Biden took office as US president in January, Guatemalan authorities had stopped a US-bound caravan of migrants. Honduras has done the same to tackle the issue.

White House aide Tyler Moran had said in March that the White House has agreements with Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala to deploy more troops along their borders.

(With inputs from agencies)

Mexico has reportedly doubled the detention of migrants after deploying 10,000 troops across the southern border, White House recently said. Jen Psaki, the White House Press Secretary, on Monday announced the move as US counts on local governments to slow down arrivals at the US border.

Mexico has reportedly doubled the detention of migrants after deploying 10,000 troops across the southern border, White House recently said. Jen Psaki, the White House Press Secretary, on Monday announced the move as US counts on local governments to slow down arrivals at the US border. Earlier in March, Mexico had began upping its enforcement operations to catch immigrants attempting to leave the country illegally towards the US. In addition, Reuters also reported that Mexico was working to better regulate the movement of people along the border with Guatemala. Also read: US caught a huge number of migrants at Mexico border in March, report says Mexico has deployed members of the National Guard along with soldiers from the immigrant office and the navy. By March 22, Mexico claimed to have 9,000 troops across the border from its defence ministry, its navy and the National Guard stationed across northern and southern borders. A member of the Mexican National Guard had said that the force’s daily arrests had doubled over the last few weeks. Also read: Traffickers are dropping children over US-Mexico border wall Before Joe Biden took office as US president in January, Guatemalan authorities had stopped a US-bound caravan of migrants. Honduras has done the same to tackle the issue. White House aide Tyler Moran had said in March that the White House has agreements with Mexico, Honduras, and Guatemala to deploy more troops along their borders. (With inputs from agencies)

Mexican troops have doubled detention of migrants heading to US: White House

US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin is on the two-day visit to Israel. This is the first official visit by a US official since President Biden took office in January.

US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin to meet PM Benjamin Netanyahu

US has now issued warning to Russia over its troop build-up. United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken has warned Russia of consequences if it escalates tensions on the Ukrainian border.

United States Secretary of State Antony Blinken issues warning to Moscow

The US State Department on Friday issued new guidelines that will enable US officials to meet more freely with officials from Taiwan.

US State Department issues fresh guidelines on Taiwan

On Oct. 30, 2015, a fire ripped through a nightclub in the Romanian capital, Bucharest, leaving 64 people dead. Almost six years later, a documentary about the fire and its tragic aftermath has been nominated for two Oscars.

It would be the first Oscar win for the Eastern European country, but the film’s success is bittersweet for many Romanians, given its painful subject matter — particularly since many believe not enough has changed since 2015.

“Collective,” which has been nominated for best documentary feature and best foreign film, follows a group of investigative journalists from a sports newspaper as they uncover painful truths about the Romanian health care system.

“The situation was so appalling that basically it should have been a big scandal in the whole of Europe,” said Alexander Nanau, the film’s director.

Events on the night of the fire and its immediate aftermath ricocheted across Romania, toppling the government at the time — led by the Social Democratic Party — and mobilizing civil society into large-scale protests.

In the years since, however, there have been further political scandals, and few health care overhauls. The coronavirus pandemic has also put huge new demands on the struggling Romanian health care system. Two fires in COVID-19 wards in the last six months have left at least 20 people dead.

Many Romanians wonder how much has really changed since “Collective.”

While tragic, the nightclub fire is just the film’s starting point. The blaze claimed 27 lives in its immediate aftermath, but 64 people would ultimately die, many victims of a health care system awash with corruption and willing to hide painful truth from the victims and their families.

Standing outside one of Bucharest’s main hospitals, Nanau recalled: “It was basically in front of this hospital where the minister of health always stood flanked by doctors saying ‘We can treat the burn victims at the highest standards.’”

However, as the journalists found out, the burn unit was not even operational at the time, Nanau said. “It’s incredible that they have the guts to lie to all these people that their kids are being given surgery in the most modern burn unit when in fact this was closed.”

The journalists also discovered that the disinfectant used in hospitals across the country was being watered down, to the extent that it was largely ineffectual, probably resulting in many more deaths. The owner of the company involved drove his car into a tree after the truth was brought to light, killing himself.

The documentary shows in real time the reaction of the journalists after a whistleblower sends them footage from a hospital of maggots crawling in the wound of a burn victim.

The film has been compared to both “Spotlight” and “All the President’s Men,” and in a review for The New York Times late last year, Manohla Dargis described “Collective” as a “staggering documentary” that offered “no moment when you can take an easy breath, assured that the terrible things you’ve been watching onscreen are finally over.”

For people in Romania, however, much of what is shown onscreen is painfully familiar.

Catalin Tolontan, then editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper Gazeta Sporturilor, is one of the main protagonists of “Collective.” Before the documentary, “We used to receive 10 or 15 messages per day from the public, with scoops or information,” he said in an interview. “After the movie we received 70 to 80 a day.”

Tedy Ursuleanu, who suffered severe burns across her head and body, and had her fingers amputated as a result of the fire, is one of the strongest characters in the film.

In an interview, she said that it was not a hard decision to let the filmmakers follow her, but that seeing the film was a painful experience. “When I saw some of the scenes, the impact was as if I lived those moments again,” Ursuleanu said. “I started to cry. I needed to go outside to compose myself.”

Ursuleanu said she believed that not enough progress had been made in the years since the documentary was filmed. “Changes have taken place, but they are few compared to the needs we have here,” she said. “Sadly, tragedies like this could easily happen again, because even now measures are not respected.”

Partway through the documentary, “Collective” introduces a young, reform-minded health minister, Vlad Voiculescu, who is brought in as part of a short-lived technocrat government.

Voiculescu and his team face strong resistance as they try to bring greater transparency to the health care system, while having to accept that the system was culpable in many deaths.

In a recent interview, Voiculescu, who was reappointed as health minister late last year, said that what frustrated him most was that on his return he found an institution that was “even more collapsed than before.” Now, Voiculescu is more focused on dealing with the coronavirus than overhauling the Romanian health care system.

“Collective,” which appeared on streaming platforms late last year, has resonated strongly with audiences around the world, especially at a time when the pandemic has made health care a central issue globally.

Nanau, a Romanian director who spent much of his life in Germany before moving back to his home country in 2015, has a track record of producing powerful documentaries. His previous film, “Toto and His Sisters,” followed the lives of three teenagers left to fend largely for themselves in one of the poorest areas of Bucharest, after their mother was sent to prison on drug charges.

But with “Collective,” he seems to have found a subject that hit at a perfect moment.

The film’s impact has also been felt outside Romania. Earlier this year in Mongolia, when a woman with COVID-19 was transferred from the hospital in freezing temperatures just days after giving birth, journalists began asking tough questions of the government, apparently encouraging one another on Facebook by referencing “Collective,” which a local television station had shown days earlier. Protests followed, and the government ultimately resigned.

“If you are a journalist in a small country and saw ‘Spotlight,’ you could say, ‘Well, this is the U.S., they have a lot of resources, they have a strong democracy, they have a bond between the public and government,’” Tolontan, the newspaper editor, said. “But if you are in Mongolia or the Czech Republic, Indonesia, and you saw this movie, you think ‘They’re like us.’”

Romanian movies like “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days,” “Beyond the Hills” and “Child’s Pose” have received top awards at international festivals over the years, but none has won an Oscar.

Andrei Gorzo, a Romanian film critic, said that it was harder for Romanian viewers to see “Collective” as a morally clear-cut tale of a few good people fighting to change the rotten system. Instead, he said, it captures a specific moment in Romania, when urban, middle-class voters believed in a new breed of politician, young and unsullied, who could clean up Romanian politics. “It is impossible for me to watch the film without acknowledging that a lot of that romanticism has turned sour since then,” he said.

Others are more optimistic. “The generation that will change things here is not the generation that is 35-plus,” Nanau said. “It’s the younger generation, and these are the people that write to us, that we have met in the cinemas.”

Tolontan said he saw “Collective” as “a point of no return” for Romanian society.

Whether the film wins at the Oscars ceremony next month, many Romanians still hope that the film’s biggest impact will be at home, and that they can leave its content in the past.

On Oct. 30, 2015, a fire ripped through a nightclub in the Romanian capital, Bucharest, leaving 64 people dead. Almost six years later, a documentary about the fire and its tragic aftermath has been nominated for two Oscars.

On Oct. 30, 2015, a fire ripped through a nightclub in the Romanian capital, Bucharest, leaving 64 people dead. Almost six years later, a documentary about the fire and its tragic aftermath has been nominated for two Oscars. It would be the first Oscar win for the Eastern European country, but the film’s success is bittersweet for many Romanians, given its painful subject matter — particularly since many believe not enough has changed since 2015. “Collective,” which has been nominated for best documentary feature and best foreign film, follows a group of investigative journalists from a sports newspaper as they uncover painful truths about the Romanian health care system. “The situation was so appalling that basically it should have been a big scandal in the whole of Europe,” said Alexander Nanau, the film’s director. Events on the night of the fire and its immediate aftermath ricocheted across Romania, toppling the government at the time — led by the Social Democratic Party — and mobilizing civil society into large-scale protests. In the years since, however, there have been further political scandals, and few health care overhauls. The coronavirus pandemic has also put huge new demands on the struggling Romanian health care system. Two fires in COVID-19 wards in the last six months have left at least 20 people dead. Many Romanians wonder how much has really changed since “Collective.” While tragic, the nightclub fire is just the film’s starting point. The blaze claimed 27 lives in its immediate aftermath, but 64 people would ultimately die, many victims of a health care system awash with corruption and willing to hide painful truth from the victims and their families. Standing outside one of Bucharest’s main hospitals, Nanau recalled: “It was basically in front of this hospital where the minister of health always stood flanked by doctors saying ‘We can treat the burn victims at the highest standards.’” However, as the journalists found out, the burn unit was not even operational at the time, Nanau said. “It’s incredible that they have the guts to lie to all these people that their kids are being given surgery in the most modern burn unit when in fact this was closed.” The journalists also discovered that the disinfectant used in hospitals across the country was being watered down, to the extent that it was largely ineffectual, probably resulting in many more deaths. The owner of the company involved drove his car into a tree after the truth was brought to light, killing himself. The documentary shows in real time the reaction of the journalists after a whistleblower sends them footage from a hospital of maggots crawling in the wound of a burn victim. The film has been compared to both “Spotlight” and “All the President’s Men,” and in a review for The New York Times late last year, Manohla Dargis described “Collective” as a “staggering documentary” that offered “no moment when you can take an easy breath, assured that the terrible things you’ve been watching onscreen are finally over.” For people in Romania, however, much of what is shown onscreen is painfully familiar. Catalin Tolontan, then editor-in-chief of the daily newspaper Gazeta Sporturilor, is one of the main protagonists of “Collective.” Before the documentary, “We used to receive 10 or 15 messages per day from the public, with scoops or information,” he said in an interview. “After the movie we received 70 to 80 a day.” Tedy Ursuleanu, who suffered severe burns across her head and body, and had her fingers amputated as a result of the fire, is one of the strongest characters in the film. In an interview, she said that it was not a hard decision to let the filmmakers follow her, but that seeing the film was a painful experience. “When I saw some of the scenes, the impact was as if I lived those moments again,” Ursuleanu said. “I started to cry. I needed to go outside to compose myself.” Ursuleanu said she believed that not enough progress had been made in the years since the documentary was filmed. “Changes have taken place, but they are few compared to the needs we have here,” she said. “Sadly, tragedies like this could easily happen again, because even now measures are not respected.” Partway through the documentary, “Collective” introduces a young, reform-minded health minister, Vlad Voiculescu, who is brought in as part of a short-lived technocrat government. Voiculescu and his team face strong resistance as they try to bring greater transparency to the health care system, while having to accept that the system was culpable in many deaths. In a recent interview, Voiculescu, who was reappointed as health minister late last year, said that what frustrated him most was that on his return he found an institution that was “even more collapsed than before.” Now, Voiculescu is more focused on dealing with the coronavirus than overhauling the Romanian health care system. “Collective,” which appeared on streaming platforms late last year, has resonated strongly with audiences around the world, especially at a time when the pandemic has made health care a central issue globally. Nanau, a Romanian director who spent much of his life in Germany before moving back to his home country in 2015, has a track record of producing powerful documentaries. His previous film, “Toto and His Sisters,” followed the lives of three teenagers left to fend largely for themselves in one of the poorest areas of Bucharest, after their mother was sent to prison on drug charges. But with “Collective,” he seems to have found a subject that hit at a perfect moment. The film’s impact has also been felt outside Romania. Earlier this year in Mongolia, when a woman with COVID-19 was transferred from the hospital in freezing temperatures just days after giving birth, journalists began asking tough questions of the government, apparently encouraging one another on Facebook by referencing “Collective,” which a local television station had shown days earlier. Protests followed, and the government ultimately resigned. “If you are a journalist in a small country and saw ‘Spotlight,’ you could say, ‘Well, this is the U.S., they have a lot of resources, they have a strong democracy, they have a bond between the public and government,’” Tolontan, the newspaper editor, said. “But if you are in Mongolia or the Czech Republic, Indonesia, and you saw this movie, you think ‘They’re like us.’” Romanian movies like “4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days,” “Beyond the Hills” and “Child’s Pose” have received top awards at international festivals over the years, but none has won an Oscar. Andrei Gorzo, a Romanian film critic, said that it was harder for Romanian viewers to see “Collective” as a morally clear-cut tale of a few good people fighting to change the rotten system. Instead, he said, it captures a specific moment in Romania, when urban, middle-class voters believed in a new breed of politician, young and unsullied, who could clean up Romanian politics. “It is impossible for me to watch the film without acknowledging that a lot of that romanticism has turned sour since then,” he said. Others are more optimistic. “The generation that will change things here is not the generation that is 35-plus,” Nanau said. “It’s the younger generation, and these are the people that write to us, that we have met in the cinemas.” Tolontan said he saw “Collective” as “a point of no return” for Romanian society. Whether the film wins at the Oscars ceremony next month, many Romanians still hope that the film’s biggest impact will be at home, and that they can leave its content in the past.

Since the Oscar-nominated ‘Collective,’ much and little has changed

United States on Friday demanded swift action from United Nations Security Council on Myanmar. There have been increasing calls for Myanmar's military junta o restore democracy. The military toppled civilian government led by Aung San Suu Kyi in a coup on February 1.

"The military needs to feel the cost associated with its horrific actions. The stability and prosperity of the region depends on swift action," US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told a Security Council meeting.

"The military has ignored our condemnations, posing a test for the Security Council," she said.

"Will the Council quibble over language in yet another statement or will we act to save the lives of the Burmese people?" she said, using Myanmar's former name of Burma.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/myanmar-military-sentences-19-to-death-says-anti-coup-protests-dwindling-376559">Myanmar military sentences 19 to death, says anti-coup protests dwindling</a>

People of Myanmar have fiercely opposed military rule and have held demonstrations and protests across the country almost everyday since the military coup. The military has resorted to strong-handed tactics. Armed forces have opened fire on number of occasions and this had the death toll rise to hundreds.

Estonia, a non-permanent member of the Security Council, said that the 15-nation body needed to start drafting a resolution that could include sanctions on Myanmar including an international arms embargo.

"The United Nations Security Council is the only entity in the world, which has the legitimate power to protect nations at risk and must explore every tool in its toolbox to end this horrible situation," said Estonia's ambassador, Sven Jurgenson.

Russia and China both hold veto power and have historically opposed international sanctions, although Beijing -- the military's primary ally -- has voiced increasing concern about the instability in its neighbor.

The military on February 1 toppled democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi and has since violently suppressed pro-democracy protests, with the United Nations saying that more than 600 people have died.

(With AFP inputs)

United States on Friday demanded swift action from United Nations Security Council on Myanmar. There have been increasing calls for Myanmar's military junta o restore democracy.

United States on Friday demanded swift action from United Nations Security Council on Myanmar. There have been increasing calls for Myanmar's military junta o restore democracy. The military toppled civilian government led by Aung San Suu Kyi in a coup on February 1. "The military needs to feel the cost associated with its horrific actions. The stability and prosperity of the region depends on swift action," US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told a Security Council meeting. "The military has ignored our condemnations, posing a test for the Security Council," she said. "Will the Council quibble over language in yet another statement or will we act to save the lives of the Burmese people?" she said, using Myanmar's former name of Burma. Also Read | Myanmar military sentences 19 to death, says anti-coup protests dwindling People of Myanmar have fiercely opposed military rule and have held demonstrations and protests across the country almost everyday since the military coup. The military has resorted to strong-handed tactics. Armed forces have opened fire on number of occasions and this had the death toll rise to hundreds. Estonia, a non-permanent member of the Security Council, said that the 15-nation body needed to start drafting a resolution that could include sanctions on Myanmar including an international arms embargo. "The United Nations Security Council is the only entity in the world, which has the legitimate power to protect nations at risk and must explore every tool in its toolbox to end this horrible situation," said Estonia's ambassador, Sven Jurgenson. Russia and China both hold veto power and have historically opposed international sanctions, although Beijing -- the military's primary ally -- has voiced increasing concern about the instability in its neighbor. The military on February 1 toppled democratic leader Aung San Suu Kyi and has since violently suppressed pro-democracy protests, with the United Nations saying that more than 600 people have died. (With AFP inputs)

US urges UNSC for action on Myanmar

The ruling could not have been more clear.

One of soccer’s six regional bodies had engaged in discriminatory behavior against a female official by hindering her chances of getting a seat on its board and a leadership position with the sport’s global governing body, FIFA.

The official, Mariyam Mohamed, also convinced judges at sports’ top court that an influential Kuwaiti sheikh had actively interfered in elections held by the Asian Football Confederation in 2019 to achieve his desired outcome.

The full ruling, which has not been published, was obtained by The New York Times. In it, a panel at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland concluded that the inaction by Asian soccer officials over several months amounted to a “denial of justice” for Mohamed. Yet two months since the decision was announced, the effect of what appears to be a powerful denunciation of ethics breaches and a disregard for women’s rights has had all the effect of a snowball hitting a tank.

Nothing has happened.

The tainted elections will not be rerun. The men who offered Mohamed inducements to drop out have not been punished. And soccer’s leaders have taken no action.

FIFA said in an email it had no comment, even though it previously insisted it would follow up on the court’s findings with soccer officials in Asia. Asian soccer’s governing body also declined to comment, saying its leaders had nothing to add to a January statement in which they had pledged the organization would review the findings.

For Mohamed, the silence has been maddening.

“It’s just a game for them, justice denial, the same process that I was in,” she said in a phone interview. “They’re waiting for time to pass by, and hoping I get fed up. Now the verdict has come, and it’s just very sad. I don’t know where else to go now.”

Mohamed, who filed her complaints to the Asian federation’s disciplinary department in May 2019, says she initially celebrated the ruling, but came to realize it may amount to a Pyrrhic victory.

She has not been contacted by officials from the AFC, she said. Nor has she heard from ethics investigators from FIFA, even though the organization’s rules state that gender discrimination is “strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion.”

The case and its aftermath have highlighted how power works in global sports. It shows how a tainted Gulf royal linked to other cases of corruption has been able to exert significant control over one of soccer’s largest governing bodies even though he has no official role in its affairs. And it shows how a strategy of delay can be its own kind of injustice.

Mohamed’s case had roots in FIFA’s response to its own problems with discrimination: To address a lack of women on its governing board, the organization since 2013 set aside specific seats for women, starting with one voting member in 2013 and now a minimum of one from each of FIFA’s six regional confederations.

Mohamed, a former soccer player and coach from the Maldives, an archipelago in the Indian Ocean, had hoped to win the AFC’s spot in a vote in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in April 2019. It did not take her long to realize that the power brokers of Asian soccer had already decided the election’s outcome.

She filed her first complaints about the election to the Asian confederation’s disciplinary department a month later. Emails show the organization responded to her inquiries by insisting it had begun an investigation, although it appears little was done. The AFC, citing confidentiality, refused to supply any evidence of its investigation to the court.

At a hearing at the Court of Arbitration for Sport last July, the AFC hardly put up a defense. Its lawyers offered no witnesses to challenge Mohamed’s testimony that a top confederation official and the head of the soccer federation of Qatar had been present in a luxury hotel suite when the Kuwaiti sheikh, Ahmad al-Fahad al-Sabah, told Mohamed he had decided that his preferred candidate, Mahfuza Akhter Kiron of Bangladesh, would be elected as the AFC’s female representative to the FIFA Council.

Mohamed was told she should drop her candidacy, and do so within 24 hours. She later claimed, in testimony that went unchallenged by the AFC, that Sheikh Ahmad attempted to mollify her by saying he had so much sway in international soccer circles that he could obtain for her “any other position of her choosing at the AFC or FIFA” in exchange for her withdrawal.

By this point, Sheikh Ahmad had no official role in soccer, having resigned his position on the FIFA Council in 2017 after allegations emerged in a U.S. federal court that he had bribed Asian officials. But Mohamed’s decision to take her case to court provided a rare public glimpse into his continuing stature as a power broker in global sports through his role as the president of the Olympic Council of Asia, an organization created by his father in 1982.

At a 2013 International Olympic Committee meeting, for example, Sheikh Ahmad’s support helped Thomas Bach secure the IOC presidency and also deliver the 2020 Olympics to Tokyo. Since he was indicted in a forgery case unrelated to sports in 2018, he has “self-suspended” from two prominent Olympic roles. But his opinion still carries weight.

Before the AFC’s 2019 elections, his legal troubles did not seem to be an issue. A list of his favored candidates was distributed to AFC voters on the eve of the elections and, aware of the talks with Mohamed and of Sheikh Ahmad’s preference for a different candidate, the leaders of several federations pressured Mohamed to drop out, she said. She declined to withdraw, and lost the vote, 31-15. Every candidate on Sheikh Ahmad’s list, however, was elected to seats on the AFC’s executive board or, as in Kiron’s case, as a confederation representative to FIFA.

After reviewing the evidence presented by Mohamed and her lawyers, the CAS panel made clear in the summary of its decision that it agreed with her version of the events. The panel confirmed that the 2019 elections had breached FIFA and AFC rules on gender discrimination. It concluded that Sheikh Ahmad had tried to influence the outcome, and that the AFC had denied Mohamed justice by not making a ruling on her complaint. It did, however, also say that by not bowing out of the elections, Mohamed ensured the sheikh’s efforts to influence the election in her case were not effective.

But the court said it was powerless to order that the flawed elections be annulled, or to punish any of the individuals accused of interfering with them. Any decision on further action was for FIFA, and the AFC, to decide, the court said.

Because of the rules governing the court, the panel’s full findings have been cloaked in secrecy since the verdict was announced on Jan. 25.

“If nothing happens it is a disgrace for FIFA, the AFC, and undermines the authority of CAS indirectly,” said Miguel Maduro, the former FIFA governance head who gave evidence in Mohamed’s case. “This award and what follows tells us at once that CAS has exposed corruption at the highest level of elections in football and at the same time tells us they cannot do anything about it.”

Maduro added that at the very least, FIFA should have initiated an ethics inquiry after the ruling. To date, it has not.

Such a move, though, would be extremely sensitive for soccer’s global leadership. The FIFA official responsible for overseeing the 2019 election, Eduardo Ache, told the CAS panel that soccer’s guidelines to improve female representation were mere recommendations. The panel said Ache’s evidence suggested he was “prepared to accept any discrimination provided at least one woman was elected to FIFA.”

But pressing for discipline in the case also could be uncomfortable for FIFA’s president, Gianni Infantino, who relies on the support of national and regional soccer leaders to push his agenda. He recently spent two weeks touring Africa, for example, to ensure that his favored candidate, a South African billionaire with no high-level experience in soccer administration, was elected president of the continent’s regional confederation. And he is unlikely to press for discipline against the leader of Qatar’s soccer federation — reportedly present when Mohamed was offered inducements to step aside — or any other Asian leader a year before Qatar hosts the 2022 World Cup.

The longer the full ruling in Mohamed’s case goes unpublished, though, the more it will give the appearance soccer’s leaders are trying to brush a problematic situation under the carpet, said Johan Lindholm, a professor of law at Umea University in Sweden who has published a book on CAS.

“Whether it’s because of bad PR or there are other things going on, then you would probably want to keep it as secret as possible,” Lindholm said.

The ruling could not have been more clear. One of soccer’s six regional bodies had engaged in discriminatory behavior against a female official by hindering her chances of getting a seat on its board and a leadership position with the sport’s global governing body, FIFA.

The ruling could not have been more clear. One of soccer’s six regional bodies had engaged in discriminatory behavior against a female official by hindering her chances of getting a seat on its board and a leadership position with the sport’s global governing body, FIFA. The official, Mariyam Mohamed, also convinced judges at sports’ top court that an influential Kuwaiti sheikh had actively interfered in elections held by the Asian Football Confederation in 2019 to achieve his desired outcome. The full ruling, which has not been published, was obtained by The New York Times. In it, a panel at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Switzerland concluded that the inaction by Asian soccer officials over several months amounted to a “denial of justice” for Mohamed. Yet two months since the decision was announced, the effect of what appears to be a powerful denunciation of ethics breaches and a disregard for women’s rights has had all the effect of a snowball hitting a tank. Nothing has happened. The tainted elections will not be rerun. The men who offered Mohamed inducements to drop out have not been punished. And soccer’s leaders have taken no action. FIFA said in an email it had no comment, even though it previously insisted it would follow up on the court’s findings with soccer officials in Asia. Asian soccer’s governing body also declined to comment, saying its leaders had nothing to add to a January statement in which they had pledged the organization would review the findings. For Mohamed, the silence has been maddening. “It’s just a game for them, justice denial, the same process that I was in,” she said in a phone interview. “They’re waiting for time to pass by, and hoping I get fed up. Now the verdict has come, and it’s just very sad. I don’t know where else to go now.” Mohamed, who filed her complaints to the Asian federation’s disciplinary department in May 2019, says she initially celebrated the ruling, but came to realize it may amount to a Pyrrhic victory. She has not been contacted by officials from the AFC, she said. Nor has she heard from ethics investigators from FIFA, even though the organization’s rules state that gender discrimination is “strictly prohibited and punishable by suspension or expulsion.” The case and its aftermath have highlighted how power works in global sports. It shows how a tainted Gulf royal linked to other cases of corruption has been able to exert significant control over one of soccer’s largest governing bodies even though he has no official role in its affairs. And it shows how a strategy of delay can be its own kind of injustice. Mohamed’s case had roots in FIFA’s response to its own problems with discrimination: To address a lack of women on its governing board, the organization since 2013 set aside specific seats for women, starting with one voting member in 2013 and now a minimum of one from each of FIFA’s six regional confederations. Mohamed, a former soccer player and coach from the Maldives, an archipelago in the Indian Ocean, had hoped to win the AFC’s spot in a vote in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, in April 2019. It did not take her long to realize that the power brokers of Asian soccer had already decided the election’s outcome. She filed her first complaints about the election to the Asian confederation’s disciplinary department a month later. Emails show the organization responded to her inquiries by insisting it had begun an investigation, although it appears little was done. The AFC, citing confidentiality, refused to supply any evidence of its investigation to the court. At a hearing at the Court of Arbitration for Sport last July, the AFC hardly put up a defense. Its lawyers offered no witnesses to challenge Mohamed’s testimony that a top confederation official and the head of the soccer federation of Qatar had been present in a luxury hotel suite when the Kuwaiti sheikh, Ahmad al-Fahad al-Sabah, told Mohamed he had decided that his preferred candidate, Mahfuza Akhter Kiron of Bangladesh, would be elected as the AFC’s female representative to the FIFA Council. Mohamed was told she should drop her candidacy, and do so within 24 hours. She later claimed, in testimony that went unchallenged by the AFC, that Sheikh Ahmad attempted to mollify her by saying he had so much sway in international soccer circles that he could obtain for her “any other position of her choosing at the AFC or FIFA” in exchange for her withdrawal. By this point, Sheikh Ahmad had no official role in soccer, having resigned his position on the FIFA Council in 2017 after allegations emerged in a U.S. federal court that he had bribed Asian officials. But Mohamed’s decision to take her case to court provided a rare public glimpse into his continuing stature as a power broker in global sports through his role as the president of the Olympic Council of Asia, an organization created by his father in 1982. At a 2013 International Olympic Committee meeting, for example, Sheikh Ahmad’s support helped Thomas Bach secure the IOC presidency and also deliver the 2020 Olympics to Tokyo. Since he was indicted in a forgery case unrelated to sports in 2018, he has “self-suspended” from two prominent Olympic roles. But his opinion still carries weight. Before the AFC’s 2019 elections, his legal troubles did not seem to be an issue. A list of his favored candidates was distributed to AFC voters on the eve of the elections and, aware of the talks with Mohamed and of Sheikh Ahmad’s preference for a different candidate, the leaders of several federations pressured Mohamed to drop out, she said. She declined to withdraw, and lost the vote, 31-15. Every candidate on Sheikh Ahmad’s list, however, was elected to seats on the AFC’s executive board or, as in Kiron’s case, as a confederation representative to FIFA. After reviewing the evidence presented by Mohamed and her lawyers, the CAS panel made clear in the summary of its decision that it agreed with her version of the events. The panel confirmed that the 2019 elections had breached FIFA and AFC rules on gender discrimination. It concluded that Sheikh Ahmad had tried to influence the outcome, and that the AFC had denied Mohamed justice by not making a ruling on her complaint. It did, however, also say that by not bowing out of the elections, Mohamed ensured the sheikh’s efforts to influence the election in her case were not effective. But the court said it was powerless to order that the flawed elections be annulled, or to punish any of the individuals accused of interfering with them. Any decision on further action was for FIFA, and the AFC, to decide, the court said. Because of the rules governing the court, the panel’s full findings have been cloaked in secrecy since the verdict was announced on Jan. 25. “If nothing happens it is a disgrace for FIFA, the AFC, and undermines the authority of CAS indirectly,” said Miguel Maduro, the former FIFA governance head who gave evidence in Mohamed’s case. “This award and what follows tells us at once that CAS has exposed corruption at the highest level of elections in football and at the same time tells us they cannot do anything about it.” Maduro added that at the very least, FIFA should have initiated an ethics inquiry after the ruling. To date, it has not. Such a move, though, would be extremely sensitive for soccer’s global leadership. The FIFA official responsible for overseeing the 2019 election, Eduardo Ache, told the CAS panel that soccer’s guidelines to improve female representation were mere recommendations. The panel said Ache’s evidence suggested he was “prepared to accept any discrimination provided at least one woman was elected to FIFA.” But pressing for discipline in the case also could be uncomfortable for FIFA’s president, Gianni Infantino, who relies on the support of national and regional soccer leaders to push his agenda. He recently spent two weeks touring Africa, for example, to ensure that his favored candidate, a South African billionaire with no high-level experience in soccer administration, was elected president of the continent’s regional confederation. And he is unlikely to press for discipline against the leader of Qatar’s soccer federation — reportedly present when Mohamed was offered inducements to step aside — or any other Asian leader a year before Qatar hosts the 2022 World Cup. The longer the full ruling in Mohamed’s case goes unpublished, though, the more it will give the appearance soccer’s leaders are trying to brush a problematic situation under the carpet, said Johan Lindholm, a professor of law at Umea University in Sweden who has published a book on CAS. “Whether it’s because of bad PR or there are other things going on, then you would probably want to keep it as secret as possible,” Lindholm said.

A soccer official proved her discrimination case. No one was punished.

United States President Joe Biden administration attempts to overturn the legacy of former President Donald Trump. It has taken another huge step in that direction by lifting Trump imposed sanctions on the ICC prosecutors.

United States: President Joe Biden's effort to undo Donald Trump's legacy

As the Biden administration overturns the legacy of former president Donald Trump it has taken another huge step in that direction by lifting Trump imposed sanctions on the ICC prosecutor this has effectively random trumps move as ineffective and inappropriate and most importantly US secretary of state Antony Blinken has said the United States still disagree with the court's move on Afghanistan and Israel and objected ICC's effort.

United States: Biden administration effort to undo trumps legacy

World powers and Iran will meet by videoconference Friday to discuss the possible return of the United States to the Iran nuclear deal, the European Union announced.&nbsp;

Representatives of China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and Iran -- the countries still party to the agreement after the US left -- will attend.

"Participants will discuss the prospect of a possible return of the United States to the JCPOA, and how to ensure the full and effective implementation of the agreement by all sides," the statement said, referring to the deal by its initials.

The meeting brings together the body that oversees the implementation of the JCPOA, which has been under threat since former US president Donald Trump pulled out in 2018 and Iran began to resume nuclear activities it had scaled back.&nbsp;

The online meeting will be chaired by senior EU diplomat Enrique Mora on behalf of EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell.

Trump denounced the 2015 accord, which saw Iran granted relief from international sanctions in exchange for accepting limits on its nuclear programme, which Western powers feared would lead to it acquiring an atomic weapon.

But new US President Joe Biden has promised to rejoin the agreement on the condition that Tehran first returns to respecting the commitments it dropped in retaliation for Trump's decision.

Earlier this month, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran may return to full compliance if Tehran deems Washington has honoured its commitments.

The agreement was signed by Iran in Vienna in 2015 with the major powers United States, China, Russia, Germany, France, United Kingdom, under an EU chair.

It was designed to prevent the Islamic Republic from acquiring a nuclear arsenal by imposing strict limits on its nuclear programme and force it to remain exclusively civilian and peaceful.&nbsp;

World powers and Iran will meet by videoconference Friday to discuss the possible return of the United States to the Iran nuclear deal, the European Union announced.

World powers and Iran will meet by videoconference Friday to discuss the possible return of the United States to the Iran nuclear deal, the European Union announced. Representatives of China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and Iran -- the countries still party to the agreement after the US left -- will attend. "Participants will discuss the prospect of a possible return of the United States to the JCPOA, and how to ensure the full and effective implementation of the agreement by all sides," the statement said, referring to the deal by its initials. The meeting brings together the body that oversees the implementation of the JCPOA, which has been under threat since former US president Donald Trump pulled out in 2018 and Iran began to resume nuclear activities it had scaled back. The online meeting will be chaired by senior EU diplomat Enrique Mora on behalf of EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell. Trump denounced the 2015 accord, which saw Iran granted relief from international sanctions in exchange for accepting limits on its nuclear programme, which Western powers feared would lead to it acquiring an atomic weapon. But new US President Joe Biden has promised to rejoin the agreement on the condition that Tehran first returns to respecting the commitments it dropped in retaliation for Trump's decision. Earlier this month, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran may return to full compliance if Tehran deems Washington has honoured its commitments. The agreement was signed by Iran in Vienna in 2015 with the major powers United States, China, Russia, Germany, France, United Kingdom, under an EU chair. It was designed to prevent the Islamic Republic from acquiring a nuclear arsenal by imposing strict limits on its nuclear programme and force it to remain exclusively civilian and peaceful.

World powers, Iran to hold virtual nuclear talks Friday

Virginia’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the city of Charlottesville can remove statues of two Confederate generals, including one of Robert E. Lee that was at the center of a deadly white nationalist rally in 2017.

The court overturned a 2019 Circuit Court ruling that the statue of Lee and a nearby monument to Stonewall Jackson could not be removed because they were protected by state law.

The Charlottesville City Council approved a resolution to remove the Lee statue in 2017. A group of citizens filed a lawsuit opposing the move, and white nationalists rallied in the city in August 2017 to protest the effort. White nationalists clashed with counterprotesters, one of whom was killed when a car driven by an Ohio man plowed into a crowd.

(After the rally, the council voted to also remove the statue of Jackson; the lawsuit was then amended to include both statues.)

Justice S. Bernard Goodwyn of the Virginia Supreme Court wrote in the court’s opinion that the city could remove the statues because they were erected before the adoption of a state law that prohibits cities from disturbing or interfering with monuments and memorials once they are in place.

“In the present case, the Statues were erected long before there was a statute which both authorized a city’s erection of a war memorial or monument and regulated the disturbance of or interference with that war memorial or monument,” Goodwyn wrote.

The Lee statue was erected in 1924 in Lee Park, and the Jackson statue was erected in 1921 in Jackson Park.

The state law in question applied only to counties when it was passed in 1904. It was amended in 1997 to give cities and local governments the authority to erect war-related monuments and memorials, while still prohibiting localities from disturbing or removing them.

“The trial court erred by interpreting the statute as operating retroactively to prohibit removal of the Statues from the City’s parks,” Goodwyn wrote.

The state General Assembly amended the state law last year to allow localities “to remove, relocate, contextualize, or cover” any monument or memorial on their public property.

The state Supreme Court decision lifted an injunction that had prevented the city of Charlottesville from removing the two statues. The court also vacated damages that had been awarded to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, including lawyers’ fees.

Lawyers representing the city and the plaintiffs did not respond to requests for comment. Frederick Payne, who is listed as the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, declined to comment when reached by phone on Thursday.

Chip Boyles, Charlottesville’s city manager, said the high court’s decision was a victory for the city.

“I and my administration will work diligently to plan the next steps, in coordination with City Council,” Boyles said in a statement. “We also look forward to engaging our community in the redesign of these park spaces in a way that promotes healing and that tells a more complete history of Charlottesville.”

Richard Schragger, a law professor at the University of Virginia who has followed the case, said Thursday’s ruling was “a symbolic victory in a way, and an important one,” following a year of protests against racism and police brutality in response to the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor.

The protests rekindled a movement to remove Confederate statues and monuments in cities across the United States that became gathering places for demonstrations against police violence.

In Richmond, the state capital and the former capital of the Confederacy, three statues of Confederate figures were removed from the city’s Monument Avenue, and a state judge ruled that a 21-foot statue of Lee, which sits atop a 40-foot base, could be removed as well. The Lee statue remains in place pending an appeal from the plaintiffs who had challenged Gov. Ralph Northam’s order to remove it.

Virginia’s attorney general, Mark Herring, said in a statement in response to Thursday’s ruling that he was looking forward to fighting in the state Supreme Court this summer against the appeal seeking to block the removal of the Lee statue in Richmond.

“I have worked hard to help remove poisonous Confederate propaganda from our publicly owned spaces, because I believe it glorifies a false history and sends a dangerous and divisive message about who and what we value,” Herring said.

In February, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported that more than 160 Confederate symbols had been removed from public spaces following Floyd’s death.

Virginia’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the city of Charlottesville can remove statues of two Confederate generals, including one of Robert E. Lee that was at the center of a deadly white nationalist rally in 2017.

Virginia’s Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the city of Charlottesville can remove statues of two Confederate generals, including one of Robert E. Lee that was at the center of a deadly white nationalist rally in 2017. The court overturned a 2019 Circuit Court ruling that the statue of Lee and a nearby monument to Stonewall Jackson could not be removed because they were protected by state law. The Charlottesville City Council approved a resolution to remove the Lee statue in 2017. A group of citizens filed a lawsuit opposing the move, and white nationalists rallied in the city in August 2017 to protest the effort. White nationalists clashed with counterprotesters, one of whom was killed when a car driven by an Ohio man plowed into a crowd. (After the rally, the council voted to also remove the statue of Jackson; the lawsuit was then amended to include both statues.) Justice S. Bernard Goodwyn of the Virginia Supreme Court wrote in the court’s opinion that the city could remove the statues because they were erected before the adoption of a state law that prohibits cities from disturbing or interfering with monuments and memorials once they are in place. “In the present case, the Statues were erected long before there was a statute which both authorized a city’s erection of a war memorial or monument and regulated the disturbance of or interference with that war memorial or monument,” Goodwyn wrote. The Lee statue was erected in 1924 in Lee Park, and the Jackson statue was erected in 1921 in Jackson Park. The state law in question applied only to counties when it was passed in 1904. It was amended in 1997 to give cities and local governments the authority to erect war-related monuments and memorials, while still prohibiting localities from disturbing or removing them. “The trial court erred by interpreting the statute as operating retroactively to prohibit removal of the Statues from the City’s parks,” Goodwyn wrote. The state General Assembly amended the state law last year to allow localities “to remove, relocate, contextualize, or cover” any monument or memorial on their public property. The state Supreme Court decision lifted an injunction that had prevented the city of Charlottesville from removing the two statues. The court also vacated damages that had been awarded to the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, including lawyers’ fees. Lawyers representing the city and the plaintiffs did not respond to requests for comment. Frederick Payne, who is listed as the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, declined to comment when reached by phone on Thursday. Chip Boyles, Charlottesville’s city manager, said the high court’s decision was a victory for the city. “I and my administration will work diligently to plan the next steps, in coordination with City Council,” Boyles said in a statement. “We also look forward to engaging our community in the redesign of these park spaces in a way that promotes healing and that tells a more complete history of Charlottesville.” Richard Schragger, a law professor at the University of Virginia who has followed the case, said Thursday’s ruling was “a symbolic victory in a way, and an important one,” following a year of protests against racism and police brutality in response to the deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. The protests rekindled a movement to remove Confederate statues and monuments in cities across the United States that became gathering places for demonstrations against police violence. In Richmond, the state capital and the former capital of the Confederacy, three statues of Confederate figures were removed from the city’s Monument Avenue, and a state judge ruled that a 21-foot statue of Lee, which sits atop a 40-foot base, could be removed as well. The Lee statue remains in place pending an appeal from the plaintiffs who had challenged Gov. Ralph Northam’s order to remove it. Virginia’s attorney general, Mark Herring, said in a statement in response to Thursday’s ruling that he was looking forward to fighting in the state Supreme Court this summer against the appeal seeking to block the removal of the Lee statue in Richmond. “I have worked hard to help remove poisonous Confederate propaganda from our publicly owned spaces, because I believe it glorifies a false history and sends a dangerous and divisive message about who and what we value,” Herring said. In February, the Southern Poverty Law Center reported that more than 160 Confederate symbols had been removed from public spaces following Floyd’s death.

Charlottesville can remove Confederate statues, High Court rules

The United States on Friday confirmed its participation in the meeting on the Iran nuclear deal next week and offered to talk directly with Tehran.&nbsp;

"These remain early days, and we don't anticipate an immediate breakthrough as there will be difficult discussions ahead. But we believe this is a healthy step forward," State Department spokesman Ned Price was quoted as saying by news agency AFP.&nbsp;

"We do not anticipate presently that there will be direct talks between the United States and Iran through this process, though the United States remains open to them."

Earlier on Friday, the European Union (EU) announced an in-person meeting of all parties in Vienna of the 2015 nuclear deal, named the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, from which the US under former president <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/donald-trump">Donald Trump</a>&nbsp;pulled off.&nbsp;

Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-rejects-meeting-us-at-nuclear-deal-talks-in-vienna-375001">Iran rejects meeting US at nuclear deal talks in Vienna</a>

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif confirmed the Islamic Republic's presence in the meeting, but denied any meeting with the US, calling it "unnecessary".&nbsp;

The meeting aimed to "rapidly finalise sanction-lifting and nuclear measures for choreographed removal of all sanctions, followed by Iran ceasing remedial measures," Zarif said.&nbsp;

"No Iran-US meeting. Unnecessary," the Iranian foreign minister wrote on Twitter.&nbsp;

US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>&nbsp;has said that Washington would return to the nuclear accord if Tehran agrees to follow its commitments under the deal.

However, Iran has insisted on lifting off the sanctions imposed under Trump before beginning any negotiations.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

The United States on Friday confirmed its participation in the meeting on the Iran nuclear deal next week and offered to talk directly with Tehran. "These remain early days, and we don't anticipate an immediate breakthrough as there will be difficult discussions ahead.

The United States on Friday confirmed its participation in the meeting on the Iran nuclear deal next week and offered to talk directly with Tehran. "These remain early days, and we don't anticipate an immediate breakthrough as there will be difficult discussions ahead. But we believe this is a healthy step forward," State Department spokesman Ned Price was quoted as saying by news agency AFP. "We do not anticipate presently that there will be direct talks between the United States and Iran through this process, though the United States remains open to them." Earlier on Friday, the European Union (EU) announced an in-person meeting of all parties in Vienna of the 2015 nuclear deal, named the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, from which the US under former president Donald Trump pulled off. Also read | Iran rejects meeting US at nuclear deal talks in Vienna Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif confirmed the Islamic Republic's presence in the meeting, but denied any meeting with the US, calling it "unnecessary". The meeting aimed to "rapidly finalise sanction-lifting and nuclear measures for choreographed removal of all sanctions, followed by Iran ceasing remedial measures," Zarif said. "No Iran-US meeting. Unnecessary," the Iranian foreign minister wrote on Twitter. US President Joe Biden has said that Washington would return to the nuclear accord if Tehran agrees to follow its commitments under the deal. However, Iran has insisted on lifting off the sanctions imposed under Trump before beginning any negotiations.

US confirms participation in nuclear deal meet, 'open' to talk with Iran

Indian Prime Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/narendra-modi">Narendra Modi </a>will be attending the 2-day virtual summit on climate change being hosted by US President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/topics/joe-biden">Joe Biden</a>. Washington has invited 40 countries for the summit that will take place from April 22 to April 23. In South Asia, Prime Minister of India, Bhutan's Lotay Tshering and Bangladesh's Sheikh Hasina have been invited, with the notable absence of Pakistani PM Imran Khan. &nbsp;

Confirming PM Modi attending the summit, Spokesperson for the Ministry of External Affairs Arindam Bagchi said, "President Biden of US, invited PM Modi to attend the climate leaders' summit that will happen virtually...PM welcomed President Biden's initiative and accepted the invitation".

Summit will reconvene the US-led Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, which brings together 17 countries responsible for approximately 80 per cent of global emissions and global GDP. The is the 2nd time both leaders will take part in a virtual meet. March saw both leaders together for the first Quad virtual summit.

Ahead of the summit, US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry will be in India from April 5 to April 8. John Kerry will be the second top Biden Administration official to visit India in the last one month. March saw the visit of US Defense secretary Lloyd Austin.

Arindam said, "purpose of the visit will be discussing the forthcoming climate leaders' summit and climate issues in general in the context of 26th 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference."

 
&nbsp;

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be attending the 2-day virtual summit on climate change being hosted by US President Joe Biden. Washington has invited 40 countries for the summit that will take place from April 22 to April 23.

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi will be attending the 2-day virtual summit on climate change being hosted by US President Joe Biden. Washington has invited 40 countries for the summit that will take place from April 22 to April 23. In South Asia, Prime Minister of India, Bhutan's Lotay Tshering and Bangladesh's Sheikh Hasina have been invited, with the notable absence of Pakistani PM Imran Khan. Confirming PM Modi attending the summit, Spokesperson for the Ministry of External Affairs Arindam Bagchi said, "President Biden of US, invited PM Modi to attend the climate leaders' summit that will happen virtually...PM welcomed President Biden's initiative and accepted the invitation". Summit will reconvene the US-led Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, which brings together 17 countries responsible for approximately 80 per cent of global emissions and global GDP. The is the 2nd time both leaders will take part in a virtual meet. March saw both leaders together for the first Quad virtual summit. Ahead of the summit, US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry will be in India from April 5 to April 8. John Kerry will be the second top Biden Administration official to visit India in the last one month. March saw the visit of US Defense secretary Lloyd Austin. Arindam said, "purpose of the visit will be discussing the forthcoming climate leaders' summit and climate issues in general in the context of 26th 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference."

Indian PM Modi to attend US President Biden's climate summit

united-states

United States, News on United States, stories on United States, articles on United States, United States stories at Wion, United States news, United States latest news

united states