ֱ

New Zealand politician removed from parliament following comments in Palestinian debate

New Zealand politician removed from parliament following comments in Palestinian debate
Pro Palestinian activists hold placards as they march in Christchurch, New Zealand. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 22 sec ago

New Zealand politician removed from parliament following comments in Palestinian debate

New Zealand politician removed from parliament following comments in Palestinian debate
  • Swarbrick, who is co leader of the Green Party, said New Zealand was a “laggard” and an “outlier” and the lack of decision was appalling before calling on some government members to support a bill to “sanction Israel for its war crimes”

WELLINGTON: New Zealand parliamentarian Chloe Swarbrick was ordered to leave parliament on Tuesday during a heated debate over the government’s response to Palestine.
An urgent debate was called after the center-right government said on Monday it was weighing up its position on whether to recognize a Palestinian state.
Close ally Australia on Monday joined Canada, the UK and France in announcing it would recognize a Palestinian state at a UN conference in September.
Swarbrick, who is co-leader of the Green Party, said New Zealand was a “laggard” and an “outlier” and the lack of decision was appalling before calling on some government members to support a bill to “sanction Israel for its war crimes.” The bill was proposed by her party in March and is supported by all opposition parties.
“If we find six of 68 Government MPs with a spine, we can stand on the right side of history,” said Swarbrick.
Speaker Gerry Brownlee said that statement was “completely unacceptable” and she had to withdraw it and apologize. When she refused, Swarbrick was ordered to leave parliament.
Brownlee later clarified Swarbrick could return on Wednesday but if she still refused to apologize she would again be removed from parliament.
New Zealand has said it will make a decision in September about whether it would recognize Palestine as a state.
Foreign Minister Winston Peters told parliament that over the next month the government would gather information and talk to partners, which would inform cabinet’s decision.
“We’ll be weighing this decision carefully rather than rushing to judgment,” Peters said.
Along with the Green Party, opposition parties Labour and Te Pati Maori support recognition of a Palestinian state.
Labour parliamentarian Peeni Henare said New Zealand had a history of standing strong on its principles and values and in this case “was being left behind.”


Musk says he plans to sue Apple for not featuring X or Grok among its top apps

Updated 18 sec ago

Musk says he plans to sue Apple for not featuring X or Grok among its top apps

Musk says he plans to sue Apple for not featuring X or Grok among its top apps
Billionaire SpaceX, Tesla and X owner Elon Musk says he plans to sue Apple for not featuring X and its Grok artificial intelligence chatbot app in its top recommended apps in its App Store.
Musk posted the comments on X late Monday, saying, “Hey @Apple App Store, why do you refuse to put either X or Grok in your ‘Must Have’ section when X is the #1 news app in the world and Grok is #5 among all apps? Are you playing politics? What gives? Inquiring minds want to know.”
Grok is owned by Musk’s artificial intelligence startup xAI.
Musk went on to say that “Apple is behaving in a manner that makes it impossible for any AI company besides OpenAI to reach #1 in the App Store, which is an unequivocal antitrust violation. xAI will take immediate legal action.”
He gave no further details.
There was no immediate comment from Apple, which has faced various allegations of antitrust violations in recent years.
A federal judge recently found that Apple violated a court injunction in an antitrust case filed by Fortnite maker Epic Games.
Regulators of the 27-nation European Union fined Apple 500 million euros in April for breaking competition rules by preventing app makers from pointing users to cheaper options outside its App Store.
Last year, the EU fined the US tech giant nearly $2 billion for unfairly favoring its own music streaming service by forbidding rivals like Spotify from telling users how they could pay for cheaper subscriptions outside of iPhone apps.
As of early Tuesday, the top app in Apple’s App Store was TikTok, followed by Tinder, Duolingo, YouTube and Bumble. Open AI’s ChatGPT was ranked 7th.

US designates Baloch separatists as a terror group over role in attacks in Pakistan

US designates Baloch separatists as a terror group over role in attacks in Pakistan
Updated 9 min 3 sec ago

US designates Baloch separatists as a terror group over role in attacks in Pakistan

US designates Baloch separatists as a terror group over role in attacks in Pakistan
  • Separatists in Balochistan have opposed the extraction of resources by Pakistani and foreign firms and have targeted Pakistani security forces and Chinese nationals working on projects

ISLAMABAD: The United States has designated a Baloch separatist group as a foreign terrorist organization, the State Department said, a move hailed Tuesday by Pakistani officials.
The designation of the Balochistan Liberation Army and its fighting wing, the Majeed Brigade, blamed for deadly attacks in insurgency-hit Balochistan province, coincides with the visit of Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, to the US
It also comes less than two weeks after Washington and Islamabad reached a trade agreement expected to allow American firms to help develop Pakistan’s largely untapped oil reserves in resource-rich Balochistan and to lower trade tariffs for Islamabad.
In a statement, the State Department said it is “designating the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and its alias, the Majeed Brigade, as a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), and adding the Majeed Brigade as an alias to BLA’s previous Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) designation.”
The BLA was first designated an SDGT in 2019 after several terrorist attacks. The US statement said that, since then, both the group and the Majeed Brigade have claimed responsibility for additional attacks.
It also said that in 2024, the BLA claimed responsibility for suicide bombings near the airport in Karachi and in the port city of Gwadar in Balochistan.
In 2025, the group said it carried out the hijacking of the Jaffar Express train traveling from Quetta to Peshawar, killing 31 civilians and security personnel and holding more than 300 passengers hostage, according to the US State Department.
“Today’s action taken by the Department of State demonstrates the Trump administration’s commitment to countering terrorism,” the US statement said.
There was no immediate comment from Balochistan nationalists and separatist groups. Balochistan has long been the scene of insurgency, mostly blamed on groups including the key outlawed Baloch Liberation Army, which the US designated a terrorist organization in 2019. The province is also home to militants linked to the Pakistani Taliban.
Separatists in Balochistan have opposed the extraction of resources by Pakistani and foreign firms and have targeted Pakistani security forces and Chinese nationals working on multibillion-dollar projects related to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.


26 EU leaders say Ukraine should have freedom to decide its future

26 EU leaders say Ukraine should have freedom to decide its future
Updated 14 min 26 sec ago

26 EU leaders say Ukraine should have freedom to decide its future

26 EU leaders say Ukraine should have freedom to decide its future
  • EU leaders: ‘Meaningful negotiations can only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities’
BRUSSELS: 26 European heads of state and government said in a statement that Ukrainians must have the freedom to decide their future and that a diplomatic solution must protect Ukrainian and European interests.
“Meaningful negotiations can only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities,” the leaders said, adding that “we share the conviction that a diplomatic solution must protect Ukraine’s and Europe’s vital security interests.”
The statement, which was agreed late on Monday and published on Tuesday, was endorsed by leaders of all EU member countries except Hungary.

US and China extend trade truce another 90 days, easing tension between world’s largest economies

US and China extend trade truce another 90 days, easing tension between world’s largest economies
Updated 28 min 57 sec ago

US and China extend trade truce another 90 days, easing tension between world’s largest economies

US and China extend trade truce another 90 days, easing tension between world’s largest economies
  • The pause buys time for the two countries to work out some of their differences, perhaps clearing the way for a summit later this year between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, and it has been welcomed by the US companies doing business with China

WASHINGTON: President Donald Trump extended a trade truce with China for another 90 days Monday, at least delaying once again a dangerous showdown between the world’s two biggest economies.
Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that he signed the executive order for the extension, and that “all other elements of the Agreement will remain the same.” Beijing at the same time also announced the extension of the tariff pause, according to the Ministry of Commerce.
The previous deadline was set to expire at 12:01 a.m. Tuesday. Had that happened the US could have ratcheted up taxes on Chinese imports from an already high 30 percent, and Beijing could have responded by raising retaliatory levies on US exports to China.
The pause buys time for the two countries to work out some of their differences, perhaps clearing the way for a summit later this year between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, and it has been welcomed by the US companies doing business with China.
Sean Stein, president of the US-China Business Council, said the extension is “critical” to give the two governments time to negotiate a trade agreement that US businesses hope would improve their market access in China and provide the certainty needed for companies to make medium- and long-term plans.
“Securing an agreement on fentanyl that leads to a reduction in US tariffs and a rollback of China’s retaliatory measures is acutely needed to restart US agriculture and energy exports,” Stein said.
China said Tuesday it would extend relief to American companies who were placed on an export control list and an unreliable entities list. After Trump initially announced tariffs in April, China restricted exports of dual-use goods to some American companies, while banning others from trading or investing in China. The Ministry of Commerce said it would stop those restrictions for some companies, while giving others another 90-day extension.
Reaching a pact with China remains unfinished business for Trump, who has already upended the global trading system by slapping double-digit taxes – tariffs – on almost every country on earth.
The European Union, Japan and other trading partners agreed to lopsided trade deals with Trump, accepting once unthinkably US high tariffs (15 percent on Japanese and EU imports, for instance) to ward off something worse.
Trump’s trade policies have turned the United States from one of the most open economies in the world into a protectionist fortress. The average US tariff has gone from around 2.5 percent at the start of the year to 18.6 percent, highest since 1933, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University.
But China tested the limits of a US trade policy built around using tariffs as a cudgel to beat concessions out of trading partners. Beijing had a cudgel of its own: cutting off or slowing access to its rare earths minerals and magnets – used in everything from electric vehicles to jet engines.
In June, the two countries reached an agreement to ease tensions. The United States said it would pull back export restrictions on computer chip technology and ethane, a feedstock in petrochemical production. And China agreed to make it easier for US firms to get access to rare earths.
“The US has realized it does not have the upper hand,’’ said Claire Reade, senior counsel at Arnold & Porter and former assistant US trade representative for China affairs.
In May, the US and China had averted an economic catastrophe by reducing massive tariffs they’d slapped on each other’s products, which had reached as high as 145 percent against China and 125 percent against the US
Those triple-digit tariffs threatened to effectively end trade between the United States and China and caused a frightening sell-off in financial markets. In a May meeting in Geneva they agreed to back off and keep talking: America’s tariffs went back down to a still-high 30 percent and China’s to 10 percent.
Having demonstrated their ability to hurt each other, they’ve been talking ever since.
“By overestimating the ability of steep tariffs to induce economic concessions from China, the Trump administration has not only underscored the limits of unilateral US leverage, but also given Beijing grounds for believing that it can indefinitely enjoy the upper hand in subsequent talks with Washington by threatening to curtail rare earth exports,” said Ali Wyne, a specialist in US-China relations at the International Crisis Group. “The administration’s desire for a trade détente stems from the self-inflicted consequences of its earlier hubris.”
It’s unclear whether Washington and Beijing can reach a grand bargain over America’s biggest grievances. Among these are lax Chinese protection of intellectual property rights and Beijing’s subsidies and other industrial policies that, the Americans say, give Chinese firms an unfair advantage in world markets and have contributed to a massive US trade deficit with China of $262 billion last year.
Reade doesn’t expect much beyond limited agreements such as the Chinese saying they will buy more American soybeans and promising to do more to stop the flow of chemicals used to make fentanyl and to allow the continued flow of rare-earth magnets.
But the tougher issues will likely linger, and “the trade war will continue grinding ahead for years into the future,’’ said Jeff Moon, a former US diplomat and trade official who now runs the China Moon Strategies consultancy.


Xi Jinping: China, Brazil can model ‘self-reliance’ for Global South

Xi Jinping: China, Brazil can model ‘self-reliance’ for Global South
Updated 29 min 30 sec ago

Xi Jinping: China, Brazil can model ‘self-reliance’ for Global South

Xi Jinping: China, Brazil can model ‘self-reliance’ for Global South
  • The two leaders have sought in recent months to present their countries as staunch defenders of the multilateral trading system
  • This was in stark contrast with US President Donald Trump’s tariff onslaught

BEIJING: China’s President Xi Jinping told his Brazilian counterpart Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva that the two countries could set an example of “self-reliance” in a phone call on Tuesday, state media reported.

The two leaders have both sought in recent months to present their countries as staunch defenders of the multilateral trading system – in stark contrast with US President Donald Trump’s tariff onslaught.

Xi said China would “work with Brazil to set an example of unity and self-reliance among major countries in the Global South” and “jointly build a more just world and more sustainable planet,” according to state news agency Xinhua.

He also said that “all countries should unite and firmly oppose unilateralism and protectionism,” Xinhua reported – a thinly veiled reference to US tariffs.

A statement by the Brazilian presidency said that the phone call lasted about an hour, during which time Lula and Xi discussed a range of topics including the war in Ukraine and combatting climate change.

“Both agreed on the role of the G20 and BRICS in defending multilateralism,” the statement said.

The leaders also “committed to expanding the scope of cooperation in sectors such as health, oil and gas, digital economy and satellites,” it added.

The phone call came after Lula indicated plans last week to speak with the leaders of India and China to consider a coordinated response to US tariffs.