Iraq claims killing senior IS leader
Iraqi security forces have killed a senior Islamic State (IS) group leader responsible for "foreign operations", Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani announced on Friday.
Although Iraq had proclaimed in 2017 the defeat of the jihadist group on its territory, IS cells have remained active and carry out sporadic attacks against Iraq's army and police.
Abdallah Makki Muslih al-Rufayi "was considered one of the most dangerous terrorists in Iraq and the world", Sudani said on X.
The jihadist, sanctioned by the United States in 2023, was IS's so-called governor of the group's Syrian and Iraqi provinces, according to the Iraqi premier.
Rufayi was also "responsible for the foreign operations offices", Sudani said.
He did not say when Rufayi was killed but applauded the operation by Iraqi intelligence that was carried out in cooperation with the US-led anti-jihadist coalition in Iraq.
Last October, Baghdad said Iraqi forces had killed nine IS group commanders.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
America's immigration dilemma: Law, accountability, and the crisis within
For decades, America has prided itself as a land of opportunity—a magnet for dreamers, workers, and refugees. But today, under the aggressive implementation of ICE-led deportations, spearheaded by President Donald Trump's renewed enforcement drive, the country finds itself fractured. The issue is no longer just about legality—it has become a battleground of narratives, identity, and accountability. President Trump insists that 'millions and millions' of illegal immigrants—whom he categorizes as violent criminals, traffickers, sex offenders, and pedophiles—have 'invaded' the U.S. According to him, his administration's duty is to remove these threats through mass deportations, often carried out with military-style precision. ICE raids in cities like Los Angeles, where five individuals with criminal pasts were arrested on June 7, are presented as success stories. But a deeper question lurks behind these headlines: if such individuals are indeed dangerous and illegal, how did they get into the country in the first place? As a legal immigrant myself, my family and I embarked on a long and arduous journey. We applied in 2007 for family-sponsored immigration and were not approved until 2024. Seventeen years of background checks, verification of employment, travel history, character assessment, and criminal records—all under the scrutiny of U.S. immigration services. It is a stringent, sometimes grueling, system that leaves little room for error. If followed diligently, it is almost impossible for someone with a dubious past to pass through. This raises troubling questions. How do individuals with criminal records—those labeled as drug dealers, violent offenders, or sex criminals—make it into the U.S. undocumented? What loopholes exist? And more importantly, who allowed it? Beyond bureaucratic lapse, another profound and often overlooked truth must be acknowledged: every wave of immigration has often been triggered by destruction caused by the United States and its allies. The Syrian crisis, spurred by U.S.-led regime change attempts, created millions of refugees—many welcomed into the United States. The U.S. invasion of Iraq unleashed chaos, civil war, and displacement, compelling thousands of Iraqis to seek shelter abroad. Libya, after being bombed into anarchy, witnessed similar refugee outflows. Palestinians displaced by decades of unending Israeli occupation, often with U.S. political and military backing, have also found refuge in America. The collapse of Afghanistan after two decades of NATO occupation led to a mass exodus—especially of Afghans who worked with Western forces. Most arrived with no paperwork or formal identity verification, given the country's primitive recordkeeping systems. Yet, many were fast-tracked into the U.S., bypassing the very scrutiny imposed on legal immigrants from stable nations. This uncomfortable truth demands moral clarity: if undocumented immigrants are subject to the full weight of the law, then those policymakers and officials who created the conditions for their displacement, or allowed their entry without due diligence, must also be held accountable. It is a shared responsibility—one that begins not at the border, but in the war rooms and foreign policy chambers where these crises were ignited. There appears to be no structured inquiry or investigation into the root causes. No commissions, no accountability frameworks to identify the officials, agencies, or politicians who enabled mass illegal entry. Immigration enforcement in the U.S. has historically vacillated depending on who is in power. One administration turns a blind eye, quietly encouraging mass entry. The next tries to reverse it through high-profile crackdowns. But in the absence of institutional accountability, this cyclical dysfunction persists—feeding public anger and polarizing communities. ICE is now being weaponized not just to remove the undocumented, but to reassert political dominance. The use of unmarked vehicles, masked officers, and sudden, forceful detentions—often in front of children and elders—conveys a message of fear. It is not surprising that over 10,000 protesters recently marched through downtown Los Angeles against these raids. Many carried Mexican flags—none carried the American flag. This wasn't just a protest; it was a symptom of deeper social unrest. Critics argue that these ICE actions, while legal under the Supreme Court's allowance of 24-hour deportation notice, are being carried out in a manner that undermines constitutional due process. Rights of asylum seekers, refugees, and even undocumented residents with long-standing ties to communities are brushed aside in the name of executive orders. A nation built by immigrants is now turning its state machinery against them. Supporters of Trump's policy, on the other hand, insist that deporting illegals—especially criminals—is not just constitutional, but necessary. They point to the Clinton-era deportations of over 12 million people, Obama's deportation of 5 million, and Bush's expedited removal protocols. 'This is not new,' they argue. 'It's enforcement overdue.' But many dissenters challenge this logic. They argue that Trump is not fixing immigration—he's weaponizing it. He's framing all undocumented migrants as threats, fueling fear for political gain. His critics claim that this dehumanization is less about justice and more about re-election. Trump's rhetoric plays to a base who feel left behind—using immigrants as scapegoats for economic and social frustrations. This divide is not only ideological—it's generational, racial, and geographic. Many immigrants, including legal ones like myself, find ourselves in a complicated space. On one hand, we support the rule of law. On the other, we reject the vilification of all migrants and the blanket criminalization of entire communities. Let us remember: America is a nation of immigrants. Even Donald Trump is the grandson of Friedrich Trump, a German immigrant who arrived in the U.S. in 1885. The German Chancellor once presented Trump with his grandfather's immigration file during a White House visit—a reminder that no one, not even the president, is far removed from the immigrant experience. The real issue is not race, religion, or ethnicity. The only legitimate distinction should be between legal and illegal entry. But even that must be addressed humanely, within the framework of rights and due process. It cannot become a pretext for racial profiling, family separation, or fear campaigns. The lack of systemic accountability is the root of this chaos. Who failed to enforce border laws? Who allowed the lapse? Was it intentional? Was there bribery? Was it negligence or political strategy? These are the questions no one in Washington wants to answer. The consequences of this negligence go beyond borders. As seen in the Los Angeles protest, foreign governments—like Mexico—may begin to leverage their diaspora as political tools. If unchecked, this tactic could be replicated by other countries, introducing a dangerous element of foreign interference in domestic American affairs. In my observation of reactions on X (formerly Twitter), two dominant narratives have emerged: one, defending ICE's actions and Trump's policies as lawful and overdue; the other, denouncing the excessive force and racial undertones as unconstitutional and inhumane. Some comments suggest this is less about criminals and more about silencing immigrants—legal and illegal alike—through fear and exclusion. What, then, is the way forward? First, no society or country elsewhere in the world may be destroyed, and no country, especially one as powerful as the United States, should ever tolerate illegal immigration. The law must be upheld. But enforcement must be precise, proportional, and humane. Second, there must be rigorous accountability. Politicians, departments, and border enforcement agencies that failed in their duty must face consequences. Only then can the system regain public trust. Third, investment must be made into technology, manpower, and processes that make it virtually impossible for undocumented migrants—especially those with criminal records—to enter undetected. The U.S. has done this before during the post-9/11 anti-terrorism era. It can do it again. This is not just about protecting borders. It's about preserving the spirit of America—a land where laws are enforced, but justice is never blind to humanity. If illegal immigration is the dragon, it must be slain at its roots. Not with brutality, but with policy, accountability, and moral clarity. Let us hope that sanity prevails. Let us hope that the United States rises above political theatrics and embraces a model of immigration that is lawful, just, and worthy of the ideals it claims to defend.
Business Recorder
6 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Chinese and Hong Kong stocks gain ahead of Sino-US trade talks
Hong Kong: Chinese and Hong Kong stocks edged higher on Monday, led by the rare earth and technology sectors, as investors awaited high-level U.S.-China trade negotiations in London. Investors were cautiously positive as the world's two largest economies seek to defuse their trade dispute, with China grappling with slow exports and deflation while the U.S. faces eroding confidence in its assets and economy. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will meet China's Vice Premier He Lifeng in the first meeting under the two countries' economic and trade consultation mechanism. China's blue-chip CSI300 Index closed up 0.3% and the Shanghai Composite Index ended 0.4% higher. Hong Kong's benchmark Hang Seng advanced 1.6% to the highest level since March 21. The offshore yuan struggled for direction and was last traded at 7.1852 per dollar. Monday's meeting follows a rare leader-to-leader call between Chinese leader Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday after tensions flared up again, with both sides accusing the other of violating a deal agreed last month. China, HK stocks close down as US-China call offers no clear progress on trade The two sides agreed a 90-day pause and a sharp reduction in tariffs after talks in Geneva in early May, which left U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods at 30% from May 14 to August 12 and Chinese duties on U.S. imports at 10%. That brought temporary relief from a trade war that could bring $600 billion in two-way trade to a standstill, disrupting supply chains and impacting the global economy. 'We think there could be some favourable outcomes from the meeting as Trump has hinted some positive signs,' analysts at China Securities said in a note, adding that any progress would offer markets some relief. Leading onshore markets higher on Monday, the strategically-important rare earths sector - expected to be a key focus of the talks - advanced 2.4% onshore in its best single-day performance in over a month. Technology shares led Hong Kong markets higher, with the Hang Seng Tech Index rising 2.8% to a one-month high. The subindex has gained over 20% since its April low, entering a technical bull market. Chinese stocks have been struggling for direction since April 2, when Trump announced sweeping 'reciprocal' tariffs that threatened to upend the global trade order. The CSI300 Index onshore has barely budged from the April 2 level, and the Hang Seng has gained around 4% during the period, both lagging the recovery among major global markets.
Business Recorder
9 hours ago
- Business Recorder
US, China seek to extend trade truce with London talks
LONDON: The United States and China are to sit down at the negotiating table in London on Monday to attempt to preserve a fragile truce on trade, despite simmering tensions. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer are leading the US delegation, President Donald Trump announced on Friday. Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng – who led Beijing's negotiating team at previous talks with the United States last month in Geneva – would also head the team in London, China's foreign ministry announced at the weekend. 'The meeting should go very well,' Trump said on his Truth Social platform. His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, told Fox News on Sunday: 'We want China and the United States to continue moving forward with the agreement that was struck in Geneva.' While the UK government reiterated that it was not involved in the content of the discussions in any way, a spokesperson said: 'We are a nation that champions free trade.' UK authorities 'have always been clear that a trade war is in nobody's interests, so we welcome these talks,' the spokesperson added. Rare earths The talks in London come just a few days after Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping finally held their first publicly announced telephone talks since the Republican returned to the White House. Trump said the call, which took place on Thursday, had reached a 'very positive conclusion.' Trump signals fresh trade tensions with China Xi was quoted by state-run news agency Xinhua as saying that 'correcting the course of the big ship of Sino-US relations requires us to steer well and set the direction'. The call came after tensions between the world's two biggest economies soared, with Trump accusing Beijing of violating a tariff de-escalation deal reached in Geneva in mid-May. 'We need China to comply with their side of the deal. And so that's what the trade team will be discussing tomorrow,' Leavitt said Sunday. A key issue in the negotiations will be Beijing's shipments of rare earths – crucial to a range of goods including electric vehicle batteries and which have been a bone of contention for some time. 'Rare earth shipments from China to the US have slowed since President Trump's 'Liberation Day' tariffs in April,' said Kathleen Brooks, research director at trading group XTB. 'The US wants these shipments to be reinstated, while China wants the US to rethink immigration curbs on students, restrictions on access to advanced technology including microchips, and to make it easier for Chinese tech providers to access US consumers,' she added. In April, Trump introduced sweeping worldwide tariffs that targeted China most heavily. At one point the United States hit China with additional levies of 145 percent on its goods as both sides engaged in tit-for-tat escalation. China's countermeasures on US goods reached 125 percent. Then in Switzerland, after two days of talks, the two sides agreed to slash their staggeringly high tariffs for 90 days. But differences have persisted, including over China's restrictions on exporting rare earth minerals. The impact was reflected in the latest official export data released Monday in Beijing. Exports to the United States fell 12.7 percent on month in May, with China shipping $28.8 billion worth in goods last month. China urges US to correct 'wrongdoings' on AI chip curb This is down from $33 billion in April, according to Beijing's General Administration of Customs. There is also huge uncertainty around the outcome of other trade disputes. 'Green channel' Throughout its talks with Washington, China has also launched discussions with other trading partners – including Japan and South Korea – in a bid to build a united front to counter Trump's tariffs. On Thursday, Beijing turned to Canada, with the two sides agreeing to regularise their channels of communication after a period of strained ties. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Chinese Premier Li Qiang also discussed trade and the fentanyl crisis, Ottawa said. Beijing has also proposed establishing a 'green channel' to ease the export of rare earths to the European Union, and the fast-tracking approval of some export licenses. China is expected to host a summit with the EU in July, marking 50 years since Beijing and Brussels established diplomatic ties.
