Thailand ends royal insult case against US scholar, rejects police appeal
BANGKOK (Reuters) -- A royal insult prosecution against an American scholar in Thailand that raised concerns in the U.S. government has been dropped, his lawyer said on Thursday, as authorities confirmed the academic had left the country.
Paul Chambers, 58, a political science lecturer, had been in legal limbo since his arrest last month on a lese-majeste charge, which led to the loss of his job, his work visa and the seizure of his passport.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Times
16 minutes ago
- Japan Times
A new generation of 'Japan hands' and a changing world
The recent passing of Joseph Nye and Richard Armitage marks the end of an era in U.S.-Japan relations. As individuals, they could not have been more different — Nye, the Harvard professor and Democratic architect of 'soft power,' and Armitage, the straight-talking U.S. Navy veteran and Republican strategist. And yet together, they represented the ideal bipartisan alignment that underpinned a golden age of American engagement with Japan. For decades, they helped shape a vision of U.S.-Japan ties grounded in shared values, strategic trust and mutual respect. They were not only scholars or statesmen — they were Japan hands in the truest sense: people who understood that the U.S.-Japan alliance is not just a bilateral relationship but a cornerstone of global order. The loss of these two great men — who quite literally built U.S.-Japan relations through their personal connections and the energy they brought to their roles — leaves a gap that no single person can fill, nor should anyone try. The debate that Ambassador Ryozo Kato began when Armitage retired from public service has only become more intense along with the numerous tributes that have flowed from Washington to Tokyo. The truth, however, is that the world they helped shape has changed dramatically. The next generation of 'Japan hands' must reflect a new landscape — one defined by shifting geopolitics, generational change and a broader, more diverse community of actors. A wider circle The term 'Japan hand' once evoked a small, elite circle of policymakers, scholars and diplomats. That world is evolving and ever expanding. Today, Japan-engagement spans across industries, disciplines and demographics, from tech entrepreneurs and climate scientists to artists, educators and defense strategists. The next generation of Japan hands will be more global, more inclusive and more interdisciplinary by necessity. Japan is no longer 'No. 1' or the main economic alternative to America like it was in the 1980s when Armitage and Nye established themselves, rather it is a bastion of soft power and a global force multiplier for a more reluctant America that is questioning its own role in the world. Richard Armitage, former U.S. Deputy Secretary of State, attends the first International Conference Of Council for Arab and International Relations in Kuwait City in February 2013. | REUTERS We now see rising voices who may not speak perfect Japanese or have not served in government, but who bring deep curiosity and commitment to the U.S.-Japan relationship. Many are women or people of color and come from backgrounds long excluded from the traditional foreign policy establishment. This is not a dilution of the term — it is this very evolution that should be celebrated even as we mourn the passing of these giants and their moment in time. A tougher strategic environment The strategic context is also far more complex than in Nye and Armitage's heyday. The U.S.-Japan alliance must now grapple with a rising China and authoritarianism in general, coupled with powerful nonstate actors and the reshaping of global supply chains after COVID-19 and a changing global trading order. Climate change, AI and demographic decline are no longer peripheral issues — they are central to national security and economic statecraft in more deeply divided American and Japanese polities where domestic politics trumps foreign policy consensus. This moment calls for more friends of Japan who can appreciate and navigate these challenges with agility, drawing from multiple domains while maintaining the clarity of purpose that Nye and Armitage modeled. It requires not just Japan experts, but bridge-builders who can interpret across cultures, disciplines and generations. Honoring a legacy To honor Nye and Armitage is not to look backward with nostalgia, but forward with ambition. They taught us that loyalty to allies should transcend political parties — a message that feels especially urgent amid rising polarization and populism across our democracies. They also showed that strategic clarity and human empathy can coexist — and that is a lesson for any generation. There will never be another Armitage or Nye — or an Armitage-Nye pairing. But that's not the goal. What we need now is a network of Japan hands — scholars, practitioners, students and citizens — who bring new energy to an old friendship. People who see Japan not only as a security partner, but as a cultural and technological force in its own right where its global role is additive and complementary to the new world order. People who understand that alliances are not inherited and taken for granted — they are earned, renewed and reimagined by each generation with appreciation and reverence for the giants on whose shoulders we all stand. The torch is being passed. The question is not only who will carry it, but whether they will carry it with the same conviction and the same courage to adapt. Joshua W. Walker, Ph.D., is president and CEO of Japan Society.
Yomiuri Shimbun
2 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Defying Trump, National Portrait Gallery Director Kim Sajet Is Still at Work
Chloe Coleman / The Washington Post The 'America's Presidents' gallery at the National Portrait Gallery on April 1. President Donald Trump's latest attempt to assert control over an elite American cultural institution has turned into a high-stakes Washington standoff. In defiance of Trump's announcement last Friday that he was firing her, Kim Sajet – the director of the Smithsonian Institution's National Portrait Gallery – has continued to report for work, conducting meetings and handling other museum business as she did before, according to several people familiar with her activities who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a personnel matter. Writing on Truth Social, Trump had declared he is firing Sajet because she 'is a highly partisan person' and because she is a 'strong supporter of DEI,' a reference to diversity, equity and inclusion. He said her replacement would be named shortly. Trump has not provided a legal reasoning to support his authority to fire Sajet. Top congressional Democrats have asserted the president does not have legal authority for the firing. Sen. Gary Peters (D-Michigan), a member of the Smithsonian's Board of Regents, said Wednesday that the board had requested more information and 'will discuss the issue further' at its scheduled meeting on Monday. 'We just need more information about her performance, and some of the allegations that were made, so we can make an informed, thoughtful decision,' Peters said. 'Clearly, the president has no authority whatsoever to fire her. The Smithsonian is an independent institution, and the director of the Smithsonian is the one who she reports to and that's the person who makes the decision as to hiring and firing of individuals.' In a joint statement, House Administration Committee ranking Democrat Joseph Morelle of New York and House Appropriations Committee ranking Democrat Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut said: 'President Trump has no authority to fire employees of the Smithsonian Institution – including the Director of the National Portrait Gallery. The dismissal of Director Sajet is unacceptable and has the same legal weight as the President's prior attempts to undermine the Smithsonian's independence: absolutely none. Should the White House require a copy of the Constitution, we would be more than happy to provide one.' Sajet's refusal to abide by Trump's decision sets up a test of the bounds of presidential authority over the Smithsonian, a sprawling complex of 21 museums, 14 education and research centers and the National Zoo. It is not a traditional government agency nor part of the executive branch, and hiring and firing decisions have historically been handled by the Smithsonian's secretary, rather than its Board of Regents. The Smithsonian's current secretary, Lonnie G. Bunch III, is widely expected to discuss the president's attempt to oust Sajet at the board meeting Monday. In an only-in-Washington twist, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. – who has been presented with major questions at the Supreme Court regarding the limits of presidential authority since Trump took office – is the chancellor of the Smithsonian and a member of its board. A Trump White House spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A Smithsonian spokesperson declined to comment. In February, Trump made another foray into American arts when he took over control of the Kennedy Center, dismissing his predecessor's appointees to its board, who then installed him as chairman and replaced the institution's director with a political ally with scant experience in the arts. The Smithsonian differs from the Kennedy Center because presidents don't appoint members to its board, which is composed of a mix of officials from all three branches of government and members of the public. But Trump is not without allies on the Smithsonian board, including Vice President JD Vance who, like Roberts, is an ex officio member. Trump's move against Sajet follows an executive order he issued on March 27 titled 'Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History,' which aims to 'restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness.' A 35-year-old special assistant and senior associate staff secretary, Lindsey Halligan, was among the order's architects – instigated, in part, by her early-2025 visit to the show 'The Shape of Power: Stories of Race and American Sculpture,' an exhibition at the Smithsonian American Art Museum, which shares a building with the Portrait Gallery. The order calls for Halligan and Vice President JD Vance to 'remove improper ideology' from the Smithsonian and 'prohibit expenditure on exhibits or programs that degrade shared American values, divide Americans based on race.' 'President Trump's attempt to fire the National Portrait Gallery Director is outrageous and represents yet another disturbing example of his relentless effort to control American art and culture,' said Rep. Chellie Pingree (Maine), the ranking Democrat on the House Interior Appropriations Subcommittee, which oversees the Smithsonian, in a statement. 'Despite what the President may think, America's cultural institutions are not run by dictatorial impulses.' On Tuesday a White House official provided The Post a list of 17 instances in which, the White House argued, Sajet was critical of Trump or outspoken about her support for diversity, equity and inclusion. The list included her donations to Democratic politicians and advocacy groups; a social media post praising Anthony S. Fauci; the caption for the museum's presidential portrait of Trump mentioning his two impeachments and 'incitement of insurrection' for the events of Jan. 6, 2021; and numerous quotes from interviews in a variety of publications about her efforts to represent a broad swath of Americans within the gallery's walls. One item on the list was a quote in a 2019 USA Today story about Black artists demanding representation in American artistic institutions: 'We owe it to Americans to reflect them because we owe it to accurate history,' Sajet says. 'I'm not interested in only having a museum for some people.' The list additionally took issue with remarks Sajet has made in support of the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements, and criticism of Columbus Day and her rejection of one artist's 2016 portrait of Trump as 'too political.' It notes that Sajet has commissioned artworks about Mexican immigration and 'the complications of ancestral and racial history.' It was critical of her 2013 decision to use '50 percent of all money spent on art' to 'support diverse artists and portrait subjects.' Since its founding 179 years ago, the Smithsonian, which receives about 60 percent of its budget from federal appropriations and grants, has generally operated independently, although there have been several controversies in which museums have altered exhibitions in response to outside criticisms, including from politicians. Museum directors, such as Sajet – holders of some of the most prestigious positions in American arts – are not paid with federal funds, instead drawing their salaries from the Smithsonian's trust fund. Hours after Trump's post, Bunch told Smithsonian staff in an email obtained by The Washington Post that the White House also sent new details of proposed cuts to the institution's budget, slashing it by 12 percent and excluding funding for its Anacostia Community Museum and its forthcoming National Museum of the American Latino, Bunch said. On Saturday, at the Portrait Gallery and SAAM's joint family Pride celebration, a trio of visitors strolled the central courtyard in neon vests emblazoned with 'Hands off the arts' on the back – closely watched by a Smithsonian staff member, who hovered nearby. 'I'm outraged' by Sajet's firing, said Karen Nussbaum, 75, of Washington. 'There's a place for a political expression in art, but not political control of art.' 'I think the next step is controlling what artists think and do,' said Cynthia Cain, 60, of Washington, 'and that's not acceptable.'
The Mainichi
4 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Trump moves to block US entry for foreign students planning to study at Harvard University
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Donald Trump is moving to block nearly all foreign students from entering the country to attend Harvard University, his latest attempt to choke the Ivy League school from an international pipeline that accounts for a quarter of the student body. In an executive order signed Wednesday, Trump declared that it would jeopardize national security to allow Harvard to continue hosting foreign students on its campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "I have determined that the entry of the class of foreign nationals described above is detrimental to the interests of the United States because, in my judgment, Harvard's conduct has rendered it an unsuitable destination for foreign students and researchers," Trump wrote in the order. It's a further escalation in the White House's fight with the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. A federal court in Boston blocked the Department of Homeland Security from barring international students at Harvard last week. Trump's order invokes a different legal authority. Trump invoked a broad federal law that gives the president authority to block foreigners whose entry would be "detrimental to the interests of the United States." On Wednesday, he cited the same authority when announcing that citizens of 12 countries would be banned from visiting the U.S. and those from seven others would face restrictions. Trump's Harvard order cites several other laws, too, including one barring foreigners associated with terrorist organizations. In a statement Wednesday night, Harvard said it will "continue to protect its international students." "This is yet another illegal retaliatory step taken by the Administration in violation of Harvard's First Amendment rights," university officials said. It stems from Harvard's refusal to submit to a series of demands made by the federal government. It has escalated recently after the Department of Homeland Security said Harvard refused to provide records related to misconduct by foreign students. Harvard says it has complied with the request, but the government said the school's response was insufficient. The dispute has been building for months after the Trump administration demanded a series of policy and governance changes at Harvard, calling it a hotbed of liberalism and accusing it of tolerating anti-Jewish harassment. Harvard defied the demands, saying they encroached on the university's autonomy and represented a threat to the freedom of all U.S. universities. Trump officials have repeatedly raised the stakes and sought new fronts to pressure Harvard, cutting more than $2.6 billion in research grants and moving to end all federal contracts with the university. The latest threat has targeted Harvard's roughly 7,000 international students, who account for half the enrollment at some Harvard graduate schools. "Admission to the United States to study at an 'elite' American university is a privilege, not a right," Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a post on X. "This Department of Justice will vigorously defend the President's proclamation suspending the entry of new foreign students at Harvard University based on national security concerns." Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., called the measure ridiculous and said it has nothing to do with national security. "It's a thinly veiled revenge ploy in Trump's personal feud with Harvard, and continued authoritarian overreach against free speech," Jayapal said on the social media site X. The order applies to all students attempting to enter the United States to attend Harvard after the date of the executive order. It provides a loophole to allow students whose entry would "benefit the national interest," as determined by federal officials. Trump's order alleges that Harvard provided data on misconduct by only three students in response to the Homeland Security request, and it lacked the detail to gauge if federal action was needed. Trump concluded that Harvard is either "not fully reporting its disciplinary records for foreign students or is not seriously policing its foreign students." "These actions and failures directly undermine the Federal Government's ability to ensure that foreign nationals admitted on student or exchange visitor visas remain in compliance with Federal law," the order said. For foreign students already at Harvard, Secretary of State Marco Rubio will determine if visas should be revoked, Trump wrote. The order is scheduled to last six months. Within 90 days, the administration will determine if it should be renewed, the order said. A State Department cable sent last week to U.S. embassies and consulates said federal officials will begin reviewing the social media accounts of visa applicants who plan to attend, work at or visit Harvard University for any signs of antisemitism. In a court filing last week, Harvard officials said the Trump administration's efforts to stop Harvard from enrolling international students have created an environment of "profound fear, concern, and confusion." Countless international students have asked about transferring from the university, Harvard immigration services director Maureen Martin said in the filing.
