Police investigate disappearance of Melania Trump's statue in her native Slovenia
Police in Slovenia are investigating the disappearance of a bronze statue of US first lady Melania Trump that was sawed off and carried away from her hometown.
The life-size sculpture was unveiled in 2020 during President Donald Trump's first term in office near Sevnica in central Slovenia, where Melanija Knavs was born in 1970. It replaced a wooden statue that had been set on fire earlier that year.
Police spokeswoman Alenka Drenik Rangus said Friday that the police were informed about the theft of the statue on Tuesday. She said police were working to track down those responsible.
According to Slovenian media reports, the bronze replica was sawed off at the ankles and removed.
Franja Kranjc, who works at a bakery in Sevnica that sells cakes with Melania Trump's name in support of the first lady, said the stolen statue won't be missed.
'I think no one was really proud at this statue, not even the first lady of the USA,' he said. 'So I think its OK that it's removed.'
The original wooden statue was torched in July 2020. The rustic figure was cut from the trunk of a linden tree, showing her in a pale blue dress like the one she wore at Trump's presidential inauguration in 2017.
The replica bronze statue has no obvious resemblance with the first lady.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Asharq Al-Awsat
an hour ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Meeting Change and Missed Opportunities
The fall of Bashar al-Assad's regime and the rise of Ahmed al-Sharaa to the Syrian presidency is the foundational episode of the regional transformation that is currently underway. It may well be one of the most consequential outcomes of the Al-Aqsa Flood Operation and its aftermath or even the most consequential strategic shift the region has witnessed since the 1967 defeat. We did not merely see a change at the top of the Syrian regime. The entire regional order that had been built around an Iranian-Syrian-Lebanese axis, whose influence stretched into Iraq and Palestine, has collapsed. A new phase has begun, and the door to the Levant has now been closed to Iranian expansion. The United States has returned to the region through the front door, with its role bolstered by a rare moment of Arab consensus regarding the need to curb the non-Arab spheres of influence that had crystalized over the past two decades. This turning point has drawn unprecedented Arab and international attention, led by Saudi Arabia and crowned by President Donald Trump's meeting with al-Sharaa. Global powers then raced to Damascus as they sought a role in reshaping Syria's regional role and strategic posture. This surge of attention has come as a surprise to Lebanon. The frustration of the Lebanese has raised legitimate questions about the gulf in Arab and international engagement with Syria when compared to Lebanon. Indeed, a change in leadership has also emerged in Beirut, which has now also exited the Syrian and Iranian spheres of influence. How could the spotlight shift away from a country long seen as the 'Arab world's concern' and the 'laboratory of international settlements'? Has the world made up its mind about Beirut? Lebanon, which has sustained Arab and international attention since the 1969 Palestinian crisis, is now squandering opportunity after opportunity, gradually losing what remains of international confidence in the country. Neither limited resources nor Lebanon's fragile political system explain this failure alone; the absence of a unified national vision, political will, and commitment to reform are also crucial factors. At the same time, most Arab states and international powers had been expecting a clear stance on the key question of sovereignty in the wake of regional and domestic changes. The authorities were expected to consolidate the state's monopoly over arms, fight corruption, and affirm judicial independence. Instead, Lebanon chose ambiguity, seemingly unaware of the significance of what has happened in Syria, Iran's retreat from the Levant, and Hezbollah's waning power. The result, three months into the new government's tenure, has been stagnation, kicking the can down the road, and petty deals. Hesitation continues to prevail, fueled by a fear of the specter of civil war and the daunting task of dismantling Hezbollah's deep entrenchment in the public sector, Lebanon's security apparatus and other state institutions The authorities are also reluctant to embark on the complex and delicate process of disentangling the Shiite community from Hezbollah. It seems that Lebanon is being steadily pushed to the margins, while Syria has been granted a historic opportunity backed by broad Arab and international support. Lebanon has received little more than initiatives that lack meaningful political backing, despite the formation of a new government that signals a desire for change. Rather than deliberate neglect, this state of affairs is a reflection of deepening despair over Lebanon's ability to seize the moment and engage with clear messages. Chief among them is the demand for a clear political decision on ending all forms of armed resistance, deeming Hezbollah's weapons as illegitimate, setting a timeframe for its disarmament and pursuing a permanent truce with Israel similar to that of the 1949 armistice. These steps would strip Israel of its pretexts, though it is nonetheless unlikely to play a constructive role in either Lebanon or Syria. The current ultra-right Israeli government is gripped by paranoia. It sees every political shift in an Arab country as a direct threat, demanding everything while offering no political concessions and favoring military solutions over political compromise. The successes it has achieved in its latest war have only hardened this disposition and deepened its delusion that force alone can dictate realities on the ground, even if this comes at the cost of regional stability and risks straining Israel's relations with the Trump administration, which seeks to broaden the Abraham Accords. In the end, the difference between Syria and Lebanon lies not in the scale of their respective crises, but in each country's ability to respond to those crises. The collapse of the Syrian regime has triggered a structural and strategic metamorphosis that has drawn in international and Arab actors eager to fill the vacuum and redraw the regional map. Syria finds itself at a moment that mirrors the post-Cold War era. This is a moment of reckoning, reshuffling, and opening up to new possibilities. Lebanon, by contrast, remains caught in a grey zone. It is neither fully collapsing nor genuinely recovering, content to manage its crises without resolving them. As Damascus transforms into the foundation of a new regional order in which it plays an active role, Beirut is fading from the world's view. The bell of transformation has rung, and opportunities do not wait for those who squander them. In a world ruled by hard reality rather than good intentions, hedging and delay no longer convince anyone.
Al Arabiya
2 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
Trump to speak with Netanyahu, Axios reports
US President Donald Trump is expected to speak with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, an Axios reporter said in a post on X, citing a source familiar.
Arab News
3 hours ago
- Arab News
FIFA has ignored Israel's atrocities for too long
Football fans worldwide are unequivocally challenging FIFA's continued support for Israel, organizing with unprecedented unity for Palestine. Unlike previous actions, this mobilization is now notably well-coordinated, widespread and consistent. Long gone are the days when much of the sport's solidarity emerged from the fanbase of Glasgow Celtic, Chile's Deportivo Palestino or Arab teams. Gaza is now the undisputed focal point of sports solidarity worldwide. The consequences of this are arguably the most significant in terms of achieving global awareness of the Israeli genocide in Gaza in particular, but also of the Israeli military occupation and apartheid in the whole of occupied Palestine. For years, the mainstream media did its utmost to ignore the pro-Palestine flags, banners and chants. When solidarity exceeded tolerable levels, whether in Scotland or Chile, football's authorities cracked down with fines and various other punitive measures. Nowadays, however, such tactics are utterly failing. At times, Celtic Park seems to be one massive pro-Palestine rally, while numerous other clubs are joining in or expanding their efforts. In and around Paris Saint-Germain's UEFA Champions League final match against Inter Milan on May 31, it seemed as if the entire PSG supporters' activities focused on Palestine. Chants of 'Nous sommes tous les enfants de Gaza' (We are all the children of Gaza) echoed everywhere, inside and outside the stadium. As soon as Achraf Hakimi scored the opening goal, a massive banner was unfurled that read: 'Stop the genocide in Gaza.' In and around the Champions League final, it seemed as if the entire PSG supporters' activities focused on Palestine Ramzy Baroud Such unprecedented acts of solidarity are comparable to the sporting boycotts of apartheid South Africa, which began in the mid-1960s. These boycotts were instrumental in liberating the discourse and transforming the conversation about apartheid from academic halls into the streets. While the above is true, the two cases are not always comparable. Regarding apartheid, thanks to the efforts of Global South governments, boycotts largely began at an institutional level and gradually garnered massive popular support. In the Palestinian case, however, there has been a complete moral breakdown on the part of institutions like FIFA, while football fans are the ones championing solidarity. FIFA is yet to take any action against Israel despite the blatant racism within its sporting institutions and the direct harm it is doing to Palestinian sports. The go-to excuse is the slogan: 'sports and politics don't mix.' But if that is the case, why did FIFA seamlessly mix the two following the Russian invasion of Ukraine? Almost immediately after the start of the war, Western countries, purporting to speak on behalf of the international community, began slapping hundreds, and eventually thousands, of sanctions on Russia, which found itself isolated in every arena, including sports. FIFA quickly joined in, banning the Russian national team from its competitions. In the Palestinian case, the hypocrisy is limitless, even though it began long before the Israeli genocide in Gaza. Every Palestinian effort, often backed by Arab, Muslim and Global South associations, to hold Israel accountable for its apartheid and military occupation has been met with failure. Every time, the response is the same. An October 2017 statement by FIFA is a case in point. It was a response to a final report by the FIFA Monitoring Committee Israel-Palestine, which followed repeated requests by international groups to look into the matter of the Israeli occupation and the need for FIFA to hold Israel accountable. In the Palestinian case, there has been a complete moral breakdown on the part of institutions like FIFA Ramzy Baroud The response was decisive: 'The current situation … has nothing to do with football.' It is of 'exceptional complexity and sensitivity' and cannot be 'changed unilaterally by nongovernment organizations such as FIFA.' The 'final status of the West Bank territories' is the concern of competent international public law authorities. It concluded that 'FIFA … must remain neutral with regard to political matters,' adding that the association will 'refrain from imposing any sanctions' on Israel and that 'the matter is declared closed.' Since then, so much has changed. For example, in July 2018, Israel declared itself a country for Jews only via the so-called nation-state law. In July 2020, the coalition government agreed a deal that allowed for the annexation of occupied areas within the West Bank. And since Oct. 7, 2023, it has been engaged in a genocide in Gaza. The accusatory language this time is not that of the Palestinians and their allies. It is the language of international institutions, which are actively investigating Israel's horrific violations in Gaza. Though FIFA may still claim that the matter is too 'complex' and 'sensitive,' how can it ignore the fact that more than 700 Palestinian athletes were killed and some 270 sports facilities destroyed in the first 14 months of the war? Here, something must be said about the tenacity of the Palestinians, a quality that does not hinge on FIFA's action or inaction. The Palestine national football team continues to go from strength to strength and, even more impressively, Palestinian children in Gaza somehow manage to create spaces, even among the ruins of their cities, to kick a ball, thus stealing a moment of joy from the horrors of genocide. Though FIFA continues to fail Palestine, sports fans refuse to be part of this moral travesty. Ultimately, it will be the tenacity of the Palestinians and the growing solidarity with their just cause that will force FIFA to take action, not only for the sake of Palestine or even the future of the sport, but for the organization's own relevance.
