Martin Pfister elected as new Swiss federal council member
ZURICH (Reuters) - Switzerland's parliament on Wednesday elected Martin Pfister to be the new member of the country's federal council, or cabinet, replacing Viola Amherd, who is stepping down at the end of this month.
Pfister edged out his colleague Markus Ritter, with both men representing the centrist Die Mitte party.
Amherd, the Swiss defence minister, served as the country's president last year within the seven-member federal council.
(Writing by Dave Graham, Editing by Rachel More)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Iran's Supreme Leader says Israel initiated a war
DUBAI (Reuters) -Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a statement on Friday that Israel initiated a war and said it will not be allowed to do "hit and run" attacks without grave consequences. "The Zionist regime (Israel) will not remain unscathed from the consequences of its crime. The Iranian nation must be guaranteed that our response will not be half-measured," Khamenei said in a statement
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Israeli strikes back Iran's leadership into a corner
By Samia Nakhoul and Parisa Hafezi DUBAI (Reuters) -Israel has gutted Iran's nuclear and military leadership in one blow, leaving Tehran with few options to retaliate including an all-out war that it is neither equipped for nor likely to win, four regional officials said. The widescale overnight strikes have ratcheted up the direct confrontation between the arch foes to an unprecedented level following years of war in the shadows that burst into the open when Iran's ally Hamas attacked Israel in 2023. Regional security sources said Tehran was unlikely to respond in kind because its missile capabilities and influence in the region outside Iran have been severely degraded by Israel since the Hamas attacks that triggered the Gaza war. But they said Iran's leaders, humiliated and increasingly preoccupied with their own survival, cannot afford to appear weak by caving to Israeli military pressure, raising the prospect of further escalation - including even the perilous option of seeking to rapidly build a nuclear bomb. "They can't survive if they surrender," said Mohanad Hage Ali at the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. "They need to strike hard against Israel but their (military) options are limited. I think their next option is withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)." Withdrawing from the NPT would be a serious escalation as it would be signal Iran is accelerating its enrichment programme to produce weapons-grade uranium for a nuclear bomb, experts said. Tehran's regional sway has been weakened by Israel's attacks on its proxies, from Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and militias in Iraq, as well as by the ousting of Iran's close ally, Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad. Western sanctions have hit Iran's crucial oil exports and the economy is reeling from a string of crises including a collapsing currency, rampant inflation along with energy and water shortages. The Iranian leadership's initial response though was muted. They did not confirm whether they would attend the sixth round of deadlocked talks with the United States over its nuclear programme scheduled for Sunday in Oman. "They can't retaliate through anyone. The Israelis are dismantling the Iranian empire piece by piece, bit by bit ... and now they've started sowing internal doubt (about the invincibility) of the regime," said Sarkis Naoum, a regional expert. "This is massive hit." Israel strikes targeting key facilities in Tehran and other cities continued into the night on Friday. The Iranian foreign ministry did respond to requests for comment. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was defiant earlier on Friday, saying Israel had "unleashed its wicked and bloody" hand, and would suffer "a bitter fate". THE NUCLEAR OPTION Abdelaziz al-Sager, director of the Gulf Research Center think-tank, said Iran has been backed into a corner with limited options. One possibility would be to offer assurances - in private - that it will abandon uranium enrichment and dismantle its nuclear capabilities, since any public declaration of such a capitulation would likely provoke a fierce domestic backlash. He said another option could involve a return to clandestine warfare, reminiscent of the 1980s bombings targeting U.S. and Israeli embassies and military installations. A third, and far more perilous option, would be to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and accelerate its uranium enrichment programme. Such a move, al-Sager warned, would be tantamount to a declaration of war and would almost certainly provoke a strong international response - not only from Israel, but also from the United States and other Western powers. Trump has threatened military action to ensure Iran doesn't obtain an atomic weapon. He reiterated his position on Thursday, saying: "Iran must completely give up hopes of obtaining a nuclear weapon." Iran is currently enriching uranium up to 60% purity, close to the roughly 90% it would need for nuclear weapons. It has enough material at that level, if processed further, for nine nuclear bombs, according to a U.N. nuclear watchdog yardstick. Israel's strikes overnight on Friday targeted Iran's nuclear facilities, ballistic missile factories, military commanders and nuclear scientists. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said it was the start of a prolonged operation to prevent Tehran from building an atomic weapon. At least 20 senior commanders were killed, two regional sources said. The armed forces chief of staff, Major General Mohammad Bagheri, Revolutionary Guards Chief Hossein Salami, and the head of the Revolutionary Guards Aerospace Force, Amir Ali Hajizadeh, were among them. "It's a big attack: big names, big leaders, big damage to the Iranian military leadership and its ballistic missiles. It's unprecedented," said Carnegie's Hage Ali. Sima Shine, a former chief Mossad analyst and now a researcher at Israel's Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), said Israel would probably not be able to take out Iran's nuclear project completely without U.S. help. "Therefore, if the U.S. will not be part of the war, I assume that some parts of (Iran's) nuclear project will remain," she told reporters on Friday. SHAKEN TO THE CORE Friday's strikes have not only inflicted strategic damage but have also shaken Iran's leadership to the core, according to a senior regional official close to the Iranian establishment. Defiance has transformed into concern and uncertainty within the ruling elite and, behind closed doors, anxiety is mounting, not just over the external threats but also their eroding grip on power at home, the official said. "Panic has surged among the leadership," the senior regional official said. "Beyond the threat of further attacks, a deeper fear looms large: domestic unrest." A moderate former Iranian official said the assassination in 2020 of General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the overseas arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, on the orders of President Donald Trump, started the rot. Since then, the Islamic Republic has struggled to reassert its influence across the region and has never fully recovered. "This attack might be the beginning of the end," he said. If protests erupt, and the leadership responds with repression, it will only backfire, the former official said, noting that public anger has been simmering for years, fuelled by sanctions, inflation and an unrelenting crackdown on dissent. In his video address shortly after the attacks started, Netanyahu suggested he would like to see regime change in Iran and sent a message to Iranians. "Our fight is not with you, our fight is with the brutal dictatorship that has oppressed you for 46 years. I believe the day of your liberation is near," he said. The hope for regime change could explain why Israel went after so many senior military figures, throwing the Iranian security establishment into a state of confusion and chaos. "These people that were very vital, very knowledgeable, many years in their jobs, and they were a very important component of the stability of the regime, specifically the security stability of the regime," said Shine. Iranian state media reported that at least two nuclear scientists, Fereydoun Abbasi and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, were killed in Israeli strikes in Tehran. EMPIRE IN DECLINE Iran's most powerful proxy in the region, Lebanese armed group Hezbollah, is also in a weak position to respond. In the days leading up to the strikes on Iran, security sources close to Hezbollah told Reuters the group would not join any retaliatory action by Iran out of fear such a response could unleash a new Israeli blitz on Lebanon. Israel's war last year against Hezbollah left the group badly weakened, with its leadership decimated, thousands of its fighters killed and swathes of its strongholds in southern Lebanon and Beirut's suburbs destroyed. A direct war between Israel and Iran could swiftly expand to Gulf states whose airspace lies between the two enemies, and which host several U.S. military bases. Gulf monarchies allied with Washington issued internal directives to avoid any provocative statements following the attacks that might anger Iran, one official Gulf source told Reuters. Analysts said Trump could leverage the fallout from the Israeli strikes to bring Iran back to the nuclear negotiating table - but this time more isolated, and more likely to offer deeper concessions. "One thing is clear: the Iranian empire is in decline," said regional expert Naoum. "Can they still set the terms of their decline? Not through military terms. There's only one way to do that: through negotiations." (Reporting and writing by Samia Nakhoul in Dubai; Additional reporting by Parisa Hafezi and Maha el Dahan in Dubai, and Laila Bassam and Maya Gebeily in Beirut; Editing by David Clarke)
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Newsom's approval rating suffers a slight loss in new California survey. How is Trump doing?
Gov. Gavin Newsom has suffered a loss in his approval ratings, a new survey found, as a majority of Californians disapprove of President Donald Trump's handling of his presidency. The Public Policy Institute of California released its June statewide survey, revealing where Californians stand on state officials, the federal government, and key issues. The survey of 1,591 adults and state residents, conducted from May 22-29, follows heightened fears of economic uncertainty due to ping-ponging tariff policies and has been released amid a rise in protests in California and nationwide over immigration enforcement sweeps. Among the many takeaways of PPIC's latest survey is that 70% of Californians disapprove of Trump's handling of his job, with 29% in approval and 1% who don't know. It's just a slight uptick from the nonpartisan nonprofit's February survey, in which 69% disapproved of Trump's job performance. Trump's approval ratings weren't too dissimilar to those of the U.S. Congress; 78% disapprove of how Congress is handling its job, with 20% who approve and 3% who don't know, according to the PPIC survey. But negative sentiments weren't solely fixed on Trump or Congress. The survey also found an uptick in Californians who don't approve of Newsom's handling of his job as governor, or 54%. That's seven percentage points up from the February survey. That said, Newsom's approval ratings have hovered in the 40% to low 50% range in recent months, according to a graph of PPIC's survey results, showing that opinions on the governor go slightly up and down. The California governor has long been the subject of ire from some of his consistiuents and political opponents — and in recent days, he's been repeatedly criticized by Trump over his handling of protests in Los Angeles as the state and the administration remain locked in a battle over the mobilization of the California National Guard and the Marines. Respondents appeared to have a less favorable perspective on California's future, with 60% saying that the state is generally going in the wrong direction. This is up from the 54% who said the state was going in the wrong direction several months ago. However, about a year ago, 62% said the state was going in the wrong direction, so these sentiments aren't new. Californians were asked to select the most important problem facing the nation. Among a slew of options such as education, health care, foreign conflicts was one problem that took some lead over the others: 35% selected political extremism or threats to democracy. Reuters/Ipsos poll: A nationwide poll that surveyed 1,024 U.S. adults from May 16-18 found 42% approved of Trump, a slight dip from the 44% of Americans who approved of Trump a week earlier, Reuters said. Quinnipiac poll: 38% of voters approve of Trump's handling of his presidency in a survey of 1,265 self-identified registered voters nationwide from June 5-9, down three percentage points from a poll in April. Meanwhile, 54% disapproved of the president's handling of his job. Gallup poll: The latest figures from a poll from May 1-18 show 43% approve of Trump's handling of his job, while 53% disapprove and 5% have no opinion. The disapproval rating has remained consistent over several periods since March, Gallup's figures show. The Economist: 44% approve of Trump, while 51% disapprove and 5% don't know, according to The Economist's polling figures, which was last updated on June 10. Civiqs: As of Thursday, June 12, 43% approve of Trump's handling of his presidency and 53% disapprove, while 4% selected neither approve nor disapprove, according to Civiqs ongoing approval rating tracker. These figures have largely remained the same for weeks. Paris Barraza is a trending reporter covering California news at The Desert Sun. Reach her at pbarraza@ This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: Trump approval rating: Is California satisfied with Trump, Newsom?
