Latest news with #foreignPolicy
Al Jazeera
3 days ago
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
Japan votes in election seen as key test for Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba
Voters in Japan are going to the polls in an upper house election seen as a test of the popularity of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and his ruling coalition. Polling stations opened nationwide at 7am on Sunday (22:00 GMT, Saturday) and will continue until 8pm (11:00 GMT) in most places, according to Japan's national broadcaster, NHK. The rising cost of living, especially for the staple food of rice, is a key issue for many voters, with population decline and foreign policy also on the agenda, according to NHK. Opinion polls suggest Ishiba's Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and coalition partner Komeito may fall short of the 50 seats needed to retain control of the 248-seat upper house of parliament in an election where half of the seats are up for grabs. A poor performance on Sunday would not immediately trigger a change of government because the upper house lacks the power to file a no-confidence motion against a leader, but it would certainly deepen uncertainty over Ishiba's fate and Japan's political stability. Ishiba would face calls from within the LDP to resign or to find another coalition partner. Opinion polls also suggest smaller opposition parties pushing for tax cuts and increased public spending are set to gain. These parties include right-wing Sanseito, which is promising to curb immigration, oppose foreign capital inflows and reverse gender equality moves. 'I am attending graduate school, but there are no Japanese [people] around me. All of them are foreigners,' said Yu Nagai, a 25-year-old student who said he voted for Sanseito. 'When I look at the way compensation and money are spent on foreigners, I think that Japanese people are a bit disrespected,' Nagai told the Reuters news agency. Other voters, meanwhile, voiced concern about escalating xenophobia. Yuko Tsuji, a 43-year-old consultant, who came to a polling station inside a downtown Tokyo gymnasium with her husband, said they support the LDP for stability and unity and voted 'for candidates who won't fuel division.' 'If the ruling party doesn't govern properly, the conservative base will drift toward extremes. So I voted with the hope that the ruling party would tighten things up,' she told The Associated Press news agency. Self-employed Daiichi Nasu, 57, said he hopes for a change towards a more inclusive and diverse society, with more open immigration and gender policies such as allowing married couples to keep separate surnames. 'That's why I voted for the CDPJ,' he said, referring to the opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan. 'I want to see progress on those fronts.' More than 20 percent of registered voters, some 21 million people, voted early, significantly more than three years ago, NHK reported. Ishiba, 68, a self-avowed defence 'geek' and train enthusiast, became prime minister on his fifth attempt last September before immediately calling snap elections for late October. Those polls marked a significant defeat for the new prime minister's ruling coalition, which won just 209 seats in the lower house of parliament, down from the 279 it previously held. In April, Ishiba announced emergency economic measures to alleviate any impact on industries and households affected by new tariffs imposed by the United States on Japanese exports. The country is still frantically seeking to secure a reprieve from US President Donald Trump's proposed 25 percent tariffs before a new August 1 deadline touted by Washington. Ishiba's centre-right LDP has governed Japan almost continuously since 1955, albeit with frequent changes of leader. He is the third prime minister to lead the country since former leader Shinzo Abe resigned in September 2020. Abe was assassinated two years later, leading to revelations and public outrage about ties between the former prime minister, his LDP and the Unification Church.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Memo on protesters cautioned that authority used to strip visas would face scrutiny
Action memos on pro-Palestinian protesters sent by government officials to Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the authority he used to strip their visas had never before been used and would likely face scrutiny, a government official testified in court Friday. Rubio used what the government says is his authority to find someone deportable "if the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe that the alien's presence or activities in the United States would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States," citing the Immigration and Nationality Act. A section of a government memo that was read in court noted "it is likely that courts will closely scrutinize this determination" because the basis of it could be considered "protected speech." MORE: DHS investigated over 5,000 student protesters listed on doxxing website: Official The contents of the memo were revealed during an ongoing bench trial in which the Trump administration is accused of instituting a constitutionally illegal ideological deportation policy against pro-Palestinian protesters, including Columbia University's Mahmoud Khalil and Mohsen Mahdawi and Tufts University's Rumeysa Ozturk. The lawsuit was filed by the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association, which represents hundreds of professors and students across the country. An action memo sent by government officials to the secretary of state proposing Rubio strip Khalil and Yunseo Chung of their visas was cleared by 10 people and departments within 24 hours before it was sent to Rubio, John Armstrong, the senior bureau official in the bureau of consular affairs at the State Department, testified Friday. The White House, Department of Homeland Security, State Department and Department of Defense had over 20 conversations about student protester visa revocations, most of which took place in March, Armstrong testified. Armstrong also testified that he had conversations with people on the Homeland Security Council over the visa revocations, naming Homeland Security Adviser Stephen Miller and his deputy. In a two-page memo from earlier this year outlining why Khalil should be deported, Rubio cited Khalil's alleged role in "antisemitic protests and disruptive activities, which fosters a hostile environment for Jewish students in the United States." Asked about how officials identify what constitutes antisemitism, Armstrong testified Friday that he can't remember receiving "any concrete guidance" as to what can be treated as antisemitic, and also testified that he doesn't know of any of his deputies having received formalized training on what antisemitism is. It's my understanding that "antisemites will try to hide their views and say they are not against Jews, they are just against Israel" -- but "it's a dodge" to hide their antisemitism, Armstrong said. Support for a foreign terrorist organization or terrorist activity is grounds for a visa revocation, Armstrong testified, saying, "Support for Hamas will get your visa revoked." Asked by plaintiffs attorneys, Armstrong also testified that criticizing Zionism, criticizing Israel's actions in Gaza, saying that the actions of the Israeli government are "worse than Hitler," saying "from the river to the sea," calling Israel an apartheid state and calling for an arms embargo could all be considered cause for removal under the executive order combatting antisemitism. MORE: Mahmoud Khalil case: Ordered to show evidence, government asserts Rubio's authority Armstrong, who personally authorized the decision to strip Ozturk of her visa, testified that he based the decision on her actions protesting Tufts' relationship with Israel and her "activities and association" with groups that are "creating a hostile environment for Jewish students." That alleged association was based on an op-ed she co-authored with someone who is part of a student group that supported the call for Tufts to divest and cut ties with Israel -- a proposal that was made by Tufts Students for Justice in Palestine, a group which is now banned from campus. DHS and Homeland Security Investigations found that Ozturk was not part of the activities that resulted in Tufts SJP's ban from Tufts, according to documents read aloud in court by attorneys. Nonetheless, Armstrong maintained that Ozturk had ties to Tufts SJP. Ozturk's visa was revoked under a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that allows the government to revoke a visa for any reason, Armstrong testified. On Thursday, Andre Watson, the assistant director for the national security division at Homeland Security, testified that he has made 10 to 15 referrals of student protesters to the Department of State for possible visa revocation since the establishment of the Tiger Team task force looking into student protesters. He said he referred every individual on whom the Homeland Security Investigations task force has filed a report, including Khalil, Ozturk and Mahdawi. After the conclusion of testimony on Thursday, U.S. District Judge William Young informed the parties of definitions he will be relying on while making a decision after the conclusion of the bench trial. "Criticisms of the state of Israel are not antisemitism. They are political speech, protected speech," Young said. Commentary on "conduct of the state of Israel, if it involves war crimes, involves genocide ... is protected speech with respect to our constitution," Young said. While condemning antisemitism and saying the government should discourage antisemitism and hate against any group of people, he said, "Antisemitism ... is not illegal. It is protected under the First Amendment." MORE: Trial challenging administration's deportation of pro-Palestinian scholars gets underway On the pivotal question of whether visa holders and lawful permanent residents have the same First Amendment rights as U.S. citizens, the judge said, "Probably they do." Young also said criticizing the state of Israel "does not constitute pro-Hamas support." After new evidence is entered on Monday, closing arguments will begin in the trial.
Yahoo
08-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Donald Trump Was Asked About A Key Promise. What Followed Was Pure Gibberish.
Donald Trump was asked by a reporter on Monday to explain what had happened to his administration's promise to seal '90 trade deals in 90 days.' Instead of outlining the dozens of deals with foreign countries that he previously boasted would be completed by Wednesday — the 90-day mark since his so-called April 'Liberation Day' — the president just waffled, talked about a couple of frameworks and possible deals in place and then appeared to suggest his plan now mainly involved sending letters to foreign governments and telling them the tariffs that their products will now be subjected to, when they are imported into America. Watch here: Here is Trump's response in full: 'Oh, we've spoken to everybody. We know every. It's all done. I told you. I told you we'll make some deals, but for the most part we're gonna send a letter. We're gonna saying, 'Welcome to the United States. If you'd like to participate in the greatest, most successful country ever.' I mean, we're doing better than ever. We have. I don't think. And you're gonna see these numbers soon. We've never had numbers like this. We've never had investment like this. Uh, we have more than 90. We're gonna have much more than 90. But most of those are gonna be sent a letter. This is exactly what I said. Now, we've made a deal with United Kingdom. We've made a deal with China. We've made a deal. We're close to making a deal with India. Others, we've met with, and we don't think we're gonna be able to make a deal. So, we just send them a letter. 'Do you wanna, do you wanna play ball? This is what you have to pay.' So, we're, as far as I'm concerned, we're done. We're sending out letters to various countries, telling them how much tariffs they have to pay. Some will maybe adjust a little bit depending if they have a, you know, cause. We're not gonna be unfair about it. And actually, it's a small fraction compared to what we should be getting. We should be. We could be asking for much more. But for the sake of relationships that we've had with a lot of really good countries, we're doing the way I do it. But we could be getting a lot more. We could ask for a lot more than what we're asking for.' Critics were puzzled: This Statue Of Liberty Street Art Made MAGA Mad — And The Artist Is Unrepentant Trump Just Launched His Own TV Streaming Platform. Seriously. Trump Admits He Misses Sports Team's Old, Racist Name CNN Data Chief 'Never Thought I'd See' This Stunning Shift In Sentiment
Daily Mail
08-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Anthony Albanese accused of getting 'cozy' with China and neglecting US
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been accused of sidelining Australia's alliance with the United States ahead of his upcoming trip to China. Albanese acknowledged Australia's pivot towards the United States during World War II during a speech at an event commemorating former Labor leader John Curtin. 'John Curtin is rightly honoured as the founder of Australia's alliance with the United States, a pillar of our foreign policy that commands bipartisan support, respect and affection,' he told the crowd on Saturday. 'But our alliance with the US ought to be remembered as a product of Curtin's leadership in defence and foreign policy, not the extent of it. In an allusion to ongoing tensions in the AUKUS agreement, Albanese said Australia should be not be 'shackled to our past'. 'So we remember Curtin not just because he looked to America. We honour him because he spoke for Australia, he said. The comments, framed as Albanese's 'progressive patriotism', have drawn criticism for downplaying Australia's alliance with the US at a critical time. The address came just weeks after US President Donald Trump cancelled his scheduled face-to-face meeting with Albanese at the G7 Summit in Canada, to deal with escalations in the Middle East. It also follows Australia rejecting calls from Washington to raise defence spending from around two to five per cent of GDP. At the same time, key NATO allies have agreed to ramp up their military budgets to the 5 per cent target, following a summit in The Hague and pressure from the US. Sky News host Paul Murray said Albanese's attempt to draw similarities between present day and the Curtin-era was 'taking the piss'. 'What I did find offensive about the suggestion from the speech on Saturday was, "Oh, well, this is just like John Curtin. We know how to balance things",' he said. 'The only reason we need to build up our military is because of China, not because of America.' Meanwhile, Nationals Senator Matt Canavan called on Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong to be more transparent about their foreign policy strategy. 'I think the Australian people deserve to know, does the Albanese government view America as the most important friend and ally to our country... which has been the case since John Curtin made that shift,' he told Sky News. 'Or do they think we should replace the United States with the likes of a dictatorial communist regime in Beijing?' Opposition Leader Sussan Ley also criticised the Curtin speech, saying Albanese needed to do more to build on the alliance in the United States. 'At a time of global uncertainty, growing conflict and a growing list of issues in the Australia-United States relationship, now is a time to build our influence in Washington, not diminish it,' Ley said in a statement. 'Many Australians will wonder whether this speech at this time was in our national interest, given so many things crucial to Australia's future are currently being considered by the US administration.' It is understood that artificial intelligence, healthcare and a revised trade agreement will be top of the agenda when Albanese meets with his Chinese counterpart. It has also been reported the PM will address the potential sale of Darwin Port. In 2015, Chinese company Landbridge secured a 99-year lease over Darwin Port in a deal struck by the Northern Territory's then-Country Liberal Government, at a time when Anthony Albanese was serving as the federal infrastructure minister.
The Guardian
06-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
This is a party I'm looking forward to
A new party focused on poverty, inequality and 'a foreign policy based on peace rather than war' (Report, 3 July). Oh Jeremy Corbyn, sign me up now. If you build it, we will HeleyBrighton, East Sussex When I did a politics course back in the 1970s, the lecturer told us that a large majority was just as difficult, and often more so, to handle than a small one (Welfare climbdown lets genie out of the bottle, and no one knows what happens next, 2 July). How right he was. Elizabeth GoaterSalisbury Kevin Ward (Letters, 2 July) should know that Royal Mail has a long history of inspired delivery. In 1967, I received my first (and only) piece of fanmail. Addressed to Dave the Folk Singer, Westward Ho!, the letter was personally delivered by the head postmaster, who was also my CooperNafferton, East Riding of Yorkshire Re the cost of Glastonbury (Letters, 2 July), go to the Proms instead. Promming (standing) tickets are £8. Who runs it? The BBC, of FullerBedford Regarding what makes someone cool ('You know it when you see it': experts size up scientists' attempt to define cool, 5 July), if you think you are cool, you probably aren' Campbell Bristol Alison McIntosh is right – it is what it is (Letters, 3 July).Marilyn RowleyDidsbury, Manchester We have just received our first Christmas catalogue!Mary HuttyBath Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
