7aMoDi

A humpback whale breaching among icebergs at Ilulissat Icefjord, a Unesco world heritage site, in Greenland. Photograph: Juan Maria Coy Vergara/Getty Images Peter Bridgewater has a clear message for the International Whaling Commission (IWC) that he once led. The organisation – which played a critical role in ending whale hunting in the 1980s – has become a zombie institution that should vote to disband itself at its meeting next month. “The commission did great work, but that was last century,” Bridgewater told the Observer last week. “Today it has – like so many other international conventions or organisations – outlived its useful life and should be quietly disbanded.” This point was stressed by Bridgewater – who chaired the IWC from 1994 to 1997 – in a comment article published in Nature last week and which was written with several other conservationists including Rakhyun Kim, of the Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development at Utrecht University, and Robert Blasiak of the Stockholm Resilience Centre. Norwegian whalers at a whaling station in South Georgia in 1932. Photograph: Liborio Justo/Getty Images “The IWC will hold its 69th meeting in Lima in September,” they state in their article. “We propose that it hands over several pending issues to other conventions and national governments and then closes up shop.” It is an extraordinarily robust demand. Nevertheless, the group states that such a move is urgently needed – to set an example over the futures of the thousands of other international environmental organisations that exist today. Many of these bodies have had little impact collectively, but expend millions of dollars annually on secretariats and meeting and use up time and resources from governments, state Bridgewater and his colleagues. Examples include the Montreal ­protocol, which monitors ozone depletion. Its residual tasks could easily be carried out by other UN bodies, they say. “Proud legacies and historical achievements are important, but allowing institutions to become zombies serves no one,” say Bridgewater and colleagues. The International Whaling Commission was originally set up to “provide for the proper development of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly development of the whaling industry”. However, as environmental concerns grew and numbers of the great whales – including the gray, humpback, right, sperm, bowhead and minke whales – plummeted as their slaughter, in their tens of thousands a year, was allowed to continue, the commission decided in 1982 that all commercial whaling should cease by the 1985-6 season. Those accomplishments are laudable but lie four decades in the past, say the group. “IWC meetings since have been a source of acrimonious and fruitless dialogue among member nations. By exiting with dignity, the IWC would set a powerful example for the international environmental community.” A minke whale. Photograph: Kerstin Meyer/Getty Images Studies of whale po[CENSORED]tions make it clear that virtually all species are now increasing. Humpback numbers have risen sharply, along with blue and minke whales. The main exception is the North Atlantic right whale, which has suffered badly from vessel strikes and entanglement in fishing gear. However, the rest of the world’s whales are doing well, said Bridgewater. “Species numbers have bounced back since the moratorium to varying degrees levels. And that is the point of our message to the IWC: ‘You have done your job. It’s been really good work. You have got a result. Now it is time to hang up things and go with dignity.’” Only three countries currently carry out whaling: Norway, Iceland and Japan. “These involve just a small number of catches,” added Bridgewater. “Crucially, the IWC has made no impact in halting whaling by these nations.” A fishing net on the tail of a whale The kindest cut: the Australians fighting to save humpback whales tangled in fishing nets Read more Instead, the commission’s work could easily be handled by the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), it is argued. As the group points out, whaling is not the main threat to whales today. “These are ship strikes, pollution and climate change.” In response to the article in Nature, a spokesman for the IWC last week defended the commission and pointed out that it had evolved to address a range of important cetacean science, conservation and management issues since its creation. “These include – but are not limited to – entanglement and bycatch in fishing gear (which is the biggest threat, estimated to kill more than 300,000 cetaceans every year), collisions with vessels, strandings, marine debris, and of course the world-leading and wide-ranging programme of the IWC Scientific Committee, which includes assessments of whale po[CENSORED]tions around the world.” https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/25/whales-are-doing-well-so-its-time-to-scrap-the-body-that-once-protected-them-says-former-head

Former President Donald Trump speaks at the National Guard Association on August 26 in Detroit [Paul Sancya/AP Photo] Federal prosecutors accusing former United States President Donald Trump of election interference have released a newly revised indictment, in response to a recent Supreme Court ruling. Tuesday’s indictment narrows the focus of the case, trimming away interactions Trump had with the Department of Justice. Still, the central charge remains the same: that Trump attempted to subvert the 2020 presidential election and overturn his loss to Democrat Joe Biden. He has long claimed, without evidence, that widespread voter fraud has marred the 2020 race. The reworked case, unfolding in Washington, DC, is one of four indictments Trump faces. He is the first US president to face and be convicted of criminal charges. Only one of the four cases, however, has culminated in a conviction: In May, Trump was found guilty of 34 charges of falsifying business records in New York. And even that verdict has been thrown into potential legal limbo by a recent Supreme Court decision granting broad immunity to presidential actions. On July 1, the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Trump v United States that all “official” presidential acts are entitled to “presumptive immunity” against prosecution. What counts as “official” acts, the court explained, goes beyond what falls within a president’s constitutional authority, marking a significant widening of executive power. The court’s decision made explicit reference to the events of January 6, 2021, when a mob of Trump supporters stormed the US Capitol in an attempt to disrupt the certification of the Electoral College vote. Referring to the Washington, DC, indictment, the court’s majority pointed to an example where Trump was accused of “attempting to enlist the Vice President” to “alter the election results”. Since interacting with a vice president is part of a president’s official duties, the court explained, “Trump is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for such conduct”. The Supreme Court currently has a conservative supermajority, with three of the judges appointed by Trump himself. The decision was issued along ideological lines, with the three left-leaning justices dissenting. The court’s decision had an immediate impact on the Washington case, as well as the other indictments against Trump. Tuesday’s revised indictment shows how federal prosecutors, led by special counsel Jack Smith, intend to react to the ruling. The indictment has been slimmed down from 45 pages to 36, removing the references the Supreme Court singled out in its July decision. It also emphasises that the interactions detailed in the new version were with people who lie outside of the president’s official orbit. In naming Trump’s co-conspirators, for instance, the revised indictment explains none “were government officials during the conspiracies and all of whom were acting in a private capacity”. However, the central charges remain identical to the first version of the indictment: that Trump entered into a conspiracy to defraud the United States; to obstruct and impede an official proceeding; and to prevent legitimate votes from being counted. Trump faces four criminal counts related to those criminal charges. “Each of these conspiracies — which build on the widespread mistrust the Defendant was creating through pervasive and destabilizing lies about election fraud — targeted a bedrock function of the United States government: the nation’s process of collecting, counting and certifying the results of the presidential election,” the indictment reads. The reworked indictment triggered a flurry of reaction from Trump on his Truth Social account. “In an effort to resurrect a ‘dead’ Witch Hunt in Washington, D.C., in an act of desperation, and in order to save face, the illegally appointed “Special Counsel” Deranged Jack Smith, has brought a ridiculous new Indictment against me,” Trump wrote. He said the new version had “all the problems of the old Indictment”. He called for it to be “dismissed IMMEDIATELY”. The former Republican president is in the midst of a second re-election campaign, ahead of the November 5 presidential vote. He has repeatedly denounced the criminal charges against him as an attempt to derail his latest White House bid, an allegation he repeated again on Tuesday. “PERSECUTION OF A POLITICAL OPPONENT!” he wrote in all capital letters in a separate post. In a later missive, he referenced a 2022 decision from the Biden Justice Department that bars political appointees in the agency from participating in an election-related activities within 60 days of an upcoming vote. “It is DOJ policy that the Department of Justice should not take any action that will influence an election within 60 days of that election — but they just have taken such action,” Trump alleged, referencing the early-voting date in some states, instead of the official November 5 election day. For his part, Smith — the special counsel appointed to independently lead the Justice Department’s investigations into Trump — said that the newly revamped indictment was offered to reflect “the Government’s efforts to respect and implement the Supreme Court’s holdings and remand instructions”. US District Judge Tanya Chutkan is expected to rule in the case, which is unlikely to reach trial before the November election. Trump has pleaded not guilty to all the criminal charges he faces. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/27/special-counsel-jack-smith-issues-revised-indictment-in-trump-election-case

Displaced Palestinians shelter in a UN-run school in Deir el-Balah in central Gaza [Ramadan Abed/Reuters] United Nations aid operations in the besieged Gaza Strip continue a day after a senior UN official said humanitarian efforts had ground to a halt because new Israeli evacuation orders forced the shutdown of the main UN operations centre. UN spokesperson Stephane Dujarric on Tuesday appeared to temper the remarks by the UN official, who spoke on Monday on condition of anonymity. When asked if conditions in Gaza had caused a halt to UN aid deliveries, Dujarric told reporters: “The conditions in Gaza yesterday [Monday] made it extremely, extremely difficult for us to do our work.” “We are doing what we can with what we have,” he said. “We’ve been saying from the beginning – this is aid delivery by seizing every opportunity, seizing every crack that we can fill. So every situation is assessed day by day, hour by hour.” The UN has had to evacuate its humanitarian aid hub in the Gaza Strip for a second time since the start of the war on the orders of the Israeli military, according to an official. The hub, with warehouses and accommodation for staff, had already been relocated before due to the Israeli ground invasion of Rafah in southern Gaza at the start of May. The new hub – with accommodation, offices and storage rooms for humanitarian – goods was set up in Deir el-Balah in the central part of the enclave, but an evacuation order on Sunday also included the new headquarters. A spokesperson for the UN emergency aid organisation OCHA said in Geneva that since Friday, evacuation orders have been issued for 19 neighbourhoods in the northern Gaza Strip and Deir el-Balah, with 15 premises in which UN and NGO staff and their families lived affected. Four UN warehouses for relief supplies, a water reservoir, a desalination plant, three wells, two smaller health facilities and a hospital were also affected. There were 29 emergency shelters for displaced people in those areas. UN safety and security chief Gilles Michaud said on Tuesday that over the weekend, the Israeli military only gave a few hours’ notice for more than 200 UN personnel to move out of offices and living spaces in Deir el-Balah. He said “the timing could hardly be worse”, with a huge polio vaccination campaign due to start shortly which requires large numbers of UN staff to enter Gaza. “The United Nations is determined to stay in Gaza,” he said in a statement. “Humanitarian aid delivery continues – a tremendous feat given that we are operating at the upper-most peripheries of tolerable risk. “Mass evacuation orders are the latest in a long list of unbearable threats to UN and humanitarian personnel.” The International Rescue Committee said on Tuesday that Israel’s new evacuation orders had forced the charity and other humanitarian groups to “halt aid operations, during what is already a dire situation for civilians”. “It’s urgent that humanitarian actors can continue their work, without threat from displacement or military operations. We urge all parties to protect civilians and facilitate humanitarian access at all times,” the organisation posted on X. On October 7 last year, Hamas fighters stormed Israeli communities, killing about 1,100 people and abducting about 250 captives, according to Israeli tallies. Since then, Israel’s military has levelled swaths of the Palestinian enclave, driving nearly all of its 2.3 million people from their homes, giving rise to deadly hunger and disease and killing at least 40,000 people, according to Palestinian health authorities. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/27/un-doing-what-it-can-to-deliver-gaza-aid-amid-israeli-evacuation-orders

Music title: جلسات بيلبورد عربية مع سيلاوي | Jalsat Billboard Arabia with Siilawy Signer: Siilawy Release date: 2024/04/24 Official YouTube link:

DH1 Ofc, I love this song

Video title: Funny Reactions and Moments🤣 Content creator ( Youtuber ) : FailArmy Official YT video:

yes @El Máster Edwin?

VOTED✔️

VOTED✔️

VOTED✔️

The 2025 Ford Bronco Sport adds an off-road-focused Sasquatch package like the bigger Bronco. The 'Squatch kit includes chunkier all-terrain tires, steel bumpers with hearty tow hooks, and better rear dampers on the Badlands model. The Bronco Sport Sasquatch models will go on sale early next year, with the Outer Banks starting around $41K and the Badlands approaching $45K. The Ford Bronco Sport is known as the baby Bronco, as it's the smaller unibody version of the larger body-on-frame Bronco. For 2025, Ford bequeaths the little one a Sasquatch off-road package inspired by its big brother's kit. So we're just going to go ahead and call the new Bronco Sport Sasquatch the baby 'Squatch. Ain't that cute? Honey, I Shrunk the Sasquatch Since it debuted a few years back, the Bronco Sport has existed as the more rugged alternative to the Ford Escape. Both play in the compact-SUV segment, with the Bronco Sport featuring standard all-wheel drive and an appearance that apes the big Bronco's retro look. Most models have a 180-hp turbocharged 1.5-liter three-cylinder with an eight-speed automatic. The Badlands has the same transmission, albeit with steering-wheel-mounted paddle shifters, but it alone has the 2.0-liter turbo four that now makes 238 horsepower (down from last year's 245 ponies). Its towing capacity also rises from 2200 to 2700 pounds, with the three-pot engine now capable of tugging 2200 pounds (up 200). Bronco Sport shoppers who want the best chance of making it through (relatively) tough terrain will gravitate toward the top-of-the-line Badlands. Its standard equipment includes a 1.0-inch lift, all-terrain tires, a torque-vectoring twin-clutch rear differential, underbody skid plates, and upgraded suspension bits. Adding the new Sasquatch package takes its toughness up a notch, and that upgraded setup is available on the Outer Banks too. Every baby Squatch rolls on a set of Goodyear Territory all-terrain tires. Measuring 265/35R-17, they stand 29 inches tall and have a reinforced sidewall and a knobby tread pattern. These new tires replace the similarly sized Falken Wildpeaks that previously came on the Badlands; it now comes standard with 28.5-inch-tall Continental all-terrains. Also, its monotube rear dampers are swapped for a beefier pair of position-sensitive Bilstein units with remote reservoirs that provide better cushioning at high speeds. Only the Badlands Sasquatch has those shocks, not the Outer Banks version. The top 'Squatch also has a higher approach angle (31.2 vs 24.1 degrees) and a slightly higher breakover angle of 21.7 degrees; its 8.7 inches of ground clearance is virtually identical. The Bronco Sport with the 'Squatch setup gets new steel front and rear bumpers with sturdy recovery points. The front tow hooks are higher up than before, and that's where the new bull bar is mounted. Previously, the Bronco Sport didn't have dedicated recovery points in the back, relying on a screw-in hook or the receiver hitch. Now there's a pair of cast D-rings on the back bumper. The Black Diamond package, available on the entry-level Big Bend trim, adds the four tow hooks and extra underbody protection. Unlike the Outer Banks, the Badlands has a steel bash plate protecting its chin, but each has other steel plates underneath. Another Badlands exclusive is the new Rally drive mode (one of several G.O.A.T. modes) that holds gears longer and sharpens the steering response. All '25 Bronco Sport models get the new Off-Road mode and Trail One-Pedal Drive that lets drivers stop and go using only the gas pedal. Perhaps our favorite new feature is the set of available tie-downs that pop out of the front fenders, providing an easier way to secure roof-mounted cargo. More 2025 Bronco Sport Updates The new Sasquatch models are getting all the attention, but the 2025 Bronco Sport sees improvements across the board. Its dashboard has been redesigned to incorporate two large displays, both of which are standard. There's the new 12.3-inch gauge cluster that replaces the old analog instruments and the huge 13.2-inch center touchscreen. Gone is the comparatively puny 8.0-inch unit with its Ford Sync 3 software, replaced by the bigger screen and its new Sync 4 interface that allows over-the-air updates and the introduction of wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto. The new dashboard layout also has updated HVAC controls, and the useful cubby has been relocated atop the dash and has two USB-C ports. The cabin can also be fitted with a grab handle on the passenger's side of the center console as on the bigger Bronco. Likewise, a row of toggle switches for auxiliary components like exterior lights is available on the overhead console. The 2025 model year also brings more standard driver-assistance tech, such as adaptive cruise control with stop-and-go functionality. There are more options too, including a 360-degree camera system with "Trail" and "Split" views as well as rear automated emergency braking. The 2025 Ford Bronco Sport lineup is now available to order. The Sasquatch models won't be available until early next year, with the Outer Banks starting at around $41K and the Badlands closer to $45K. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a61959321/2025-ford-bronco-sport-sasquatch-revealed/

After the WSL clubs ended US tours with a Washington friendly we look at big talking points on and off the pitch Chelsea’s 18-year-old Wieke Kaptein, battling here with Arsenal’s Steph Catley, gave a mature performance in Washington. Photograph: Tim Nwachukwu/Getty Images Chelsea depth Sonia Bompastor made six changes at the break and a further five just past the hour, ensuring the XI that finished was different from the XI that started the 1-0 friendly win over Arsenal in Washington. The fact that Chelsea did not at any point look significantly weakened tells you everything about the players at their disposal and the level they are operating at. Consider that they are still without the long-term absentees Mia Fishel and Sam Kerr, that Erin Cuthbert picked up a knock against Gotham FC, Lauren James was rested as a precaution and Catarina Macario isn’t expected back until the start of the season at best, and Chelsea’s squad is scarily good. Nine-day deadline Arsenal have nine days until they welcome Rangers to Borehamwood for a Champions League qualifier. Win that and they play Atlético Madrid or Rosenborg three days later for a place in the second round of qualifying towards the end of September. The side were bitterly disappointed to crash out at the first qualifying stage last year, months after dramatically securing third in the league to get there. Avoiding a repeat is critical. They have had more time to prepare and games against Washington Spirit and Chelsea have been important preparation. However, while it is unfair to take too much from a pre-season friendly, it was clear from the loss to Chelsea that there is plenty to be worked on. “We still lack a bit of clarity on when to change the point of the attack and to recognise where the free player is,” said Jonas Eidevall. “We lacked consistency in giving those passes and making those decisions. Sometimes we did it really well and sometimes we took the wrong decisions, and we need to learn from that.” The starting XI was light of a few expected regular starters, with the new goalkeeper Daphne van Domselaar and forward Stina Blackstenius not expected to be ready until the UWCL qualifiers and Victoria Pelova a long-term absentee. The newly recruited Mariona Caldentey and midfielder Lia Walti featured in the second half, Emily Fox remained on the bench and Lotte Wubben-Moy and Beth Mead were omitted as a precaution. But, when you consider Chelsea’s absences, the gap is clear. Jonas Eidevall believes Arsenal can improve their decision-making when attacking. Photograph: David Price/Arsenal FC/Getty Images New signings solid Lucy Bronze appears to have slotted into the Chelsea backline with ease after her move from Barcelona. The right-back looked comfortable before she was withdrawn at half-time, troubling the Arsenal defence and not being hugely tested defensively. Her fellow new recruit Sandy Baltimore, who joined from Paris Saint-Germain, got her first Chelsea goal within three minutes of entering the fray and brimmed with confidence. For Arsenal, Sweden’s Rosa Kafaji was handed a start in a strong, albeit not full-strength, lineup and we saw glimpses of her creative potential in a solid first 45 minutes. Caldentey didn’t look out of place after her entry on 60 minutes and could have had a goal had she not seemed a little surprised by the arrival of the ball at her feet on the edge of the area. Kaptein leads way for young talent In a superstar-packed Chelsea squad the mature performances of the 18-year-old Dutch midfielder Wieke Kaptein and 20-year-old Japanese forward Maika Hamano were big highlights. Both showed flashes of creative brilliance, Kaptein in a curving defence-splitting pass and Hamano when she leapt in to dispossess an off-guard Kim Little before providing the assist for Baltimore’s goal. For Arsenal, Kafaji showed why she is so highly rated in Sweden, and the 17-year-old centre-back Katie Reid continued to look incredibly assured in pre-season. Bompastor takes first blood Any concerns about the transition from Emma Hayes to Bompastor will not have been allayed by a pre-season defeat of Arsenal, but taking first blood in the tetchy rivalry will have helped to build excitement about the future under the new manager. “We worked really hard as a team,” said Bompastor. “The result is good, even if we know we still need to work. These two games [against Gotham FC and then Arsenal] have been good to help us progress.” Hayes did a brilliant job at preparing the squad for this period. Her commitment to getting competitive minutes into the legs of Chelsea’s future stars before the end of the season is paying dividends for Bompastor. Aggie Beever-Jones is among the young players who were well prepared by Emma Hayes for this new Chelsea era. Photograph: Harriet Lander/Chelsea FC/Getty Images Overseas tours From basketball games and community projects to history tours and trips to the White House and New York Stock Exchange, these tours in the US have been jam-packed. How commercially successful they have been for Arsenal and Chelsea will likely take a bit of time to determine, but with broadcast rights picked up by DAZN and exposure to the lucrative US marketplace maximised, they are likely to be regular presence. A crowd of 15,062 watched Arsenal’s game against Washington Spirit but that was topped by the 17,130 who came to Chelsea v Arsenal, demonstrating the overseas appeal of the WSL. https://www.theguardian.com/football/article/2024/aug/26/chelsea-arsenal-women-talking-points-us-tours-young-talent

‘Even the way she bit her claws filled me with delight’ … Nala. Photograph: Courtesy of Sophie Walsh The pet I’ll never forget: Nala the tabby, who terrorised other cats and had to be hidden from the landlord She stole my heart – and the food from my plate. I still miss her mischief and her tenderness It was September 2016 when my parter and I walked into our local Cats Protection shelter looking to adopt our first pet together. There were young families buzzing around the last remaining kittens, but my attention was immediately drawn to a two-year-old grey tabby with her peach nose edged in black. I scooped her up into my arms and knew instantly it could only be her. She oozed affection; her purr radiated through my soul. She’d just been returned to the shelter following a failed adoption because she didn’t get on with the family’s other cat. The sanctuary volunteers were hesitant to let her go, but finally decided she could come home with us. Nala had found her forever home. It didn’t take long to understand exactly what Nala’s previous family meant when they said she didn’t get on with other cats. After tentatively exploring her new home, Nala spotted Aslan, a big ginger tom, through the patio windows. Her tail puffed up, her fur stood on end, and she launched herself at the window again and again, howling and shrieking. Even for someone who had grown up with cats, this was something new. And it didn’t stop there. Nala hated other cats, especially toms. Next door’s cat once found himself cornered in our living room and wet himself in a panic as he ducked and dived to get past Nala. He learned not to come around after that. For our first couple of years together we were living in rental accommodation; we’d adopted Nala without the landlord’s permission. We had asked, and she said no – but we got Nala anyway. The lack of consent made for some interesting inspections. All traces of Nala had to be removed: bowls, beds and toys were shoved in the boot of the car, Nala was let out into the garden. The only trouble was, she’d sit at the patio doors for hours, silently mewing as strangers inspected her home. “No, she’s not ours,” we’d insist. “I think she must live next door … Who knows what she wants?” It had nothing to do with the fact it was 5pm and she was ready for her tea. Whether she was stealing aloo gobi straight from my plate (yes, really) or stalking pasta she’d caught from the pan, she was full of mischief. Everything about her was joyous, every moment precious. I loved everything about her. I still do. Her leopard print belly and her humongous panther paws … even the way she bit her claws filled me with delight. And God, did she love us back. There were head boops in abundance, and the frequency of her purr was a tonic to the struggles of everyday life. Every ounce of her being was full to the brim with this immeasurable tenderness. For someone like me, who often finds the world too overwhelming to navigate, Nala made existing feel possible. When my gran passed away – the first bereavement I’d experienced – Nala comforted me for days. As I laid in bed, she laid by my side, her head in my hand, my heart in hers. Losing Nala in 2019 was the most traumatic experience I have been through – a loss I am still unable to describe. A whole chunk of my being gone. I recently learned that I am autistic, and I’ve been reflecting a lot on my visceral connection with Nala. She was more than just the pet I’ll never forget; she was a part of me. ‘Her purr was a tonic to the struggles of everyday life.’ Photograph: Courtesy of Sophie Walsh https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/aug/26/the-pet-ill-never-forget-nala-the-tabby-who-terrorised-other-cats-and-had-to-be-hidden-from-the-landlord

Kipenzi’s calf, which will be named by the public in a voting competition, at 2 days old. Photograph: Werribee open range zoo A very large bundle of joy was quietly delivered to a Melbourne zoo last Sunday as a southern white rhino gave birth to a male calf. Mother Kipenzi, 11, and father Kifaru, 15, welcomed their 60kg baby into the world in the early hours of 18 August, Werribee open range zoo announced. Dr Mark Pilgrim, the director of Werribee open range zoo, said the new mother had been taking to her role very well. “It’s just incredible to see her mothering instincts coming out,” said Pilgrim. “It’s beautiful to see that with her.” The newborn is Kipenzi’s second – she gave birth to her first calf in March last year, but struggled to bond with it. That calf died within days, suffering internal trauma and cardiac arrest after Kipenzi, who weighs two tonnes, leaned against it soon after its birth. Kipenzi and the new calf have been closely monitored this week, with mother and baby being kept in a secluded area accessible only to keepers while they get to know each other and bond. They will remain there for some weeks before the calf is introduced to the other rhinos and then later to the public. Pilgrim said the zoo’s staff were delighted with the not-so-little family’s progress so far, especially with Kipenzi. “She’s being an amazing mum, really protective of [the calf] right now,” he said. “She’s doing her best to shepherd it and keep it close to her, and making sure that it’s not wandering off too far. So she’s just doing the perfect thing we expect a mother rhino to do.” The calf has already been showing a forthright personality, snorting and stomping around his enclosure, Pilgrim said. “He’s going to be a real handful later on.” Kipenzi herself was born at Werribee zoo in 2013 to resident rhino Sisi, but was hand-reared by keepers due to Sisi’s refusal to let her out of her sight – which meant she was unable to get underneath her to suckle. Kipenzi was given her name – which means “precious one” in Swahili – by a Wyndham Vale resident. Her new calf will also be named by the public in a voting competition in coming weeks. Southern white rhinos are native to southern Africa. A near-threatened species, they are bred at Werribee open range zoo in Melbourne as part of the Australasian Southern white rhino breeding program. It is estimated as few as 10,080 southern white rhinos remain in the wild. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/24/melbourne-zoo-white-rhino-calf-name-competition-kipenzi-kifaru

Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, shake hands during their meeting on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation summit in Astana, Kazakhstan on July 3, 2024 [Sergey Guneyev/Sputnik via AP] As the presidential race in the United States is heating up, the two candidates – Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump – have clashed on a range of issues. Whether it is immigration, reproductive rights or social spending, the two have sought to rally their bases by attacking each other on what they see as the key concerns of voters. However, there is one issue on which they seem to align: China. Although they have different visions on how to pursue US policy towards the superpower challenging Washington’s position on the world stage, they seem to agree that it is a threat that needs to be contained. How do they propose to do that? Harris appears to offer a continuation of President Joe Biden’s policies. She would seek to enhance the US’s longstanding security partnerships in Asia by transforming them into economic alliances while also waving a “big stick” against those who seek to violate US sanctions even in partner states. Harris will also likely continue to push for “de-risking” from China, a policy of relocating manufacturing industry out of Chinese territory – which the Biden administration has promoted as something that can benefit third countries. In the case of some key partners like Vietnam, that has been the case; the country has seen substantial FDI growth as a number of Western companies have moved their operations there. The Democrats are also keen on placing the CHIPS and Inflation Reduction Acts – which seek to promote domestic production of microchips and clean energy, respectively – not only at the heart of their domestic agenda, but also contextualising them as returning jobs and industries “stolen” by Beijing. Trump, on the other hand, has doubled down on the “America First” rhetoric of his previous campaigns and even gone further. His wider economic policy rests on a return to 19th century-style broad tariffs on almost all US imports, particularly crushing ones against Beijing. It is through these policies that he has most significantly affected US geo-economic policy. Today, there is no faction of either the Democratic or Republican parties that calls for actively engaging with China. The pro-free trade agenda that dominated both sides of the aisle in the 25 years between the Soviet Union’s collapse and Trump’s ascent to power is quietly ignored. When it is mentioned, it is to tar one’s political opponents. Trump and Harris’s campaigns thus offer different tactical visions of the same strategy – protecting US economic interests by pushing and pulling away from China’s. But both have failed to consider the fact that a far more aggressive Russia is also a threat to the US-dominated international economic order and taking on both Beijing and Moscow at the same time would be foolhardy. The US has to recognise that China is far more economically important to countries caught in this global rivalry, including allies. This is as true for Georgia and Kazakhstan – two countries that have not embraced the Western sanctions regime against Russia but have signalled some compliance with it – as it is for Germany and the United Arab Emirates, for whom China is almost as important a trade partner as the US. The “Middle Corridor” of Eurasian trade the West has sought to promote to deter Russia’s influence in the region makes little sense without Beijing’s buy-in. Furthermore, pushing too hard against China risks a backlash that would at best undermine or potentially even reverse some of the progress that has been made in restraining Russia’s geo-economic agenda. It is important here to point out Moscow’s ever-growing dependency on its large neighbour. Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, China has become one of Russia’s top trade partners as well as a provider of access to international markets that are otherwise restrained by Western sanctions, with Russian companies seeking to use the Chinese currency, the yuan, for trade with Latin America, Asia and Africa. But despite ever-escalating sanctions under the Biden administration on Chinese trade, Beijing has yet to fully embrace Russian President Vladimir Putin’s vision of the world order. China does support his rhetoric, particularly at summits of the so-called BRICS nations where criticism of the West and the US in particular is the standard flavour. Beijing has been reluctant to directly challenge US sanctions on Russia or push hard for a new currency bloc to challenge the dominance of the US dollar. Chinese banks, for example, have significantly cut back on offering yuan trade for Russian counterparties following increased US secondary sanctions threats. Russian media, including slavishly pro-Putin outlets, have noted these challenges; Western media have done so far less frequently. Even on crucial economic projects, such as the construction of a new major Russia-China gas pipeline dubbed Power of Siberia 2, Beijing is wary of overcommitting. Agreed in principle just weeks before the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, no progress has been made on talks around its development. Mongolia, through which the pipeline is planned to pass, recently indicated it does not expect it to be completed in the next four years. If the next US president decides to wage a two-front economic war with Russia and China, this would push Beijing closer to Moscow’s position. Presently, Chinese President Xi Jinping sees his country as the rightful centre of the emerging international economic order, displacing the US. By contrast, Putin believes that the existing international economic order should be destroyed, even if only rubble is left once it is gone. Russia’s commodities-dependent economy has no chance of being a great economic power like the US. That is why, it hopes that by knocking everyone down a peg it can compete as one of many moderate economic powers. This thinking lies at the core of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and its willingness to politicise everything – from sovereign lending markets to gas trade in its aftermath. China is certainly a major economic competitor for the West and the US in a way that Russia cannot have any hopes of being in the foreseeable future, but its track record of invading neighbours is far less pronounced than Russia’s. Its economic warfare is also largely relegated to trying to improve its position through strategic loans, new institutional aims such as mobbing arbitration centres from the West to China, and state subsidies for critical industries. In short, it is a competition that the US can engage with and against over the long term, whereas Putin’s threats, risk tolerance, and willingness to wage war are far more pronounced in the short term. That is why, it makes more sense to pursue increased cooperation with China now, or at least try to ensure its support for Russia is as limited as possible. The battle over where automotive production and supply chains will run can wait. This logic should hold even for the most hawkish US voices on China – rebuffing Russia’s threat today will leave the US and its allies in a far stronger place to outcompete China in the future. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance. https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/8/26/the-next-us-president-should-not-take-on-both-russia-and-china

Al Jazeera journalist Wael Dahdouh reacts as he attends the funeral of his son, Palestinian journalist Hamza Dahdouh, who was killed in an Israeli strike, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, January 7, 2024 [Ibraheem Abu Mustafa/Reuters] Sixty global press freedom and human rights organisations have signed a letter calling on the European Union to take decisive action against Israel for its escalating violations of media freedom and the killing of journalists in Gaza, the occupied West Bank and Israel. The letter on Monday urged the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and the imposition of targeted sanctions on responsible Israeli officials. It was signed by organisations including the International Press Institute (IPI), Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Free Press Unlimited (FPU). Addressing top EU diplomat Josep Borrell and European Commission Executive Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis, the appeal underscored the urgent need for action against what they describe as “unprecedented violations of media freedom by Israeli authorities”. “These are part of widespread and systematic abuses committed by Israeli authorities in Gaza, the West Bank, Israel, and elsewhere, as documented or acknowledged by Israeli, Palestinian and international NGOs, UN experts, the International Court of Justice, and in a request for arrest warrants by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court,” the letter, said. “These violations should trigger the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and further EU targeted sanctions against those responsible,” it was added in the letter. The organisations outlined eight actions taken by Israel that require an urgent response by the EU, including the targeted killing of journalists, a ban on independent media access to Gaza, and record-high arbitrary detention of journalists. Since October 7, 2023, Israel has faced accusations of systematic abuses, including the killing of more than 120 Palestinian journalists and media workers in Gaza, and the arrest and arbitrary detention of at least 49 journalists. The letter also highlighted allegations of torture, enforced disappearances, and significant censorship within Israel and the Palestinian territory it occupies. The cumulative effect of these violations, the letter said, was to create conditions conducive to propaganda and misinformation, ultimately undermining the path to peace and security. In July, Israel killed Al Jazeera Arabic journalist Ismail al-Ghoul and his cameraman Rami al-Rifi in an air attack, striking their car in the Shati refugee camp, west of Gaza City. In January, Israel killed Hamza Dahdouh, the oldest son of Wael Dahdouh, Al Jazeera Arabic’s bureau chief in Gaza, who was also a journalist. In October last year, Israel had killed Dahdouh’s wife, his 15-year-old son, seven-year-old daughter and toddler grandson in an air raid. In December, Israel attacked and killed Al Jazeera Arabic journalist Samer Abudaqa and injured Dahdouh in an attack in Khan Younis, southern Gaza. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/26/press-freedom-groups-urge-eu-to-act-on-israel-violations-of-media-rights

Accepted! T/C.

VOTED✔️

US President Joe Biden, left, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu [AP Photo] A delegation from the Palestinian group Hamas has landed in Cairo on Saturday evening to “listen to the results of negotiations thus far” between mediators – Egypt, Qatar and the United States – and Israel. Observers are reluctant to call this a hopeful sign as conviction grows that Gaza ceasefire negotiations between Hamas and Israel are on the verge of collapse. Negotiations of some form or another have been ongoing practically since October 7, the day Israel launched a war on Gaza that has killed more than 40,000 people and destroyed most of the Strip – ostensibly in retribution for a Hamas-led attack on Israel that killed 1,139 people and took more than 200 captive. An agreement had seemed close in May when the US said it had a draft proposal approved by all parties and endorsed by the UN Security Council on June 10. Eleventh-hour failures Hamas agreed to the proposal, emphasising that it wanted the Israeli army out of Gaza, the return of people to their north Gaza homes that they had been driven out of, international engagement to rebuild Gaza, and the release of Palestinians held in Israeli prisons. Israeli officials kept making statements indicating that the war on Gaza must continue – and the Israeli army invaded Rafah. Yet the US maintained that Israel had accepted the proposal and the stumbling block was Hamas, which was holding up all progress. With a ceasefire agreement seemingly in arm’s reach, it disappeared. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu maintained his rhetoric of continuing to fight until “Hamas is completely defeated in Gaza”, a goal long called out as unrealistic by parties on both sides. There has been one short pause since Israel began its war on Gaza, during which Palestinian prisoners were released from Israeli jails in exchange for Israeli captives held in Gaza. Shown here is a Palestinian prisoner embracing his family in Ramallah after his release on December 1, 2023 [Jaafar Ashtiyeh/AFP] He eventually also presented new demands: that Israel remain in the Philadelphi Corridor abutting Egypt’s Sinai, checkpoints be set up to “vet” people trying to go back to their homes in north Gaza, and that full lists be provided of all living captives Hamas intends to release. Senior Israeli officials said Netanyahu’s demands would sabotage the talks, and the mediators refused to pass them on to Hamas. Egypt has refused Israel’s demand that it be allowed to remain in the Philadelpi Corridor, which would violate the Camp David Accords between the two. Blinken’s rhetoric The US proposal followed past drafts, sticking to a three-phase process that would release all captives in Gaza in exchange for prisoners held by Israel, achieving a “sustainable calm” to lead to a full ceasefire, the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza, the reconstruction of the Strip, and the eventual opening of crossings. “We had a proposal that [US President Biden] laid out in late May which was fairly detailed and passed at the UN Security Council as a resolution [with] global support,” Matt Duss, the executive vice president at the Center for International Policy in Washington, DC, said. “Yet, we’ve seen various rounds of new conditions added by Netanyahu who, despite Biden saying Israel supports it, made it very clear that he didn’t.” Netanyahu was criticised by Israeli negotiators for undermining talks after a local broadcaster reported comments he made about Israel not leaving the Philadelphi or Netzarim Corridor – which the Israeli army created to separate north and south Gaza – “under any circumstances”. US officials have been in the region trying to work out sticking points in recent days with a “bridging proposal” that reportedly includes withdrawal plans. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, however, would not say if the proposal includes the Israeli army fully withdrawing from Gaza as earlier proposals mentioned. But he maintained his earlier assessment as to who was holding things up. “In a very constructive meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu today, he confirmed to me that Israel supports the bridging proposal,” Blinken said to reporters after a two-and-a-half-hour meeting with Netanyahu on Monday. “The next important step is for Hamas to say ‘yes’.” Blinken’s claims were rejected by Hamas, who maintained that they wanted to stick to the agreed-upon deal. “The Israelis have retreated from issues included in Biden’s proposal. Netanyahu’s talk about agreeing to an updated proposal indicates that the US administration has failed to convince him to accept the previous agreement,” Hamas spokesman Osama Hamdan told Al Jazeera on Monday. Hamas’s Osama Hamdan spoke to Al Jazeera about the ceasefire proposals [File: Mohamed Azakir/Reuters] And while Blinken has held firm in public that Netanyahu agrees to the deal, Israeli media have reported things playing out differently behind the scenes. US backing Netanyahu ‘for inexplicable reasons’ The Biden administration’s continued support for Netanyahu, despite his reported obstinance, has left many analysts baffled. “We’re in this surreal situation where both Hamas and Israeli security officials are saying Netanyahu is the one blocking Biden’s ceasefire proposal,” Mohamad Bazzi, director of Near Eastern Studies at New York University, told Al Jazeera. “We also see that Netanyahu publicly rejected key elements of the ceasefire as Blinken has described the deal … but at same time both [US President Joseph] Biden and Blinken insist that Netanyahu supports the current deal and Hamas is the stumbling block. “So we end up with the US administration covering for Netanyahu for inexplicable reasons.” While Israel’s stated objective for the talks is retrieving captives held in Gaza, Netanyahu’s reported sabotage of talks has some questioning if he is genuinely interested in a deal. Some 109 captives remain in Gaza, according to Israeli government estimates, and US officials believe half of them to still be alive. Families who have loved ones missing in Gaza have been protesting regularly and calling on their government to save the captives. A person holds up their hand with ‘HELP’ written on it, as families of Israeli captives in Gaza since October 7 march from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem to try to pressure Israel’s government to make a deal to release their loved ones, on July 10, 2024 [Ammar Awad/Reuters] “There’s a very strong argument that Netanyahu doesn’t want a ceasefire at this point,” Bazzi said. “In many ways, why should he when the US won’t impose any cost on him for being the biggest obstacle to a ceasefire?” ‘Doomed’ Biden and his administration have criticised Netanyahu in the past. In April, Biden said Netanyahu was making a mistake in his handling of the war in Gaza. Then in early June, Biden suggested Netanyahu was prolonging the war for personal and political gain. Despite the criticisms, the Biden administration has refused to condition their support of Netanyahu’s government. “Biden has two very important levers, the primary being the holding or conditioning of military aid and the second is the political cover at the UN Security Council and other international bodies… and he doesn’t seem to use them.,” Bazzi said. The failure to hold Netanyahu and Israel to account has led to questions over the US’s accountability over the destruction of Gaza. “Biden is completely complicit in this war that wouldn’t have been possible in the first place, … without full US support and cover,” Gilbert Achcar, professor of development studies and international relations at SOAS University of London, said. “These negotiations were doomed to fail from the start… it’s basically a waste of time,” Achcar said. “The function is more for the Biden administration to try to show that it is doing something. But I think they know quite well that it’s leading nowhere because the gap between what Netanyahu wants and what Hamas requests is too wide to be overcome.” https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/24/is-the-field-level-for-hamas-israel-in-the-ceasefire-talks

VOTED✔️

VOTED✔️

VOTED✔️

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks to the families of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in Tehran on May 19, 2024 [Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via Reuters] | By Ali Hashem Published On 21 Aug 2024 21 Aug 2024 In the shadowy corridors of Tehran’s power, the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh at the end of July – widely believed to have been carried out by Israel – shattered a fragile equilibrium. The timing of this escalation in the longstanding conflict between Iran and Israel could not have been worse, with newly sworn-in President Masoud Pezeshkian still getting used to his role when this geopolitical fireball was hurled into his lap. For Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the assassination of the Palestinian group’s leader was more than a provocation, it was an existential challenge. The explosion that killed Haniyeh, which Iran believed was a missile launched from within its own borders, was a breach of sovereignty that angered Tehran and put Khamenei’s 2003 fatwa prohibiting the manufacture, use and storage of nuclear weapons under increased scrutiny. Strategic implications The high-level debate over whether Khamenei’s fatwa on nuclear weapons served Iran’s strategic priorities was already continuing prior to Haniyeh’s assassination, according to a senior Iranian official who spoke to Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity. Khamenei has steered Iran through global shifts from the Cold War’s end to the rise of United States unipolarity and conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria – and through the fraught history of Iran’s nuclear deal with world powers. Now, at 85, he needs to secure the future of the Islamic republic, a critical juncture that requires more than manoeuvres in the “grey zone” – the space between war and peace that Iran has traditionally used to exert pressure on its adversaries. The implications could reshape the Middle East’s strategic landscape at a time when negotiators are scrambling to reach a ceasefire deal that would end Israel’s brutal war on Gaza and, three weeks after the assassination, Iran has yet to indicate what it will do. Asked whether Iran is withholding its attack on the Israeli regime so ceasefire talks can proceed, Iran’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, told Al Jazeera: “The timing … of Iran’s response will be meticulously orchestrated to ensure that it occurs at a moment of maximum surprise.” The assassination prompted intense debate in Iran, sources told Al Jazeera, with some arguing restraint as the wisest course, fearing a retaliatory strike could plunge Iran into a protracted and costly confrontation with Israel, which could weaken Tehran and its regional allies. The restraint camp – from across Iran’s political spectrum – also expressed hope that calm now can serve as leverage in future negotiations with the US, potentially opening a new chapter in US-Iran relations and becoming a more potent response to Netanyahu’s provocations. A woman holds a poster as she attends the funeral procession of assassinated Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on August 1, 2024 [Majid Asgaripour/West Asia News Agency via Reuters] Khamenei’s choice Khamenei did not agree. Speaking to officials on August 14, he said Iran must not be intimidated by the psychological warfare its enemies were using. Invoking the Quran, he added that “non-tactical retreats, whether in military, political, media or economic fields, will incur divine wrath”. Although there is no indication yet as to what he will do, it is a choice that could reshape the Middle East’s strategic landscape. The nuclear question adds to the complexity. Thus far, Iran’s nuclear policy has centred around its right to possess peaceful nuclear technology, Khamenei’s fatwa on the issue, and to exist in a nuclear-weapons-free zone, an official who wished to remain anonymous told Al Jazeera. “In the broad sense, Iran’s nuclear policy still does not fall under the category of nuclear ambiguity like Israel,” the official said, referring to Israel’s refusal to disclose what nuclear capabilities it has. However, a remark by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the UN last September and an Israeli minister advocating that Gaza be levelled with nuclear weapons have been perceived as threats by Iran, the official said, prompting Iran to rethink its strategy. The US’s unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear agreement is another reason for Iran to recalibrate its approach, they added, explaining that Iran entered nuclear talks hoping sanctions on the country would be lifted in exchange for restrictions on its nuclear programme. “But, what happened [when the US left the nuclear agreement]?” they ask rhetorically. “Iran had to face the US’s maximum pressure policy without [being able to do] anything.” Will the nuclear doctrine change? “Iran’s response must … punish the aggressor for its act of terrorism and infringements upon Iran’s national sovereignty [as well as] bolster Iran’s deterrence capabilities to induce profound regret within the Israeli regime, thereby serving as a deterrent,” UN ambassador Iravani said. “Furthermore,” he added, “Iran’s response must be carefully calibrated to avoid any possible adverse impact that could potentially influence a prospective ceasefire [in Gaza].” That is a potentially impossible balance to strike. In this context, the anonymous official says, “The threats shown by the Zionist entity [Israel] and the shift from a policy of ambiguity about their nuclear programme to a clear policy of nuclear threats against Iran at the United Nations … suggest that they may later target the nuclear facilities themselves.” They add: “Iran needs to maintain its sovereignty, and … it is discussing revising its doctrine. If Israel’s nuclear weapons are not removed, there will be competition to possess nuclear weapons in the region, and Iran will absolutely reassess its strategy.” Iran’s ambassador to the UN Amir Saeid Iravani speaking at the UN Security Council on April 14, 2024 [Eduardo Munoz/Reuters] Asked whether they thought that Iran, if it changes its nuclear doctrine, would move to producing nuclear weapons, especially since Western and Israeli estimates say it is no more than a month away from producing a nuclear warhead, the anonymous official answered in the negative. “Any change in the nuclear doctrine does not necessarily mean moving towards nuclear weapons,” the official said, adding that it could mean altering the current nuclear strategy, and affirming that any change would be directed towards Israel because it is threatening Iran. Such a change may worry Iran’s neighbours but, the official added: “We’re open to any way to reassure our neighbours about our nuclear capabilities. “The question remains whether our neighbours are ready to reassure us about their arms purchases and the threats posed by the presence of American bases on their lands.” Ultimately, the choices before Khamenei are like the bitter cups he must drink from – the supreme leader faces a test of endurance as he weighs his options before him, each fraught with significant risks and uncertain outcomes. The stakes have never been higher, as the world watches Tehran grapple with its most critical decision in decades. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2024/8/21/khameneis-calculus-ran-supreme-leader-faces-a-bitter-choice-re-israel