News

Iraq presidential vote delayed as Kurdish blocs struggle to pick candidate

The election for Iraq’s next president has been postponed in order for more consultation between the two Kurdish parties to come to a decision.

The Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) requested a delay in the parliamentary vote scheduled for Tuesday, according to the Iraqi News Agency (INA).

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

According to a sectarian quota system, the prime minister’s position is held by a Shia, the parliament’s speaker is a Sunni, and the presidency is largely ceremonial for Kurds.

A PUK member typically assumes the presidency in accordance with a deal reached between the two main Kurdish parties. The KDP selects the region’s president and regional leader, in contrast, from the region’s semi-autonomous Kurdish region.

However, the KDP chose Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein as the primary candidate in this instance.

Whoever is nominated by the two Kurdish parties still needs the support of the Shia and Sunni blocs in the parliament, according to Al Jazeera’s Mahmoud Abdelwahed, who is based in Baghdad.

The new president will have 15 days to choose a prime minister, presumably Nouri al-Maliki’s former leader, after the election.

Al-Maliki, 75, has previously served as Iraq’s prime minister for two terms, including two terms in 2006 and 2014. He abruptly resigned under American pressure. He is perceived as having ties to Iran.

Maliki was approved by the Coordination Framework, a coalition of Shia parties with a majority in parliament on Saturday. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned against an Iraqi pro-Iranian government the following day.

Washington “has conveyed to it a negative view of previous governments led by former prime minister Maliki,” according to an Iraqi source close to the coordination framework.

The United States will make its own sovereign decisions regarding the next government, according to US representatives in a letter.

Another Iraqi source confirmed the letter, noting that Maliki was confident that Washington’s concerns would be addressed by the Shia alliance, which had continued to advance with its decision.

Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ puts rights abusers in charge of global order

The Trump administration has worked diligently to undermine the UN, particularly its efforts to uphold universal human rights, since taking office a year ago. Donald Trump, the current US president, wants to form a “Board of Peace,” with himself as the chairman forever. While many nations were invited, those signing up appear to be a rogues’ gallery of leaders and governments with varying levels of appalling human rights records.

In order to stop another World War II crime against humanity and genocide, the United States was instrumental in founding the UN in 1945. The US has always had a love-hate relationship with the UN, always being wary of perceived threats to its autonomy. However, the Trump administration has criticized what it perceives as “anti-American” and “hostile agendas,” insisting on the hate and displacing the love.

Numerous vital UN programs have been ignored and underfunded by the administration. Additionally, a significant portion of the assessed contributions, which member states are required to pay, has been withheld. The administration has discontinued funding the UN population fund, which supports and defends women and girls in armed conflicts and crisis zones, and has withdrawn from the UN World Health Organization, UN climate bodies, and international climate agreements.

In UN negotiations, US negotiators have pushed Trump’s ideological agenda and demanded that some of the language used in statements and resolutions be removed. Because the Trump administration views them as “woke” or politically correct, the UN diplomats claim that targeted language includes words like “gender,” “diversity,” and “climate.” The administration has had a few successes with its ideological campaign in the UN Security Council, but it has had a difficult time in the General Assembly, where the US is one of 193 members without a veto and has had some success.

The administration appears to be determined to reincarnate the Security Council in a Trumpian manner, though. According to the proposed charter of the Board of Peace, it is “an international organization that seeks to promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and ensure enduring peace in areas affected or threatened by conflict.”

The Russian and Chinese governments, which have worked tirelessly for years to de-emphasize human rights at the UN, are undoubtedly hearing something about human rights because the charter doesn’t mention them.

According to the $1 billion fee for permanent membership, Trump’s board appears to be a sort of pay-to-play, global club. It’s difficult to imagine this body prioritize ending suffering, hatred, and bloodshed, as Trump remarked at the World Economic Forum’s launch event on the sidelines of the forum. There are several well-known human rights abusers and leaders who have been linked to war crimes. Vladimir Putin, the president of Russia, and Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, are two of the people Trump has invited to join. Both of them are facing international criminal court (ICC) arrest warrants for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Trump has invited leaders from China, Belarus, and Kazakhstan to his board, each with their own appalling human rights records.

According to the charter, Trump would have the power to “adopt resolutions or other directives” as chairman of the board.

Hungary and Bulgaria are the only European Union members who have so far ratified joining. Viktor Orban, Hungary’s far-right populist prime minister, has long supported Trump. Trump threatened to significantly raise French wine and champagne tariffs in response to French President Emmanuel Macron’s refusal to accept a position.

Trump also gave Canada a seat on the board that was a permanent one. However, he withdrew the offer following Davos speech by Prime Minister Mark Carney. Carney sharply criticised the use of economic coercion by great powers against smaller nations while not mentioning Trump or the US. Carney urged middle-class nations to unite and combat bullying from great powers.

Following an additional two years of Israeli forces’ atrocities that left at least 70, 000 Palestinians dead, with whom the US was associated, the Board of Peace was originally intended to be in charge of Gaza’s administration. Gaza is not mentioned in the board’s charter. However, Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, led a side event at Davos that focused on Gaza. The “Gaza Executive Board,” a subsidiary of the Board of Peace, will consist of Kissner.

Kushner gave the impression of a “New Gaza,” complete with glittering office buildings and pristine beaches crowded with people. Tony Blair, the Trump negotiator Steve Witkoff, and senior Türkish and Qatari officials make up the Gaza Executive Board, which is unoccupied.

Governments should collaborate to uphold international human rights, humanitarian law, the rule of law, and accountability rather than handing out $1 billion checks to Trump. They should use all available resources to combat unfair US actions, including Trump’s sanctions against prominent Palestinian human rights organizations, ICC judges, and UN special rapporteurs. They should demand answers from all warring parties, whether in Gaza, Sudan, Ukraine, Myanmar, or anywhere else.

Anything less would put Trump in danger of winning and would make it easier for him and his board to support the UN and other important international organizations. The UN has its issues, including those relating to the protection of human rights. However, it is still worthwhile to strengthen rather than to replace it with an allies of war criminals and rights violators.

Guardiola apologises to ref Hallam but ‘defends’ outburst

JavaScript must be enabled in your browser to play this video.

  • 124 Comments

Farai Hallam, the new Premier League official, has apologized to Pep Guardiola if he “feels offended,” having previously criticized the official following Manchester City’s victory over Wolves on Saturday.

The Spaniard, however, said he must “defend my club and my players.”

Despite being instructed by the video assistant referee (VAR) to review the incident on the pitchside monitor, City manager Guardiola took offense at Hallam’s decision to decline to award his team a penalty for an apparent handball by visiting defender Yerson Mosquera despite making his top-flight debut.

Guardiola responded, “With their statements, they defend each other, [that is] completely understandable. That must be done by them.

“But I also have to protect my club. How many times did I criticize the officials during the worst season in ten years? How frequently?

I’m so sorry if he offends me, “I’m sorry.” It’s happened, and I’m aware that it’s not easy on the debut. I am aware that everyone is very sensitive.

Guardiola stated following the game that he would be waiting for a call from the referees’ chief, Howard Webb, to “explain why it is not a penalty.”

Guardiola made the third reference to Webb in two weeks in a press conference, saying: “Never, ever, in ten years I have criticised the referees. This season, I’m arguing and explaining why we did it.

I stand up for my team and my players. The referees are defended by Howard Webb. That must be done by him.

    • two days ago
    • 27 seconds ago

“I congratulate the opponent when we lose.”

To avoid missing an additional two games in a play-off, City must defeat Turkish giants Galatasaray on Wednesday in order to regain their lead.

He defended his officiating position in Tuesday’s pre-match press conference, referring to Crystal Palace defender Jaydee Canvot’s handball against Chelsea on Sunday and Antoine Semenyo’s disallowed goal for offside against Erling Haaland in the Carabao Cup semi-final first leg tie at Newcastle.

The first thing we do when we lose in the Champions League, Premier League, or FA Cup is congratulate the opponent constantly, Guardiola said. “I do it because I think it’s appropriate to say it,” I said.

Everyone defends his position, but when you say once or twice over the course of ten years that you are the type to complain, that’s fine. For what has happened numerous times, I stand up for my team and my players.

Analysis: Did Guardiola’s complaints get through?

For the majority of the season, Guardiola’s anger over refereeing decisions has been bubbling beneath the surface.

But he hasn’t been able to control his feelings throughout the month.

Prior to the most recent incidents, Guardiola had at least some complaints.

In the November 2-1 defeat at Newcastle, the Premier League’s Key Match Incidents Panel concluded that City should have received a penalty.

After Phil Foden had released a shot, home defender Fabian Schar caught him, but the VAR did not intervene.

In the same game, Bruno Guimaraes scored a goal that appeared to be offside, but it was within the 5 cm tolerance range.

The recent decisions had a more subjective impact.

Semenyo’s goal at Newcastle in the Carabao Cup should not have been blocked by a VAR intervention, according to PGMO. Although the VAR overstepped the law, the offside against Haaland was technically correct.

Referee Anthony Taylor’s accurate description of the incident helped Diogo Dalot’s potential red card for a studs-up challenge on Jeremy Doku in the Manchester derby. If the decision on the field had been a red card, that would have also had a chance, according to Webb.

Similar to the Mosquera handball was also present. Because the Wolves player’s arms were extending outward from his body, you could argue for a penalty.

You could argue, however, that his arms would be in that position as he slowed his assault on Omar Marmoush.

related subjects

  • Manchester City
  • UEFA Champions League
  • Football

Guardiola apologises to ref Hallam but ‘defends’ outburst

To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.

  • 121 Comments

Pep Guardiola has apologised to new Premier League referee Farai Hallam if he “feels offended”, having taken issue with the official following Manchester City’s victory over Wolves on Saturday.

But the Spaniard said he has to “defend my club and my players”.

City manager Guardiola took umbrage at the fact Hallam – making his top-flight debut – decided not to award his side a penalty for an apparent handball by visiting defender Yerson Mosquera, despite being told to review the incident on the pitchside monitor by the video assistant referee (VAR).

Asked if he took his comments from the weekend too far, Guardiola replied: “With their statements, they defend each other, [that is] completely understandable. They have to do that.

“But at the same time I have to defend my club. How many times did I criticise the referees last season, which was the worst season in 10 years? How many times?

“If he is offended then I am so sorry. I know it’s not easy on debut – and it’s happened. Everyone is so sensitive, I know that.”

Following the match, Guardiola said he would be awaiting a call from referees’ chief Howard Webb to “explain why it is not a penalty”.

For the third time in two weeks, Webb was again referenced by Guardiola in a news conference as he added: “Never, ever, in 10 years I have criticised the referees. What I am saying this season is arguments and reasons why we have done it.

“I defend my club and my players. Howard Webb defends the referees. He has to do that.

    • 2 days ago
    • 26 minutes ago

‘When we lose, I congratulate the opponent’

City are back in European action on Wednesday and must beat Turkish giants Galatasaray to have any hope of finishing in the top eight to avoid an extra two games in a play-off.

But in Tuesday’s pre-match news conference, he maintained his stance on officiating by referencing Antoine Semenyo’s disallowed goal – for offside against Erling Haaland – in the Carabao Cup semi-final first leg tie at Newcastle, as well as Crystal Palace defender Jaydee Canvot’s handball against Chelsea in Sunday’s Premier League encounter.

“When we lose in the Champions League, Premier League, FA Cup – the first statement is congratulate the opponent all the time,” said Guardiola. “I do it because I believe it is fair enough to say.

“But when you say one times or two times over 10 years that I am the type [to complain] then OK it’s fine, everyone defends his position. I defend my club and players for what happened many, many [times].

Analysis: Was Guardiola correct in his complaints?

Guardiola’s anger about refereeing decisions has been bubbling underneath the surface for much of the season.

But throughout this month he has been unable to keep a lid on his feelings.

Even before the most recent incidents, Guardiola had at least some grounds for complaint.

The Premier League’s Key Match Incidents Panel ruled City should have been given a penalty in a 2-1 loss at Newcastle in November.

Phil Foden was caught by home defender Fabian Schar after he had released a shot, but the VAR did not intervene.

In the same game Newcastle scored a goal which looked like it might be offside, but Bruno Guimaraes was within the 5cm tolerance level.

The more recent decisions were more subjective.

PGMO accepted Semenyo’s goal should not have been disallowed through a VAR intervention at Newcastle in the Carabao Cup. While offside against Haaland was technically correct in law, it was an overstep by the VAR.

The potential red card for Diogo Dalot for a studs-up challenge on Jeremy Doku in the Manchester derby was a borderline call which was influenced by referee Anthony Taylor providing a good description of the incident. As Webb said, if the on-field decision had been a red card that would have stood too.

The Mosquera handball was similar, too. You could make a case for a penalty as the Wolves player had his arms out from the body.

But you could also argue his arms would justifiably be in that position as he slowed down his run to challenge Omar Marmoush.

Related topics

  • Manchester City
  • UEFA Champions League
  • Football