Archive June 4, 2025

A convicted Swedish member of ISIL has gone on trial in Stockholm, accused of war crimes for his role in the horrific 2015 killing of a captured Jordanian pilot, who was burned alive in Syria.

“Osama Krayem has, together and in agreement with other perpetrators belonging to IS [ISIL], killed Maaz al-Kassasbeh,” prosecutor Reena Devgun told the district court on Wednesday.

“Osama Krayem, in uniform and armed, guarded and led the victim Moaz al-Kassasbeh to a metal cage, where the latter was then locked up. One of the co-perpetrators then set fire to Moaz al-Kassasbeh, who had no possibility to defend himself or call for help,” Devgun said.

The case is considered unique as the other ISIL members involved in the brutal killing, which sparked international outrage at the time, are presumed dead, Swedish prosecutor Henrik Olin told the AFP news agency.

Krayem, 32, wearing a dark blue shirt and with a thick beard and long, loose dark hair, had his back to the handful of journalists and spectators who followed Wednesday’s proceedings behind a glass wall in the high security courtroom in Stockholm’s district court.

He appeared calm as the prosecution laid out the charges, which could result in a life sentence if Krayem is convicted.

In the 22-minute video of the killing, the victim is seen walking past several masked ISIL fighters, including Krayem, according to prosecutors.

The pilot, who was 26 years old, is then seen being locked in the cage and praying as he is set on fire.

Prosecutors have been unable to determine the exact date of the murder, but the investigation has identified the location.

‘The harshest penalty’

The defendant’s lawyer, Petra Eklund, told AFP before the start of the trial that her client admitted to being present at the scene, but disputed the prosecution’s version.

“He denies the acts for which he is prosecuted,” she said.

“He acknowledges having been present at that place during the event, but claims not to have acted in the manner described by the prosecutors in the account of the facts,” she added.

Krayem was identified thanks to a scar on the suspect’s eyebrow, visible in the video and spotted by Belgian police, which led to the investigation being opened, said Devgun when the charges were announced last week.

The pilot’s father, Safi al-Kassasbeh, told AFP on Wednesday the family hoped Krayem would “receive the harshest penalty according to the magnitude of the crime”.

“This is what we expect from a respected and fair law,” he said.

Krayem is already serving long prison sentences for his role in the Paris and Brussels attacks in 2015 and 2016, 30 years and life respectively.

He now faces charges of “serious war crimes and terrorist crimes” for his alleged participation in al-Kassasbeh’s killing.

Al-Kassasbeh’s killing shocked Jordan, which at the time was participating in the US-led coalition’s strikes against ISIL positions in Syria – the reason ISIL gave for killing the Syrian pilot. Jordan had declared a period of mourning following the pilot’s death.

On December 24, 2014, an aircraft belonging to the Royal Jordanian Air Force crashed in Syria.

The pilot was captured the same day by ISIL fighters situated near the central city of Raqqa and burned alive in a cage sometime before February 3, 2015, when a gruesome video emerged, according to the prosecution.

ISIL, which at the time controlled large chunks of Syria and Iraq, had been demanding the release of Sajida al-Rishawi – a woman held by Jordanian authorities since 2005 – in exchange for al-Kassasbeh’s life.

Rishawi was sentenced to death “for conspiracy to carry out terror acts” after a triple bomb attack on the Radisson SAS hotel in the capital Amman.

The propaganda video, in which ISIL also called for the killing of other Jordanian pilots, was one of the earliest videos released by the group.

A dive into the economic tug-of-war between the US and China in the Pacific, seen through the experiences of locals.

Tucked within the proposed “Big Beautiful Bill”, the more than 1,000-page tax and spending overhaul that United States President Donald Trump wants to see enacted in law, is a provision that is being referred to as a “revenge tax”.

The “Enforcement of Remedies Against Unfair Foreign Taxes” in Section 899 targets countries that the Trump administration believes impose unfair or discriminatory taxes on US companies and individuals, and will allow the US to impose additional taxes on entities from those countries.

The provision calls, for instance, for levies on revenue from digital services, such as data monetisation and online advertising.

The proposal also includes a higher minimum tax on the profits of foreign entities, even if those profits are earned outside US borders. This could impact passive income streams, such as interest and dividends, and may discourage international investors from countries flagged as discriminatory.

The administration’s unpredictable approach to global economic policy has already created uncertainty in international markets. Should this measure be signed into law, it could further erode foreign investor confidence in the US market.

‘This revenge tax move will add to economic uncertainty. It will stop foreign CEOs from investing – the very thing President Trump says he wants. It means more wild economic swings, stock market declines, less stability and a greater chance of recession this year,” Stuart Mackintosh, the executive director of the financial think tank Group of Thirty, told Al Jazeera.

“Every few days, we see a destabilising misuse of US power, more self-inflicted wounds, that look set to drive up prices and slow the economy. America has shredded its political and economic alliances. These revenge taxes underscore that America cannot be trusted.”

Who could be affected

Under the provision, certain foreign governments and international businesses could face an additional 20 percent tax, which would apply to non-US entities earning income from US sources, including interest, dividends and royalties.

Taxes would be hiked gradually at the rate of 5 percent annually.

It would also affect profits earned at US locations, which are transferred to foreign parent companies, as well as income from the sale of US real estate by designated “bad actors”. Trusts, global foundations and partnerships with passive income could also be impacted.

However, exceptions are built into the legislation for foreign pension funds and charitable organisations. The tax would only apply to countries designated as “discriminatory” by the US Treasury Department. Countries not flagged would remain unaffected.

House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, a Republican from Missouri, said that while the provision could serve as an effective retaliatory tool, it “will hopefully never take effect”.

According to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, the measure could bring in revenue of $116.3bn over the next decade. But it would also lower tax revenue in the long term, by $12.9bn in both 2033 and 2034.

Impacted investment climate

The administration’s shifting trade strategies have already led to legal battles, policy reversals and a climate of unpredictability that has left companies hesitant to make long-term plans.

Companies like toy manufacturer Mattel and automaker Stellantis have suspended financial guidance due to the volatile nature of US tariff policy.

These policies have also contributed to swings in consumer confidence. When Trump announced his series of sweeping tariffs against trade partners on April 2, which he dubbed “Liberation Day”, confidence fell to a 13-year low, only to rebound after the administration paused the tariffs’ implementation.

Analysts warn that provisions like the “revenge tax” could deter foreign investment and strain developing partnerships.

“If you’ve got the headwinds of an extra withholding tax that starts at an extra 5 percent [and] moves up to 20 percent over the subsequent four years, I think [investors would] have second thoughts. In terms of optimising your investment strategy, you’d have a slightly smaller allocation to the US,” Chris Turner, the global head of markets and regional head of research for the United Kingdom and Europe at ING, a financial services company, told Al Jazeera.

There is already evidence that some economies have started diversifying away from the US. Canada, for example, has increased trade with Europe and Asia. Trump’s trade policies have also been cited as a factor in foreign governments divesting from US treasuries, while the European Central Bank continues to promote the euro as a competing global reserve currency.

This measure adds another mechanism to the Trump administration’s broader trade strategy, which has relied heavily on tariffs even as many face legal scrutiny.

Last week, the US Court of International Trade blocked the administration’s blanket global tariffs enacted under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act. A federal district court temporarily halted the block’s enforcement as legal battles unfold.

Experts believe many of these tariffs may not withstand judicial review.

“There’s no statute that provides the president that authority”, to impose sweeping international tariffs through the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Greg Shaffer, a law professor at Georgetown University, told Al Jazeera. “And as the court said, if there were such a statute, it would be unconstitutional because the Constitution provides that responsibility to Congress.”