Police have fired tear gas and used grenades and batons to disperse protesters gathered outside Bangladesh’s national Parliament complex to express dissatisfaction with the interim government’s new political charter.
The charter was drafted more than a year after Gen Z demonstrations that led to former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina’s removal.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Bangladesh’s most powerful political parties signed the charter on Friday aimed at ensuring democratic reform after next year’s elections, but celebrations by the government led by Nobel Peace Prize winner Muhammad Yunus were muted after one party refused to sign and by the clashes on the capital’s streets.
The clashes broke out after several hundred people, who described themselves as those whose protests toppled Hasina, started demonstrating on Friday. They were expressing anger that their concerns had not been addressed in the new charter, despite their loved ones dying during the mass uprisings against Hasina, who fled to exile in India.
Some protesters vandalised a police vehicle and makeshift tents, while others clashed with soldiers and security officials in the capital Dhaka. Witnesses said several people were injured.
The interim government, headed by Yunus, had invited the country’s main political parties to sign a new political charter to pave the way for a number of political reforms.
The “July National Charter”, named after the national uprisings that started last July, outlines a roadmap for constitutional amendments, legal changes and the enactment of new laws.
A National Consensus Commission formed by the Yunus government prepared the charter after a series of talks with the major political parties, except Hasina’s Awami League party.
The Bangladesh Nationalist Party, headed by former Prime Minister Khaleda Zia, and eight like-minded parties said they would sign the charter.
Hasina’s rule saw widespread human rights abuses, including mass detentions and extrajudicial killings of her political opponents.
Protests against Hasina’s rule began on July 1, 2024, with university students calling for changes to a quota system for public sector jobs. They culminated on August 5, 2024, when thousands of protesters stormed Hasina’s palace as she escaped by helicopter to India, where she remains in exile.
She has defied court orders to attend her ongoing trial on charges amounting to crimes against humanity. The United Nations has said up to 1,400 people may have been killed in the weeks-long uprising last year.
Yunus has promised to hold the next national election in February, before the Muslim-majority nation of 170 million people celebrates the Islamic holy month of Ramadan. But questions remain whether the election would be inclusive without Hasina’s party and its allies in the race.
On Thursday, the United States military carried out its latest strike on an alleged Venezuela drug smuggling vessel, as the admiral overseeing the Trump administration’s controversial campaign in the Caribbean Sea announced his early departure.
Officials did not offer additional details about the incident, in which they said there were some survivors — unlike the previous boat bombings.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth posted on X that Admiral Alvin Holsey of the Southern Command would be retiring at the end of the year, less than a year into the post, which is usually three years long.
The latest attack on a boat came a day after United States President Donald Trump confirmed that he authorised the CIA to carry out secret operations in Venezuela and suggested that he was mulling a land attack, too.
Trump told a reporter that he authorised the CIA to go into Venezuela because there are “a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela, and a lot of the Venezuelan drugs come in through the sea, so you get to see that, but we’re going to stop them by land also”.
In a TV address on Wednesday, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro cautioned against further escalation, objecting to “failed regime changes … carried out by the CIA”.
So, how many Venezuelan boats has the US struck so far, how deadly have they been, and what troops has the Trump administration sent to the Caribbean Sea as it threatens the Maduro government in Venezuela?
How many vessels have been attacked so far?
The US has carried out at least six strikes on boats in Venezuelan waters since the start of September, killing some 27 people, after allegations that they were carrying narcotics.
However, the Trump administration has failed to provide evidence that the targeted boats were carrying narcotics bound for the US.
(Al Jazeera)
September 2
The US military killed 11 people in a strike on a vessel from Venezuela allegedly carrying illegal narcotics, Trump said on September 2. It was the first known operation since the US’s deployment of warships to the southern Caribbean.
Trump shared aerial footage of the bombing on his Truth Social account, stating, “Earlier this morning, on my Orders, U.S. Military Forces conducted a kinetic strike against positively identified Tren de Aragua Narcoterrorists in the SOUTHCOM area of responsibility. TDA is a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, operating under the control of Nicolas Maduro, responsible for mass murder, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, and acts of violence and terror across the United States and Western Hemisphere.”
September 15
On September 15, Trump confirmed that three people had been killed by a US military strike on another Venezuelan vessel. He took to his Truth Social account to say that the operation had positively identified drug trafficking cartels. The post was accompanied by a video which appeared to show the boat exploding on the water.
September 19
This marked the third fatal attack on a vessel allegedly smuggling drugs. Trump posted on social media that the strike had killed three people who were affiliated with a designated terrorist organisation.
October 3
On October 3, the US government confirmed that four people had been killed when its forces destroyed a boat allegedly involved in drug trafficking on the high seas not far from Venezuela.
October 14
In its latest operation, the US killed six people on board a boat in international waters near the Venezuelan coast, Trump confirmed on social media on Tuesday.
In his post, he wrote, “Intelligence confirmed the vessel was trafficking narcotics, was associated with illicit narcoterrorist networks, and was transiting along a known route for smuggling.”
October 16
In Thursday’s attack on the suspected drug vessel, there were survivors, unlike the previous strikes. Unlike previous attacks on boats, US officials have not posted photos of the attack.
It is unclear whether US forces offered medical help to the survivors, whether they were captured, or where they are now.
Is the US breaking international law?
Human Rights Watch (HRW) has said the maritime strikes amount to “extrajudicial killings”.
“US officials cannot summarily kill people they accuse of smuggling drugs,” said Sarah Yager, Washington director at HRW. “The problem of narcotics entering the United States is not an armed conflict, and US officials cannot circumvent their human rights obligations by pretending otherwise.”
The use of military force against foreign ships in international waters is considered unlawful unless a clear legal exception applies. In a letter to Congress on September 4 Trump cited the right to self-defence as justification for the US’s actions at sea.
Coastal countries like Venezuela control the waters within 12 nautical miles (22km) of their shores, known as territorial waters, where they have full sovereignty. Beyond that, they can claim up to 200 nautical miles (370km) as an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
Under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), all states enjoy freedom of navigation and overflight on the high seas, which lie beyond any nation’s control. Ships there fall under the jurisdiction of the country whose flag they fly, except when involved in piracy or other illegal acts.
(Al Jazeera)
Where are US ships deployed?
In August, Washington started deploying warships just outside Venezuelan waters.
On August 14, the US Fleet Forces Command published a news release stating sailors and Marines assigned to the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group had departed from Norfolk, Virginia and Camp Lejeune, North Carolina.
According to the latest United States Southern Command – one of 11 unified combatant commands of the Department of Defense responsible for Latin America, Central America, the Caribbean, and surrounding waters – various strike packages and naval assets are in proximity to Venezuela.
India’s white-ball tour to Australia begins on Sunday and, even with a T20 World Cup only months away, the focus is far greater on the one-day internationals with one big question hanging over the series – will this be the end of Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma?
The 2026 edition of the T20 World Cup will be cohosted by holders India and Pakistan in February and March, but Kohli and Rohit, who played large roles in the victory at the 2024 edition, have retired from the format, along with the Test game.
Recommended Stories
list of 4 itemsend of list
The next 50-over Cricket World Cup will be cohosted by South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe in October and November 2027, which has long left the question as to whether Kohli and Rohit, 36 and 38 respectively, will be able to reach one more global event for India.
Boasting almost 600 ODIs between them, Kohli and Rohit are now in the spotlight as to whether they have an international future beyond the three-match series, which begins in Perth on Sunday.
Al Jazeera Sport takes a closer look at the situation and the series as a whole.
When did Kohli and Rohit last play for India?
The pair last played for India in the Champions Trophy final in March in which they beat New Zealand, with Rohit relinquishing the captaincy after the game.
What has been said about Kohli and Rohit’s India futures?
The 2027 World Cup dream appeared slim with head coach Gautam Gambhir tight-lipped when asked this week whether the duo might continue on under new captain Shubman Gill when he leads the ODI squad for the first time in Australia.
Gambhir said he was refusing to look that far even if he does not doubt their quality, while India appear eager to control a transition rather than be caught in its throes.
“Look, the 50-over World Cup is still two-and-a-half years away, and I think it is very important to stay in the present,” Gambhir, who oversaw the completion of the Test series victory against West Indies on Tuesday, told reporters.
“Obviously, they are quality players, they are coming back, their experience is going to be a handful in Australia as well.
“Hopefully, those two guys will have a successful tour, and more importantly, as a team, we will have a successful series.”
Rohit, who captained India to the final of the 2023 ODI World Cup, will be 40 by the next edition of the 50-over showpiece.
Kohli, who was part of India’s World Cup-winning 2011 squad, may have the better chance being two years younger.
Brace yourselves…they’re 𝘽𝙖𝙘𝙠 𝙄𝙣 𝘽𝙡𝙪𝙚𝙨 🔥
Rohit Sharma 🤝 Virat Kohli
🎥 Watch on loop as the duo gears up for #AUSvIND 💪 #TeamIndia | @ImRo45 | @imVkohli pic.twitter.com/u99yHyFfwJ
Are Kohli and Rohit the only World Cup doubts for India?
The future is also uncertain for all-rounder Ravindra Jadeja, who turns 37 in December.
Jadeja was part of the recent Champions Trophy-winning squad but has been dropped from the 50-overs squad for Australia.
Jadeja still hopes to play the next World Cup and defused any drama that usually trails big-name omissions, saying his axing has been explained to him.
“It is a good thing that they communicated the reason behind my omission,” Jadeja said during the second Test against West Indies.
“But whenever I get a chance next, I will try and do what I have done all these years.
“Winning a World Cup is everyone’s dream. We had narrowly missed out the last time, the next time we will try and make up for it.”
Are Australia ready for India, with or without Kohli and Rohit?
If Australia is to be Kohli and Rohit’s last taste of international cricket, it will be in front of crowds packed with fans from the country’s booming Indian communities in Perth, Adelaide (October 23) and Sydney (October 25).
A number of Test players in the Australia squad, including batter Travis Head and veteran pacemen, Josh Hazlewood and Mitchell Starc, will use the series to loosen up for the Ashes, which looms large over this series.
The first Ashes Test against England starts in Perth on November 21 and runs through to the fifth Test in Sydney, which starts on January 3.
It will be Starc’s first start in international cricket in the Australasian summer, having retired from T20s.
What is the latest injury news for Australia and captain Cummins?
Marnus Labuschagne, a late call-up to replace injured all-rounder Cameron Green, will hope to convert his hot red-ball form into white-ball runs to continue building his case for an Ashes recall.
Labuschagne was dropped from the Test side for the tour of West Indies but has roared back into contention with centuries in his last two Sheffield Shield matches for Queensland.
Cricket Australia said on Friday that Green had been ruled out of the ODI series after having “low grade side soreness” in training and would likely return to play in Shield cricket.
The all-rounder joins Pat Cummins on the sidelines, with the regular skipper struggling to shake off lower back bone stress which has put him in doubt for the start of the Ashes.
Australia will also be without regular wicketkeeper Alex Carey for the Perth opener against India, along with spinner Adam Zampa.
Josh Philippe will be behind the stumps, while left-arm spinner Matt Kuhnemann gets a rare chance in the one-day side in Zampa’s absence.
As the Group of 20 leaders gather in Cape Town, clean air features on the agenda as a standalone priority for the first time in the forum’s history. The reality, however, is stark. Outdoor air pollution claims 5.7 million lives each year, and a report released last week highlights the lack of international development finance for clean air. Only $3.7bn was spent globally in 2023, representing barely 1 percent of aid, with only a fraction reaching Africa.
As the minister chairing the G20’s environment workstream this year, I am proud to have worked with member countries and international organisations to place air pollution firmly on the agenda. When Japan held the presidency in 2019, the focus was on marine plastics. Last year, under Brazil’s leadership, the G20 prioritised finance for forests. This year, we sought to treat the right to breathe clean air with the urgency it deserves.
In South Africa, our Constitution guarantees every person the right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing. That principle guides our domestic policy and informs our leadership of the G20’s discussions.
This is the first G20 presidency on African soil, a fitting setting to confront this crisis. Africa is the fastest urbanising continent on Earth, and the choices we make today in how we power our homes, move our people, and build our cities will shape health, climate, and economic outcomes for decades to come. The burden of air pollution is already visible in hospital admissions, school absenteeism, and productivity losses across the continent. According to the World Bank, outdoor air pollution causes global economic losses equivalent to nearly 5 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) each year.
This reality is now reshaping the global debate. In May, governments adopted the world’s first global goal on air quality at the World Health Organization’s World Health Assembly, which aims to halve deaths caused by poor air by 2040. It was a landmark step, but without finance to match ambition, such commitments risk remaining words on paper.
Our G20 deliberations identified four barriers to cleaner air. The first is limited institutional capacity. The second is inadequate monitoring and data, leaving policymakers and citizens without reliable information. The third is weak cooperation across borders. The fourth is the shortage of finance relative to the scale of the problem.
The Clean Air Fund’s recent report makes this plain. In 2023, support for outdoor air quality in sub-Saharan Africa fell by 91 percent to only $11.8m. Globally, just 1 percent of aid was spent on clean air, and only 1 percent of that reached sub-Saharan Africa. In other words, less than one-10,000th (1/10,000) of global development funding supports clean-air efforts in one of the regions most in need.
That is not only inequitable; it is also economically short-sighted. Clean-air action reduces healthcare costs, boosts productivity, and supports the transition to more resilient economies.
South Africa’s own experience demonstrates what is possible. Through the National Air Quality Framework and the National Environmental Management Act, we have built a foundation for accountability and transparency in monitoring air quality. We have strengthened coordination between national and municipal governments, introduced targeted interventions in the Highveld and Vaal Triangle, and expanded our air-quality monitoring network so that communities can access real-time data. These measures are supported by our broader Just Energy Transition, which directs investment towards cleaner transport, renewable power, and improved waste management.
The lesson is that progress requires both political will and predictable finance. Domestic measures alone are not enough. International financial institutions and development banks must embed clean-air objectives within climate and development portfolios.
This year’s G20 discussions also underscored the importance of data. You cannot manage what you cannot measure. Expanding reliable air-quality monitoring networks in low-income countries is one of the smartest investments the international community can make. It empowers local decision-makers, supports innovation in clean technologies, and strengthens accountability.
The message from Cape Town is clear: clean air belongs at the top table. That recognition must now be matched by sustained progress to deliver measurable outcomes. In practice, this means embedding clean-air objectives at the heart of development finance and prioritising regions that have been left behind, especially across Africa, where pollution levels are high but funding remains negligible.
Clean air is not a peripheral issue; it is central to achieving climate goals, health targets, and sustainable growth. The science is clear: the same pollutants that harm human health also warm the planet. Tackling them together delivers faster and more cost-effective results.
We therefore call for a collective effort among governments, development partners, and the private sector to ensure that clean air becomes a central measure of success in the global transition. The right to breathe clean air is universal. Delivering it requires fairness, commitment, and finance that match ambition.
