Demonstrations have taken place at more than 1, 600 locations around the United States, in protest against President Donald Trump’s controversial policies that include mass deportations of immigrants and refugees and cuts to medical insurance, as well as the removal of other safety nets for impoverished people.
The “Good Trouble Lives On” refrain that underscored the national day of action on Thursday was inspired by the late congressman and civil rights leader John Lewis, who died in 2020 at the age of 80 following an advanced pancreatic cancer diagnosis.
He was the youngest and last survivor of the Big Six civil rights activists, a group led by Martin Luther King Jr. In 1965, a 25-year-old Lewis led some 600 protesters in the Bloody Sunday march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama. Lewis was beaten by police, suffering a skull fracture.
Organisers had called for peaceful protests to take place on the fifth anniversary of Lewis’s death along streets, at courts and other public spaces in cities including Atlanta, New York and Los Angeles.
“We are navigating one of the most terrifying moments in our nation’s history”, Lisa Gilbert, co-president of the nonprofit Public Citizen, said during an online news conference on Tuesday.
“We are all grappling with a rise of authoritarianism and lawlessness within our administration … as the rights, freedoms and expectations of our very democracy are being challenged”.
Pushback against Trump so far in his second term has centred on deportations and immigration enforcement tactics, as well as access to healthcare.
Protesters oppose mass deportation and the steepest rollbacks of social welfare programmes in the US since their inception]Adam Gray/Reuters]
The administration has pushed third-party countries to accept deportees, and the African country of Eswatini has confirmed this week that it received five individuals deported from the US. The US also completed the deportations of eight men to South Sudan after a judge cleared the way for their transfer to the violence-hit , African country.
Trump’s administration has also been actively targeting pro-Palestinian activists. Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University student imprisoned for more than three months, this month filed a wrongful detention claim against Trump seeking $20m in damages.
The so‑called “One Big, Beautiful Bill” also prompted a backlash for slashing health coverage schemes, Medicare and Medicaid, by $930bn over the next decade. It could leave as many as 17 million Americans without insurance, in one of the steepest rollbacks of social welfare programmes in the US since their inception in 1935.
Earlier this month, protesters engaged in a tense standoff as federal authorities conducted mass arrests at two Southern California marijuana farms. One farmworker died after falling from a greenhouse roof during a chaotic raid.
The European Union has approved a new raft of stiff sanctions against Russia over its war in Ukraine, including a lower oil price cap, a ban on transactions with Nord Stream gas pipelines, and the targeting of more shadow fleet ships.
“The message is clear: Europe will not back down in its support for Ukraine. The EU will keep raising the pressure until Russia ends its war,” EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said in a statement on Friday.
Kallas said the EU move amounts to “one of its strongest sanctions packages against Russia to date” linked to the war, which is now in its fourth year.
Ukraine’s newly appointed Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko welcomed the EU’s agreement on an 18th sanctions package against Russia, saying it “strengthens the pressure where it counts”. Svyrydenko added on X that there was more to be done in terms of measures to help bring peace closer.
The move comes as European countries start to buy United States weapons for Ukraine to help the country better defend itself.
US President Donald Trump announced the deal to supply more weapons to Ukraine and threatened earlier this week to impose steep tariffs on Russia unless a peace deal is reached within 50 days.
The European Commission, the EU’s executive branch, had proposed to lower the oil price cap from $60 to $45, which is lower than the market price, to target Russia’s vast energy revenues.
The EU had hoped to get major international powers in the Group of Seven countries involved in the price cap to broaden the effect, but conflict in the Middle East pushed up oil prices, and the US administration could not be brought on board.
In 2023, Ukraine’s Western allies limited sales of Russian oil to $60 per barrel, but the price cap was largely symbolic as most of Moscow’s crude – its main moneymaker – cost less than that. Still, the cap was there in case oil prices rose.
Oil is Russia’s main source of income
The linchpin of Russia’s economy is oil income, allowing President Vladimir Putin to pour money into the armed forces without worsening inflation for people, and avoiding a currency collapse.
The EU has also targeted the Nord Stream pipelines between Russia and Germany to prevent Putin from generating any revenue from them in future, notably by discouraging would-be investors. Russian energy giant Rosneft’s refinery in India was hit, as well.
The pipelines were built to carry Russian natural gas to Germany but are not in operation. They were targeted by sabotage in 2022, but the source of the underwater explosions has remained a major international mystery.
Additionally, the new EU sanctions are targeting Russia’s banking sector to limit the Kremlin’s ability to raise funds or carry out financial transactions. Two Chinese banks were added to the list.
The EU has slapped several rounds of sanctions on Russia since Putin ordered the invasion of Ukraine on February 24, 2022.
A group of UN experts claims that Rwanda is under the control of M23 rebels in the eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, that Uganda has “unilaterally doubled its military presence” there, and that armed groups, including those affiliated with the Congolese government, are violating civilian rights.
An as-yet unpublished report from UN experts on DRC that was leaked to the media and seen by Al Jazeera describes violations by all parties to the conflict and blames neighbouring governments for allegedly exploiting and escalating the current crisis.
According to the Reuters news agency, the report was submitted to the UN Security Council in May. Unnamed UN official who contributed to the report told Al Jazeera on condition of anonymity that it is anticipated to be released soon.
While analysts see these reports as an essential tool of accountability, Kigali and Kampala have called the experts biased.
The government and government have repeatedly refuted the accusations made against them, but neither has responded to Al Jazeera’s request for comment on the report’s content.
Meanwhile, the recent findings run the risk of dampening the cautious optimism brought about by Kinshasa and M23’s ongoing Qatar-mediated peace talks and the signing of a peace agreement between Rwanda and the DRC last month.
Rwanda’s ‘ instruction’, control of resources
M23, which the UN claims is supported by Rwanda, has been at odds with the Congolese army and its allied militias known as Wazalendo for years. Kigali refutes this claim. M23 quickly seized control of Goma and Bukavu, the capitals of North Kivu and South Kivu, which it still holds today.
The latest UN experts report – the first since M23’s advance – offers a stark assessment of the conflict, placing blame on Rwanda for facilitating the rapid expansion of the rebel forces.
According to the report, Rwanda is “critical support” for M23, which receives “instructions” from the country’s government and intelligence services.
[Photo: Arlette Bashizi/Reuters] M23 rebels squat on a truck near the DRC-Rwanda border crossing [Arlette Bashizi/Reuters]
In previous reports, the UN experts found there were some 3, 000-4, 000 Rwandan troops fighting alongside M23 in the DRC.
According to the new report, Rwandan officials secretly informed the Group of Experts that President Paul Kagame had decided to take control of Goma and Bukavu one week prior to the [M23] Goma attack.
Rwanda has repeatedly denied supporting M23, and Kigali has harshly criticized the UN experts.
“These reports were written long ago”, President Paul Kagame said at a news conference in Kigali on July 4, after the contents of the report started circulating in international media.
The Rwandan leader criticized the UN panel of experts, saying, “They come here just to confirm a narrative they already had.”
Kagame compared the experts to a burglar who burns a house and also serves as a prosecutor and judge. “The very ones who burned the]house] are the ones in the seat to judge and prosecute”.
However, the UN report only reiterated its criticism of Kigali.
According to the report, Rwanda is held accountable for the actions of the group because of the Rwandan army’s “de facto direction and effective control” over M23’s operations, arguing that Rwanda’s behavior qualifies as international sanctionable.
Last month’s US-brokered deal between the DRC and Rwanda does not include M23, but it stipulates that all parties should comply with the Qatar peace process. Additionally, it is emphasized that the Congolese government should encourage Hutus’ support of the armed group’s FDLR, which is linked to Tutsis’ deaths in the 1994 Rwanda genocide. According to the agreement, Rwanda should then halt its “defensive measures” inside the DRC.
While Kigali has often argued that its actions in the DRC are aimed at addressing longstanding security threats posed by the FDLR, the UN experts assert that its actions went far beyond legitimate security concerns.
According to the experts, “Kigali’s ultimate goal was to retain control over the DRC’s natural resources.”
Coltan was among the minerals smuggled into Rwanda after being stolen from mines in towns that were seized by M23. “Once in Rwanda, the looted minerals were mixed with local production, effectively laundering them into the downstream supply chain under the guise of Rwandan origin”, the report said.
Boss Mining Solutions Inc., which is represented by Eddy Habimana, who has previously been linked to the illegal movement of minerals from the DRC, purchased a portion of the minerals, according to the report.
The report also mentions Uganda’s violation of international law in addition to Rwanda.
Amid the Rwanda/M23–DRC fighting, there was a “rapid military build-up” by the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) in North Kivu and Ituri provinces, the report said.
The number of troops significantly increased this year, it continued, “effectively doubling Uganda’s footprint in the nation.”
According to the report, the Ugandan army, which has collaborated with the Congolese military to combat the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), a rebel movement with roots in Uganda, “unilaterally” increased its troop presence in eastern DRC.
“The DRC government confirmed that the new UPDF deployment was executed without its prior approval, and that UPDF was undertaking unilateral initiatives outside the framework of joint operations with the]Congolese army]”, the report read.
The panel of experts’ opinions on the deployment posed questions about Kampala’s motivations, particularly given previous assertions that the UPDF supported M23. The report claims that the troop movements created a de facto buffer zone to protect M23 from northern counterattacks despite Uganda’s claim that they were defensive and meant to safeguard its economic interests.
In response, Uganda’s ambassador to the UN, Adonia Ayebare, wrote on X that the report “contains falsehoods” and attempts to undermine the joint military operation with the DRC. After the publication of the report, he promised to make an official statement about Uganda.
General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, the head of Uganda’s army, wrote on X that: “We (UPDF) continue to save the lives of people in our region while the UN’s so-called “Group of Experts” produces biased reports against us.”
The report by the UN experts had called out “repeated incendiary public statements” by Kainerugaba in which they said he emphasised close cooperation between the UPDF and the Rwandan army.
Additionally, the report also accused former ICC convict Thomas Lubanga of starting a political-military movement to challenge the Congolese government, “with at least moral and passive support from the Ugandan authorities.”
Lubanga, who addressed journalists in Kampala on July 16 said he is being forced to flee because Kinshasa had been pursuing his cause because it “would find itself on Kinshasa’s doorstep today.”
Civilians push a bicycle loaded with goods as soldiers walk by, near the border between Uganda and the DRC]File: Arlette Bashizi/Reuters]
interests in the DRC are Rwandan and Ugandan.
In light of regional dynamics, Professor Kristof Titeca, who recently published a report on Uganda’s operations in the DRC, urges readers to read the UN report and the associated backlash.
Kigali and Kampala share overlapping interests in the DRC – chiefly concerning security, political influence, and economic access – but these interests also place them in a complex relationship of both cooperation and competition, he said.
After Uganda allowed its soldiers to enter the country in pursuit of the ADF, Titeca claims that Kigali’s fear that Kampala might encroach on its influence in eastern DRC contributed to the rapid expansion and resurgence of M23.
As M23 gained ground toward the end of 2024, Uganda sent troops to combat rebels, specifically those who wanted to stop Rwanda from entering areas of interest.
Titeca says the military manoeuvres were as much a strategic message to Rwanda as they were about protecting Ugandan interests.
Titeca suggests that Kigali and Kampala may have an implicit understanding of their respective areas of influence based on movements and postures that have been observed since late 2024.
Some people believe Kampala and Kigali’s area of interest agreement might exist, he said.
In eastern DRC, “they are friends and also enemies at the same time”, he added, referring to Uganda and Rwanda.
The violations committed by Kinshasa
Kinshasa also bears some responsibility, according to the UN experts. On the Congolese side, the report paints a picture of a state under siege, struggling to maintain sovereignty over its eastern territories.
Despite the latter being subject to UN sanctions and being heavily dependent on irregular Wazalendo organizations and the Rwandan army, the government remained heavily dependent on both.
This alliance, according to the report, has worsened the security and human rights situation, causing reprisals attacks, child restraining, and sexual violence.
As it called out M23’s actions during the taking of Goma and Bukavu, the report also documented a pattern of grave international humanitarian law and rights violations – including looting, sexual violence, and killings – by retreating Congolese soldiers and Wazalendo fighters at the same time.
According to the statement, “These abuses occurred in a climate of impunity, in the general context of a weakening chain of command.”
The Congolese government pressed Al Jazeera for a response to these assertions, but they were unsuccessful.
In dismissing the report, the Rwandan president accused the panel of perpetuating a biased narrative against Kigali and of ignoring Congolese government complicity with the FDLR, which he says continues to spread anti-Tutsi views that led to the 1994 genocide.
At the July 4 press conference, Kagame said, “All the reports, 75% of them, blame AFC/M23 and Rwanda.” You won’t find that they have a thorough analysis of FDLR or how institutionalized Congolese people spread genocide ideology. How can experts not see that”?
Rwandan analyst Thierry Gatete questioned the UN panel’s legitimacy and claimed that they hardly ever conduct field research in response to Kagame’s criticisms.
He claimed that they rely on witness accounts from Congolese officials or FDLR sympathisers while sitting in New York or Paris.
The report notes that Rwanda denied the group of experts access to Kigali. Gatete claims that Rwanda initially cooperated with the panel before giving up because the reports were consistently biased and inconsequential. He claimed that “nobody takes what they write seriously.”
While Rwanda and Uganda view the UN reports as biased, others see them as essential tools for accountability.
The panel provides crucial evidence that challenges both state and non-state actors, according to Stewart Muhindo, a researcher with the Congolese civil society organization LUCHA.
He noted that “the panel tells the hard truths,” noting that the report also criticizes the DRC government for continuing to cooperate with the FDLR despite promises to end the alliance. “It’s not just about blaming Rwanda”.
Muhindo and other UN experts concur that the humanitarian crisis has been exacerbated by the DRC’s reliance on Wazalendo fighters. He claimed that these irregular forces have been responsible for atrocities, including child soldiers’ recruitment and attacks, despite not being sanctioned like the FDLR.
Following a yearlong battle close to Myanmar’s main army training academy, the military government claimed to have removed rebel fighters and recaptured a town. This marked a rare turnaround for the government in the country’s northeast.
The Ta’ang National Liberation Army (TNLA) had previously controlled the town of Nawnghkio in Shan State, and the ruling military announced this on Thursday.
The strategically significant town, which is situated on a crucial highway connecting central Myanmar to China, was taken over by the Three Brotherhood Alliance in July 2024.
The military government claimed to have retaken Nawnghkio after “566 armed engagements within 11 operational months” in a statement released by the state-run Global New Light of Myanmar. Soldiers were pictured holding rifles aloft in a rare one-page spread in a rare newspaper. It provided a detailed account of the conflict, citing initial events that officers and enlisted men “sacrificing their lives” led to.
However, the military “combined strategic ground military tactics with strategic air military tactics,” according to the report.
Nawnghkio is located 40 kilometers (25 miles) from Mandalay, Myanmar’s second-largest city, and 80 kilometers (50 miles) from Pyin Oo Lwin, the town where the country’s main military officer training academy is located.
The TNLA stated in a statement that the military government’s victory had been denied, stating only that “the heavy offensive has made it difficult to continue administrative work in the town.” The TNLA added that “civil administration services have been relocated to secure locations”
Analysts claim that the military government’s control over large population centers is secure because it has an air force that can halt large-scale rebel advances, despite the combined rebel offensive against government forces having already begun in October 2023.
Northeastern Lashio city was also taken by the rebels in April, but a deal with China brokered its release was what gave it back to the ruling military.
A myriad of pro-democracy armed groups and ethnic rebel armies have joined forces to fight military rule in Myanmar since a military coup in 2021 toppled the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi.
After a troubling investigation revealed that South Korea’s government-endorsed foreign adoption program violated the fundamental human rights of adoptees, it is set to end the decades-old practice of outsourcing adoptions to private agencies.
According to the South Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare, the country’s government will adopt a “newly restructured public adoption system” on Saturday, in which state and local governments assume full control over the entire adoption process.
Following the devastating Korean War of 1950-1953, when inter-country adoption was encouraged as a solution, South Korea sent more than 140, 000 children overseas.
A , Truth and Reconciliation Commission investigations revealed earlier this year that the adoption process had been plagued by irregularities, including “fraudulent orphan registrations, identity tampering, and inadequate vetting of adoptive parents.”
The Health Ministry continued, “The new change is a significant step toward ensuring the safety and upholding the rights of adopted children.”
Important decisions will be made by a ministry committee in accordance with the new system, such as matching prospective adoptive parents with children and ensuring the child’s best interests are protected by the “best interests of the child.”
Prior to now, this was handled by significant adoption agencies, which had no control over the state. The government was held responsible for the problems, particularly the failure to regulate adoption fees, which transformed the sector into one based on profit.
The government now assumes full responsibility for ensuring the safety and rights of all adopted children, according to Kim Sang-hee, director of population and child policy at the Ministry of Health and Welfare.
After the Korean War, international adoption was established to bring mixed-race children to a nation that valued ethnic homogeneity.
In the 1970s and 1980s, it overcame post-war poverty and experienced rapid and aggressive economic growth, leading to millions of dollars in international adoption efforts.
The new measure, according to activists, is only a starting point and is insufficient.
While I believe it’s time to end all private adoption organizations in Korea, I don’t believe that letting the state handle new ones suffices, writes author Lisa Wool-Rim Sjoblom, a Swedish adoptee from Korea.
According to Sjoblom, the government should prioritize implementing the findings of the truth commission, issue an official apology, and support the tens of thousands of Koreans who were adopted abroad, according to Sjoblom.
According to a spokesperson for the Syrian Interior Ministry, Syrian security forces are preparing to relocate to Suwayda to end fighting between the Druze and Bedouin tribes.
According to Israel’s public broadcaster Kan News, Israel has previously warned the Syrian government to leave the country and its forces attacked a convoy of Bedouin fighters on Syria’s Palmyra-Homs highway on Friday, according to Israel’s public broadcaster Kan News.
Two days prior to Israel’s massive attacks on Damascus, this is reported.
Despite the withdrawal of Syrian government forces from the southwest of Suwayda and an attempt by Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa to draw a line amid recent weeks of deadly violence that has left hundreds of people dead, Bedouin fighters in Syria said they have launched a new offensive against Druze fighters late on Thursday.
The fighters were attempting to free Bedouins, according to a Bedouin military commander who told Reuters news agency that the truce only applied to government forces and not to them. Druze armed groups have detained these people in recent days.
According to the Kan report, Bedouin fighters have recently managed to reach the Suwayda region, which supports earlier rumours from Arabic-language news media.
In response to attempts to impose a ceasefire between Bedouin and Druze fighters, Syria’s leadership has condemned Israel’s attacks as a violation of its sovereignty.
Israel’s recent bombing of Syria was justified by the claim that it was protecting the Druze minority. However, the country has more selfish motivations.
Israel has long attacked Syria, even prior to the most recent Druze-related violence.
Israel has attacked Syria hundreds of times and invaded and occupied the region’s territory, excluding the western Golan Heights, which it has occupied since 1967, including the 14-year conflict that resulted in the removal of long-time leader Bashar al-Assad.
Leading Israeli analysts speculate that the Israeli government’s and its troubled prime minister’s personal and political goals may have been the cause of these recent attacks rather than their concern for the welfare of the Druze.
Israel launched its own attacks on Syria on Wednesday, striking the Ministry of Defense, and close to the presidential palace in Damascus, leading to the most recent reports of violence. The ceasefire was reached on Wednesday, however.
In a televised speech on Thursday, Al-Sharaa declared that taking control of Suwayda’s security was important in order to stop sectarian conflict there and stop Israel from attacking. He also stated that defending the country’s Druze citizens and their rights.
One of the spiritual leaders of the Syrian Druze community, Sheikh Hikmat Al Hijri, said, “We are not sectarian, and we have never wanted to cause division.” Anyone who compromises security and stability bears full responsibility for our entire situation. We disagree that anyone who commits sabotage or incitement only represents themselves, and that any sect or region can be held responsible for their actions.
Qatar, Turkiye, and the US were both condemned for saying they did not support Israeli strikes.
In a phone conversation with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa, Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani criticized Israel’s recent attacks on Syria.
The emir called Israel’s bombing of Syria “a flagrant violation” of the nation’s sovereignty, international law, the UN Charter, and a threat to regional stability, according to a statement released by Sheikh Tamim’s office on Friday.
After Israel’s actions sought to “sabotage” a ceasefire in the country, Turkiye president Tayyip Erdogan said on Thursday that the country would not allow division to occur in Syria or that its multicultural structure and territorial integrity would be endangered.
According to the presidency, Erdogan and al-Sharaa, the president of Turkey and al-Sharaa spoke about Israel’s attacks on Damascus during a phone call on Thursday, adding that Erdogan had expressed support for Damascus.
Following Israeli airstrikes against Damascus, Turkiye was instrumental in ensuring a ceasefire in Syria. A Turkish security source reported on Thursday that Turkish intelligence officials spoke with the Syrian Druze leader.
State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce has stated that the Syrian government should take the lead in the wake of the country’s condemnation of violence.
She stated on Thursday that “we are engaging diplomatically with Israel and Syria at the highest levels to address the current crisis and reach a lasting agreement between the two sovereign states.”
The US “did not support recent Israeli strikes,” according to Bruce, adding that “regarding Israel’s intervention and activity” in Syria.
