Reporting from behind shifting front lines in Myanmar’s civil war
On a typical day, Mai Rupa travels through his native Shan State, in eastern Myanmar, documenting the impact of war. A video journalist with the online news outlet Shwe Phee Myay, he travels to remote towns and villages, collecting footage and conducting interviews on stories ranging from battle updates to the situation for local civilians living in a war zone. His job is fraught with risks. Roads are strewn with landmines and there are times when he has taken cover from aerial bombing and artillery shelling. “I have witnessed countless people being injured and civilians dying in front of me,” Mai Rupa said. “These heartbreaking experiences deeply affected me,” he told Al Jazeera, “at times, leading to serious emotional distress.” Mai Rupa is one of a small number of brave, independent journalists still reporting on the ground in Myanmar, where a 2021 military coup shattered the country’s fragile transition to democracy and obliterated media freedoms. Like his colleagues at Shwe Phee Myay – a name which refers to Shan State’s rich history of tea cultivation – Mai Rupa prefers to go by a pen name due to the risks of publicly identifying as a reporter with one of the last remaining independent media outlets still operating inside the country. Advertisement Most journalists fled Myanmar in the aftermath of the military’s takeover and the expanding civil war. Some continue their coverage by making cross-border trips from work bases in neighbouring Thailand and India. But staff at Shwe Phee Myay – a Burmese-language outlet, with roots in Shan State’s ethnic Ta’ang community – continue reporting from on the ground, covering a region of Myanmar where several ethnic armed groups have for decades fought against the military and at times clashed with each other. Ta’ang National Liberation army officers march during an event to mark the 52nd Ta’ang revolution day in Mar-Wong, Ta’ang self-governing area, northern Shan State, Myanmar, in 2015 [File: Gemunu Amarasinghe/AP] Fighting to keep the public informed After Myanmar’s military launched a coup in February 2021, Shwe Phee Myay’s journalists faced new risks. In March that year, two reporters with the outlet narrowly escaped arrest while covering pro-democracy protests. When soldiers and police raided their office in the Shan State capital of Lashio two months later, the entire team had already gone into hiding. That September, the military arrested the organisation’s video reporter, Lway M Phuong, for alleged incitement and dissemination of “false news”. She served nearly two years in prison. The rest of the 10-person Shwe Phee Myay team scattered following her arrest, which came amid the Myanmar military’s wider crackdown on the media. Spread out across northern Shan State in the east of the country, the news team initially struggled to continue their work. They chose to avoid urban areas where they might encounter the military. Every day was a struggle to continue reporting. Advertisement “We couldn’t travel on main roads, only back roads,” recounted Hlar Nyiem, an assistant editor with Shwe Phee Myay. “Sometimes, we lost four or five work days in a week,” she said. Police arrest Myanmar Now journalist Kay Zon Nwe in Yangon in February 2021, as protesters took part in a demonstration against the military coup [Ye Aung Thu/AFP] Despite the dangers, Shwe Phee Myay’s reporters continued with their clandestine work to keep the public informed. When a magnitude 7.7 earthquake hit central Myanmar on March 28, killing more than 3,800 people, Shwe Phee Myay’s journalists were among the few able to document the aftermath from inside the country. The military blocked most international media outlets from accessing earthquake-affected areas, citing difficulties with travel and accommodation, and the few local reporters still working secretly in the country took great risks to get information to the outside world. “These journalists continue to reveal truths and make people’s voices heard that the military regime is desperate to silence,” said Thu Thu Aung, a public policy scholar at the University of Oxford who has conducted research on Myanmar’s post-coup media landscape. Journalists with Shwe Phee Myay conduct a video interview in Shan State, Myanmar, in September 2024 [Courtesy of Shwe Phee Myay] On top of the civil war and threats posed by Myanmar’s military regime, Myanmar’s journalists have encountered a new threat. Advertisement In January, the administration of US President Donald Trump and his billionaire confidante Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) began dismantling the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). USAID had allocated more than $268m towards supporting independent media and the free flow of information in more than 30 countries around the world – from Ukraine to Myanmar, according to journalism advocacy group Reporters Without Borders. In February, The Guardian reported on the freezing of USAID funds, creating an “existential crisis” for exiled Myanmar journalists operating from the town of Mae Sot, on the country’s border with Thailand. The situation worsened further in mid-March, when the White House declared plans for the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) to reduce operations to the bare minimum. USAGM oversees – among others – the Voice of America and Radio Free Asia, which were both leading providers of news on Myanmar. Last week, RFA announced it was laying off 90 percent of its staff and ceasing to produce news in the Tibetan, Burmese, Uighur and Lao languages. VOA has faced a similar situation. Tin Tin Nyo, managing director of Burma News International, a network of 16 local, independent media organisations based inside and outside Myanmar, said the loss of the Burmese-language services provided by VOA and RFA created a “troubling information vacuum”. Myanmar’s independent media sector also relied heavily on international assistance, which had already been dwindling, Tin Tin Nyo said. Many local Myanmar news outlets were already “struggling to continue producing reliable information”, as a result of the USAID funding cuts brought in by Trump and executed by Musk’s DOGE, she said. Some had laid off staff, reduced their programming or suspended operations. Advertisement “The downsizing of independent media has decreased the capacity
Could India, Pakistan use nuclear weapons? Here’s what their doctrines say
Pakistan said it struck multiple Indian military bases in the early hours of Saturday, May 10, after claiming that India had launched missiles against three Pakistani bases, marking a sharp escalation in their already soaring tensions, as the neighbours edge closer to an all-out war. Long-simmering hostilities, mostly over the disputed region of Kashmir, erupted into renewed fighting after the deadly April 22 Pahalgam attack in Indian-administered Kashmir that saw 25 tourists and a local guide killed in an armed group attack. India blamed Pakistan for the attack; Islamabad denied any role. Since then, the nations have engaged in a series of tit-for-tat moves that began with diplomatic steps but have rapidly turned into aerial military confrontation. As both sides escalate shelling and missile attacks and seem on the road to a full-scale battle, an unprecedented reality stares not just at the 1.6 billion people of India and Pakistan but at the world: An all-out war between them would be the first ever between two nuclear-armed nations. Advertisement “It would be stupid for either side to launch a nuclear attack on the other … It is way short of probable that nuclear weapons are used, but that does not mean it’s impossible,” Dan Smith, director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, told Al Jazeera. So, how did we get here? What are the nuclear arsenals of India and Pakistan like? And when – according to them – might they use nuclear weapons? How tensions have spiralled since April 22 India has long accused The Resistance Front (TRF) – the armed group that initially claimed credit for the Pahalgam attack, before then distancing itself from the killings – of being a proxy for the Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based armed group that has repeatedly targeted India, including in the 2008 Mumbai attacks that left more than 160 people dead. New Delhi blamed Islamabad for the Pahalgam attack. Pakistan denied any role. India withdrew from a bilateral pact on water sharing, and both sides scaled back diplomatic missions and expelled each other’s citizens. Pakistan also threatened to walk out of other bilateral pacts, including the 1972 Simla Agreement that bound the neighbours to a ceasefire line in disputed Kashmir, known as the Line of Control (LoC). But on May 7, India launched a wave of missile attacks against sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. It claimed it hit “terrorist infrastructure”, but Pakistan says at least 31 civilians, including two children, were killed. On May 8, India launched drones into Pakistani airspace, reaching the country’s major cities. India claimed it was retaliating, and that Pakistan had fired missiles and drones at it. Then, for two nights in a row, cities in India and Indian-administered Kashmir reported explosions that New Delhi claimed were the result of attempted Pakistani attacks that were thwarted. Advertisement Pakistan denied sending missiles and drones into India on May 8 and May 9 – but that changed in the early hours of May 10, when Pakistan first claimed that India targeted three of its bases with missiles. Soon after, Pakistan claimed it struck at least seven Indian bases. India has not yet responded either to Pakistan’s claims that Indian bases were hit or to Islamabad’s allegation that New Delhi launched missiles at its military installations. How many nuclear warheads do India and Pakistan have? India first conducted nuclear tests in May 1974 before subsequent tests in May 1998, after which it declared itself a nuclear weapons state. Within days, Pakistan launched a series of six nuclear tests and officially became a nuclear-armed state, too. Each side has since raced to build arms and nuclear stockpiles bigger than the other, a project that has cost them billions of dollars. India is currently estimated to have more than 180 nuclear warheads. It has developed longer-range missiles and mobile land-based missiles capable of delivering them, and is working with Russia to build ship and submarine missiles, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). Pakistan’s arsenal, meanwhile, consists of more than 170 warheads. The country enjoys technological support from its regional ally, China, and its stockpile includes primarily mobile short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, with enough range to hit just inside India. A motorcyclist rides past shattered windows of a restaurant outside the Rawalpindi cricket stadium after an alleged drone was shot down in Rawalpindi, Pakistan, on May 8, 2025 [Aamir Qureshi/ AFP] What’s India’s nuclear policy? India’s interest in nuclear power was initially sparked and expanded under its first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, who was eager to use it to boost energy generation. However, in recent decades, the country has solidified its nuclear power status to deter its neighbours, China and Pakistan, over territorial disputes. Advertisement New Delhi’s first and only nuclear doctrine was published in 2003 and has not been formally revised. The architect of that doctrine, the late strategic analyst K Subrahmanyam, was the father of India’s current foreign minister, S Jaishankar. Only the prime minister, as head of the political council of the Nuclear Command Authority, can authorise a nuclear strike. India’s nuclear doctrine is built around four principles: No First Use (NFU): This principle means that India will not be the first to launch nuclear attacks on its enemies. It will only retaliate with nuclear weapons if it is first hit in a nuclear attack. India’s doctrine says it can launch retaliation against attacks committed on Indian soil or if nuclear weapons are used against its forces on foreign territory. India also commits to not using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. Credible Minimum Deterrence: India’s nuclear posture is centred around deterrence – that is, its nuclear arsenal is meant primarily to discourage other countries from launching a nuclear attack on the country. India maintains that its nuclear arsenal is insurance against such attacks. It’s one of the reasons why New Delhi is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), as it maintains that all countries uniformly disarm before it does the same. Massive Retaliation:
Newark Mayor Ras Baraka arrested during ICE detention centre protest
US attorney says Baraka ‘committed trespass’ during protest of facility, which he argues opened without proper permits. Rights groups and Democratic officials have decried the arrest of the mayor of Newark, New Jersey, during a protest at an immigration detention centre. Mayor Ras Baraka had joined several lawmakers at the detention centre, called Delaney Hall, for a demonstration on Friday. For weeks, he has been among those protesting the recently opened 1,000-bed centre, which critics see as a key link in President Donald Trump’s mass deportation efforts. Those in attendance said Baraka sought to enter the facility along with members of the United States Congress on Friday, but he was denied entry. A video reviewed by The Associated Press showed a federal official in a jacket with the logo for the Homeland Security Investigations unit telling Baraka he could not tour the facility because “you are not a congress member”. Baraka then left the secure area, rejoining protesters on the public side of the centre’s gate. Video showed him speaking through the gate to a man in a suit. The man said, “They’re talking about coming back to arrest you.” Advertisement “I’m not on their property. They can’t come out on the street and arrest me,” Baraka replied. Moments later, several Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, some wearing face coverings, surrounded the mayor and others on the public side of the gate. Baraka was dragged back through the security gate in handcuffs, while protesters yelled, “Shame!” In a subsequent post on the social media platform X, Alina Habba, Trump’s former personal lawyer and acting US attorney for New Jersey, said Baraka had “committed trespass and ignored multiple warnings” to leave. “He has willingly chosen to disregard the law. That will not stand in this state,” Habba wrote. “He has been taken into custody. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.” US Representative LaMonica McIver was also at the centre on Friday, along with Representatives Bonnie Watson Coleman and Robert Menendez Jr, to conduct what they called an “oversight inspection”. In a post on X, McIver said Baraka “did nothing wrong” and had already left the facility at the time of his arrest. “This is unacceptable,” McIver said in the video. For its part, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security accused the lawmakers of “storming” the facility in a “bizarre political stunt”. Baraka has said the detention centre — located in Newark, not far from New York City — opened despite not having the proper local permits and approvals. He has launched a lawsuit to halt its operations. The GEO group, which runs the centre in coordination with ICE, has denied his claims. It entered into an agreement with the federal government in February to run the Delaney Hall facility, under a 15-year contract valued at $1bn. Advertisement ‘Unjust arrest’ Local elected officials swiftly condemned the federal agents’ actions, with the state’s governor, Phil Murphy, writing on X that he was “outraged by the unjust arrest” of Baraka. Murphy called the mayor an “exemplary public servant who has always stood up for our most vulnerable mayors” and appealed for his release. The governor noted that New Jersey had previously passed a law banning private immigration detention centres in the state, a Democratic stronghold, although it was partially struck down by a federal court in 2023. An appeal is ongoing. Baraka, who is running in next month’s Democratic primary for governor, has been an outspoken critic of the Trump administration’s immigration policies. He struck a defiant tone against the Trump administration in January, after ICE raided businesses in the city he leads. “Newark will not stand by idly while people are being unlawfully terrorised,” he said at the time. Adblock test (Why?)
Church must bring light to world’s ‘dark nights’: Pope Leo at first mass
The new head of the Catholic Church will be formally installed as pope at a mass on May 18, the Vatican says. Pope Leo XIV has promised to make the Catholic Church a balm for the world’s “dark nights”, as he celebrated his first mass as pontiff less than 24 hours after being elected. Sixty-nine-year-old Leo, the former Cardinal Robert Prevost and the first American pope, delivered the Mass on Friday, flanked by cardinals in the Vatican City’s Sistine Chapel. The new head of the Catholic Church was elected by fellow cardinals on Thursday, following Pope Francis’s death, and has become the first US pontiff in the church’s 2,000-year history. Leo, who now leads the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics, acknowledged that the Christian faith is sometimes “considered absurd” and the preserve of “the weak and unintelligent”. “A lack of faith is often tragically accompanied by the loss of meaning in life, the neglect of mercy, appalling violations of human dignity, the crisis of the family and so many other wounds that afflict our society,” he said at the mass, adorned in simple white and gold clothes. He also warned that Jesus cannot be “reduced to a kind of charismatic leader or superman”. Advertisement “This is true not only among non-believers, but also among many baptised Christians, who thus end up living, at this level, in a state of practical atheism,” he said. The new pontiff said he would seek to serve as the “faithful administrator” for the Church as a whole. Leo will be formally installed as pope at a mass on May 18 and will preside over his first general audience on May 21, the Vatican said, with world and religious leaders invited to his formal launch of the papacy. Pope Francis’s inauguration in 2013 attracted a crowd of about 200,000 people. The new pope will also leave senior Vatican officials in their roles for the time being, giving him time to decide before making appointments, the Vatican said. The pope was elected at the end of a two-day conclave that wrapped up on Thursday evening when white smoke billowed from the chimney of the Sistine Chapel. Francis, who died last month at the age of 88, leaves Leo to inherit a number of major challenges, ranging from a budget shortfall to divisions about whether the Church should be more welcoming towards the LGBTQ community and divorcees, and should let women play a greater role in its affairs. Leo was born in Chicago but spent two decades as a missionary in Peru. Before his election, US cardinals were largely written off as papal contenders because of a widespread assumption that the global Church could not be run by a superpower pope. However, since Leo also holds Peruvian citizenship, it is understood that he has knowledge of both the West and the Global South. Advertisement Adblock test (Why?)
Canadian unemployment rate hits six-month high amid US-imposed tariffs
Statistics Canada showed an unemployment rate of 6.9 percent, with most cuts in the manufacturing sector. Canada’s unemployment jumped to its highest level since November as United States President Donald Trump’s imposed tariffs affect the export-dependent economy. Statistics Canada showed a 0.2 percent increase for the month of April, bringing the country’s unemployment rate to 6.9 percent, according to its report released on Friday. The 6.9 figure matched November unemployment, which was an eight-year high outside of the pandemic era. The agency pointed to the effect tariffs imposed by the US had on the country’s manufacturing sector, which lost 31,000 jobs on a monthly basis. The wholesale, retail and trade sector saw 27,000 jobs cut. Employment in the public sector increased by 23,000 or up 0.5 percent in April, following three months of little change, especially due to increased temporary hiring for the federal election that took place on April 28. The average hourly wage growth of permanent employees, a metric closely watched by the Canadian central bank to gauge inflationary trends, was at 3.5 percent in April, unchanged since March. Advertisement Overall, the employment number was largely flat with minimal gains of net 7,400 jobs in April, it said – slightly higher than analyst expectations at 6.8 percent. This was in contrast to a loss of 32,600 jobs the prior month. The employment rate, or the proportion of the working-age population that is employed, was at 60.8 percent in April, following a decline of 0.2 percentage points in March. This was a six-month low, the statistics agency said. The employment rate had been depressed for most of 2023 and 2024 as population growth outpaced employment gains. However, since February, population growth has not been very high but employment gains have slowed. “People who were unemployed continued to face more difficulties finding work in April than a year earlier,” StatsCan said, adding that among those who were unemployed in March, 61 percent remained unemployed in April – almost four percentage points higher than the same period last year. Major hit coming Trump’s tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminium in March and automobiles in April, along with import duties on a broad range of products with various reductions and exemptions, have affected businesses and households. The Bank of Canada has warned that growth would take a major hit in the coming months as exports fall, prices increase, hiring drops and layoffs accelerate. It has said it will act decisively if the economy needs urgent support. “Overall, we are seeing a job market that was weak heading into the trade war, now looking like it could soon buckle. Today’s report supports the case for a Bank of Canada cut in June,” Ali Jaffery, senior economist at CIBC Capital Markets, told the Reuters news agency. Advertisement Adblock test (Why?)
Who are the armed groups India accuses Pakistan of backing?
Tensions are higher between India and Pakistan than they have been in decades as the two countries trade blame for drone attacks on each other’s territory over the past few days. At the heart of the dispute is what India claims is Pakistan’s support for armed separatist groups operating in Kashmir, a region disputed between the two countries. An armed group called The Resistance Front (TRF) claimed responsibility for the Pahalgam attack in Indian-administered Kashmir last month in which 26 people were killed. India alleges that TRF is an offshoot of another Pakistan-based armed group, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and has blamed Pakistan for supporting such groups. Pakistan has denied this. It condemned the attack in April and called for an independent investigation. Here is more about who the armed groups are and the major attacks they’ve claimed or been blamed for. The TRF emerged in 2019 following the Indian government’s suspension of Article 370 of the Indian Constitution, stripping Indian-administered Kashmir of its semi-autonomous status. Advertisement However, the group was not widely known before the Pahalgam attack, which it took responsibility for in April via the Telegram messaging app, on which it said it was opposed to the granting of residency permits to “outsiders”. Since the repeal of Article 370, non-Kashmiris have been granted residency permits to settle in Indian-administered Kashmir. This has stoked fears that the Indian government is trying to change the demographics of Kashmir, whose population is nearly all Muslim. Unlike other armed rebel groups in Kashmir, the TRF does not have an Islamic name. However, the Indian government maintains that it is an offshoot of, or a front for, Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-based armed group whose name means “Army of the Pure”. In 2020, TRF started claiming responsibility for minor attacks, including some targeted killings. TRF recruits included rebels from different splinter rebel groups. Indian security agents say they have arrested multiple TRF members since then. According to Indian government records, most armed fighters killed in gunfights in Kashmir were affiliated with the TRF in 2022. The LeT, which calls for the “liberation” of Indian-administered Kashmir, was founded around 1990 by Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, who is also known as Hafiz Saeed. In 2008, armed gunmen opened fire on civilians at several sites in Mumbai, India, killing 166 people. Ajmal Kasab, the only attacker captured alive, said the attackers were members of LeT. Saeed denied any involvement in that attack, however. Kasab was executed by India in 2012. Advertisement India also blamed Pakistani intelligence agencies for the attack. While Pakistan conceded that the attack may have been partly planned on Pakistani soil, it maintained that its government and intelligence agencies were not involved. According to the United Nations, LeT was also involved in a 2001 attack on India’s parliament and a 2006 attack on Mumbai commuter trains that killed 189 people. On May 7, India launched missile attacks on several cities in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. One of these cities was Muridke in the Punjab province. India claims that Muridke was the location of the headquarters of the Jamat-ud-Dawa, a charity organisation that New Delhi insists is a front for the LeT. Last week, the Indian army claimed it had struck LeT’s Markaz Taiba camp in Muridke. The army also claimed Kasab had been trained at this camp. Pakistan says LeT has been banned, however. Following an attack on Indian-administered Kashmir’s Pulwama in 2019, Pakistan also reimposed a lapsed ban on Jamat-ud-Dawa. Saeed was arrested in 2019 and is in the custody of the Pakistani government, serving a 31-year prison sentence after being convicted in two “terror financing” cases. Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM), or “The Army of Muhammad”, was formed around 2000 by Masood Azhar, who had been released from Indian prison in 1999. Azhar, who had been arrested on “terrorism” charges, was released in exchange for 155 hostages being held by hijackers of an Indian Airlines plane. Azhar previously fought under the banner of a group called Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, which calls for Kashmir to be united with Pakistan, and has been linked to al-Qaeda. Advertisement According to the UN Security Council, JeM has also had links with al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and the Taliban. Pakistan banned JeM in 2002 after the group, alongside LeT, was blamed for an attack on the Indian parliament in 2001. The British-born Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, who was convicted of killing US journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002, was also a member of JeM. Pearl was the Wall Street Journal’s South Asia bureau chief. However, a 2011 report released by the Pearl Project at Georgetown University following its own investigation claimed that Pearl had not been murdered by Sheikh. The report instead alleged that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind behind the September 11, 2001 attacks, was responsible. In 2021, a panel of three judges at Pakistan’s Supreme Court ordered Sheikh’s release. Despite the ban, Indian authorities claim the group continues to operate in Bahawalpur, in Pakistan’s Punjab province. On May 7, the Indian army claimed its strikes had also targeted the headquarters of JeM there. In 2019, JeM claimed a suicide bomb attack that killed 40 Indian paramilitary soldiers in Pulwama in Indian-administered Kashmir. Azhar has been arrested by Pakistani authorities twice, but was released and has never been charged. He has since disappeared from the public eye and his current whereabouts are not known. Hizbul-ul-Mujahideen Hizbul-ul-Mujahideen (HuM), or “Party of Holy Fighters” was formed in 1989 by Kashmiri separatist leader Muhammad Ahsan Dar. The group emerged out of the 1988 protests in Kashmir against the Indian government. The group, also called Hizb, has become the largest Indigenous rebel group based in Indian-administered Kashmir. Advertisement Rather than calling for independence, HuM calls for the whole of Kashmir to be allowed to accede to Pakistan. The group has a huge network of fighters in Shopian, Kulgam and Pulwama districts in the south of Indian-administered Kashmir. In 2016, the killing of popular HuM commander Burhan Wani triggered widespread protests in Indian-administered Kashmir, resulting in a crackdown by
Who is Pope Leo XIV, the first US pontiff?
The white smoke has billowed, and the Catholic church has a new pope – and he’s American. Cardinals at the Vatican elected the Chicago-born Robert Prevost on Thursday to lead the church, succeeding Pope Francis, who died last month. Prevost took the name Leo XIV as he became the first pontiff from the United States. “Peace be with you,” were his first words as pope. Here is a look at the new pope and his journey from the US Midwest to the top of the church of 1.4 billion people. What is Pope Leo’s background? Born in Chicago in 1955 to parents of French, Italian and Spanish descent, Leo’s father was a school principal and his mother had degrees in library science and education and was deeply involved in the St Mary of the Assumption that the family attended. Last week, the Chicago Sun-Times cited Leo’s friends and fellow church goers as saying that he was dedicated to his faith and path to priesthood from a young age. Leo graduated with a degree in mathematics from the University of Villanova in Pennsylvania in 1977. He also studied religion at the Catholic Theological Union of Chicago. Advertisement In 1982, he received a doctorate in church law from the Pontifical University of St Thomas Aquinas in Rome before being sent to serve in a Catholic mission in Peru. In the subsequent decades, he rose through the ranks of the church as he bounced between Chicago and Peru. Pope Francis made him the Bishop of Chiclayo, Peru, in 2015 before giving him greater responsibilities within the church. That same year, Prevost also became a Peruvian citizen. In 2023, he became prefect of the Dicastery for Bishops, a key Catholic administrative body, based in Rome. What is an Augustinian? In his first public remarks as pope, Leo introduced himself as an Augustinian – an order within the Catholic Church that follows the teachings of St Augustine of Hippo, which emphasise love, harmony, humility and dedication to the spiritual community of the church. The term also describes individuals who belong to religious orders, and Pope Leo is just one of 34 popes out of 266 to have done so. Such orders are a community of Catholics, which can include priests, nuns, monks and or lay people, dedicated to a particular type of mission and spirituality. Pope Francis was the first pope from the Jesuit religious order ever, and the first in more than a century and a half to come from any religious order. What did the pope say in his first speech? Leo suggested that he would follow in Francis’s footsteps. The late pope was largely seen as a transformational figure who took the church in a progressive direction and focused on promoting the rights of the poor and marginalised. Advertisement “Let us keep in our ears the weak but always brave voice of Pope Francis, who blessed Rome – the pope who blessed Rome and the world that day on the morning of Easter,” Leo said. In his final Easter message, days before he died, Francis called for peace and disarmament. Why Leo? When it comes to popes, names matter. New pontiffs often choose new names as tribute to a saint or predecessor. For example, Pope Francis took the name of St Francis of Assisi, who renounced material goods and dedicated his life to the poor. The last Leo to lead the church, Pope Leo XIII, championed the rights of workers. “Up until that time, the church’s hierarchy tended to be identified with the upper class, and so Leo XIII put a redirection on the church, and certainly many of the popes since that time have built on that,” Father James Bretzke, professor of theology at John Carroll University, told Al Jazeera. What are his politics? Church leaders are not politicians, but religion is intertwined with public affairs. Leo has given hints of his politics over the years, particularly in advocating for the rights of migrants. In 2015, Leo shared an article by Cardinal Timothy Dolan, criticising then-candidate Donald Trump’s anti-immigration proposals. The column was titled: Why Donald Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric is so problematic. In February, he again appeared to criticise the Trump administration’s immigration policies, taking aim at Vice President JD Vance’s argument that people should love others close to them more than strangers. Advertisement Leo shared an article proclaiming: “JD Vance is wrong: Jesus doesn’t ask us to rank our love for others.” Where does he stand on female priests? The debate over allowing women to be priests has been raging within the Catholic Church, but Leo does not seem to be in favour of the change. “Something that needs to be said also is that ordaining women – and there’s been some women that have said this, interestingly enough – ‘clericalising women’ doesn’t necessarily solve a problem, it might make a new problem,” he told reporters in 2023. What has he said about sex abuse scandals? Leo’s Augustinian Order has faced criticism over transparency in dealing with sex abuse cases that have rocked the church. In 2023, Leo called for focusing on the victims when it comes to this issue. “There are places where good work has already been done for years, and the rules are being put into practice. At the same time, I believe that there is still much to learn,” he told Vatican News in 2023. “I am talking about the urgency and responsibility of accompanying victims.” How does he compare to other popes, age-wise? At 69, Leo is younger than his past two predecessors when they became pontiffs. Francis was 76. Benedict XVI was 78. But he is older than John Paul II, who was 58 when he became pope – one of the youngest pontiffs in modern history. What does he do in his spare time? He likes tennis, spending time with friends and “meeting a broad range of different people”. “I consider myself quite the amateur tennis player. Since leaving Peru, I have
Student protester Mohsen Mahdawi unveils legal defence fund for immigrants
Student protest leader Mohsen Mahdawi has appeared at the Vermont state house to help launch a legal defence fund to help immigrants like himself who are facing deportation hearings. His appearance on Thursday comes nearly a week after Mahdawi himself was released from immigration detention, after spending nearly 16 days in custody for his pro-Palestinian advocacy. The administration of President Donald Trump has sought to deport Mahdawi and other student activists for their demonstrations, citing a Cold War-era law that allows the removal of foreign nationals deemed to have adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States. Though released on bail, Mahdawi continues to face deportation proceedings. He reflected on his time behind bars at a news conference where he and state officials announced the Vermont Immigration Legal Defense Fund. “ I was unjustly kidnapped or detained, if you want to go by the legal term,” Mahdawi said with a wry smile. “And without the support and the love that I received from the people of Vermont – Vermonters and the representatives of the people in Vermont – I may not have been here today among you.” Mohsen Mahdawi reflects on his time in immigration detention as he announces the launch of the Vermont Immigration Legal Defense Fund [Alex Driehaus/AP Photo] Mahdawi entered the national spotlight as a leader in the student protests at Columbia University, an Ivy League school in New York City that has been at the forefront of pro-Palestinian advocacy. Advertisement A legal permanent resident of the US, Mahdawi himself is Palestinian and grew up in the Far’a refugee camp in the occupied West Bank. He has publicly described the oppression he said he experienced there, including the deaths of family members and friends at the hands of the Israeli military. Since Israel launched its war in Gaza on October 7, 2023, Mahdawi has been outspoken in his opposition to the military campaign. As an undergraduate at Columbia, he helped found student groups like Dar: The Palestinian Student Society and Columbia University Apartheid Divest. The latter has taken a lead role in protesting ties between the school and organisations involved with Israel and its military activities. But President Trump has described such protests as “illegal” and pledged to crack down on non-citizen participants. On March 8, Mahdawi’s colleague at Dar, Mahmoud Khalil, was the first student protester to be taken into custody for his role in the nationwide student protest movement. Others have since been detained, including Tufts University doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk, who supporters say did little more than write an op-ed about the war in Gaza. Just over a month later, on April 14, Mahdawi arrived at an appointment in Colchester, Vermont, ostensibly for his US citizenship application. Immigration officers, however, were waiting on site to arrest him, and he was led away in handcuffs. Mahdawi was accused of no crime. The Trump administration, however, has accused him of harassing Jewish students and leading “pro-Hamas protests”, though it has not offered evidence to support those allegations. Advertisement “His rhetoric on the war in Israel proves his terrorist sympathies,” a recent document from the Department of Homeland Security said. Mahdawi’s detention galvanised Vermont politicians on both sides of the political spectrum. Governor Phil Scott, a Republican, called on the federal government to release any evidence it had that Mahdawi was a threat to national security and denounced the surreptitious manner of his arrest. “What cannot be justified is how this action was undertaken. Law enforcement officers in this country should not operate in the shadows or hide behind masks,” Scott wrote in a press release. “The power of the executive branch of the federal government is immense, but it is not infinite, and it is not absolute.” Meanwhile, Senator Peter Welch, a Democrat, visited Mahdawi behind bars at Vermont’s Northwest State Correctional Facility in an effort to raise awareness about his case. Ultimately, on April 30, a federal district court deemed that Mahdawi was no flight risk and released him on bail, warning that the government’s actions could be interpreted as an attempt to “shut down debate”. In his public appearance on Thursday, Mahdawi thanked his fellow Vermonters for showing him support and called on the state to act as an example to others. “Home is where you feel safe and loved. And those who surround you, they are your people, and you are my people,” he told the crowd. “This is a message of hope and light that our humanity is much larger than what divide us. Our humanity is much larger than unjust laws. Our humanity is much larger than being Democrat or Republican, Black or white, in a city or in rural area.” Advertisement Mahdawi also described how, when he was in detention, he saw an undocumented farm worker praying on his knees each night before going to sleep. “ I think his prayers have been answered today by this initiative,” Mahdawi said of the legal defence fund. The fund’s organisers said they hope to raise $1m to “build a lasting safety net” for immigrant families in Vermont. That sum, they said, would fund training and hiring legal staff to respond to what they described as an immigration “crisis”. “Vermont is going to take action to ensure no one faces deportation, detention or family separation alone and unrepresented,” said State Senator Kesha Ram Hinsdale. “This will be embedded in our civic infrastructure in a way we have not achieved before and we hope will have long-term benefits beyond this immediate crisis.” Vermont State Treasurer Mike Pieciak added that the fund would ensure justice is not solely reserved for those who can afford it. “This effort is not about politics. This effort is about principle,” he said. “The fundamental right to due process means very little if somebody cannot access legal representation, especially when they’re navigating a system as complex and as high stakes as the US immigration law.” Adblock test (Why?)
‘Leone!’ Vatican crowds hail Leo XIV as new pope of the Catholic Church
Vatican City – It felt like the square could talk in one voice: “Leone! Leone! Leone!” Thousands of people in St Peter’s Square chanted in chorus the name adopted by Robert Prevost as he ascended to the papacy on Thursday: Leo XIV. Just an hour and a half earlier, white smoke had billowed from the chimney of the Sistine Chapel, announcing that a conclave of cardinals had elected a new leader for the world’s 1.4 billion Catholics. Now, it was time to meet Pope Leo himself. A solemn silence fell across the square. The faithful waited to hear the pope’s first message, which would set the tone for his papacy. “Peace be upon you,” said Leo XIV, appearing on the central balcony of St Peter’s Basilica. He proceeded to repeat a blessing uttered by his late predecessor, Pope Francis, just weeks earlier: “God loves us, God loves everyone, and evil will not prevail. We are in the hands of God.” It was a closely watched moment, with red-hatted cardinals poking out of nearby windows to catch their first glimpse at the newly minted pontiff. Advertisement Pope Leo XIV was elected on the second day of the conclave, and his opening remarks as leader signalled continuity with Francis, who died on April 21 at age 88. But experts say he is likely to strike a middle path, between furthering Francis’s inclusive agenda and embracing Vatican tradition. “Peace” was one of the most used words in his brief speech — a choice meant to echo the words that Jesus pronounced after Easter, as Vatican spokesperson Matteo Bruni explained during a news briefing. Leo XIV called on Catholics to seek “a disarmed peace and a disarming peace” through “dialogue” and “building bridges”, in a brief speech heavy with themes of unity. “Bravo! That is what we need!” one audience member in the square shouted as the new pope spoke. Another, 29-year-old Kasper Mihalak from Denmark, was squeezed in the middle of the crowd hoping to catch a glimpse of the first North American pope. “I am really excited. Cardinal Prevost, now Leo XIV — it’s gonna be amazing! He said a lot about peace during his speech. I think the world now really needs it,” Mihalak said. Rosaria Venuto could hardly hold back her tears. Early in the morning, she picked up her two children and drove four hours from Ascoli Satriano, a small town in the southern Italian province of Apulia, to be in St Peter’s Square. “I am deeply moved to have the chance to be here and live through this joy and be a small part of this historical event,” she said. Crowds gather below the balcony of St Peter’s Basilica, where Pope Leo XIV made his first appearance [Alkis Konstantinidis/Reuters] His own man Born in Chicago, a midwestern city in the United States, Leo XIV spent more than two decades in Peru, where he acquired dual citizenship. Advertisement There, he worked in some of Peru’s poorest areas, and he eventually became the bishop of Chiclayo, in the country’s agricultural north. Then, in 2023, Pope Francis appointed him to lead a powerful office that manages bishops across the world. Phil Pullella, a Vatican expert who has covered the papacy for more than four decades, said that background offers a degree of continuity with Francis, who hailed from Argentina and advocated against poverty. “He knows about poverty in Latin America,” Pullella said of Leo XIV. “So, he’s not the same thing as if they had elected some cardinal of New York, for example.” That continuity was likely appreciated by conservative camps at the Vatican, as well as liberal-leaning ones, Pullella added. “He comes from the wealthy world, but he witnessed firsthand the problems of the Global South in a poor country,” he said. Still, Pullella noted that the way Leo XIV dressed showed that “he is going to be his own man”. Instead of the simple white cassock that Pope Francis wore in 2013 when he was elected, Leo XIII added a traditional red cape over his vest, symbolising the spiritual and temporal powers of his office. “In a sense, he is going back a little bit to that kind of tradition,” Pullella said. “He would not have been elected had he not had the votes of the conservative bloc.” Nuns at the Vatican react with glee to the announcement of the newly elected Pope Leo XIV on May 8 [Amanda Perobelli/Reuters] A unifying figure Leo XIV’s election came as a surprise to many. Many observers were betting on a new pope by nightfall, but few expected only three rounds of voting. The crowd was stunned when white smoke started to pour out of the tiny chimney by early evening, at around 6:09pm local time (16:00 GMT). That was the signal that — of the 133 cardinals under the age of 80 who were eligible to vote — a candidate had received the two-thirds majority needed to become pope. Advertisement This year’s conclave had the distinction of being the most international in the Vatican’s history: The participating cardinals hailed from more than 70 countries, representing divergent views for the Catholic Church’s future. The diversity was part of the legacy of Pope Francis, who appointed cardinals from underrepresented countries like Laos and Haiti to broaden the church’s global appeal. Francis spent 12 years as head of the Catholic Church, shaking up the establishment by adopting a distinct style and tone, focused on austerity and advocacy for marginalised populations. The late pope’s efforts caused excitement among reformers but also dismay among conservatives, who accused him of diluting the Church’s teachings. Experts say that led to a deep polarisation within the church, with some members criticising Francis for decentralising the church’s authority. Those experts point out that Leo XIV’s experience in the Roman Curia — the church’s government — was likely a selling point among conservative conclave voters looking for stability in the years ahead. Members of the Catholic Church cheer the election
Israel retrofitting DJI commercial drones to bomb and surveil Gaza
The Israeli military has been altering commercial drones to carry bombs and surveil people in Gaza, an investigation by Al Jazeera’s Sanad verification agency has found. According to Sanad, drones manufactured by the Chinese tech giant DJI have been used to attack hospitals and civilian shelters and to surveil Palestinian prisoners being forced to act as human shields for heavily armoured Israeli soldiers. This is not the first time DJI drones have been modified and used by armies. There were similar reports about both sides of the Russia-Ukraine war in 2022. At the time, DJI suspended all sales to both countries and introduced software modifications that restricted the areas where its drones could be used and how high they could fly. However, DJI has not stopped selling drones to Israel. A DJI Avata captured in Gaza [Handout/Saraya al-Quds] Israel’s use of DJI drones The Israeli army’s use of DJI drones is not new. By 2018, DJI drones were reportedly in extensive use across numerous divisions in the Israeli military. The Israeli campaign group Hamushim found evidence that Israeli military-trained operators were using DJI’s Matrice 600 model to drop tear gas on civilian protesters during the following year’s Great March of Return in Gaza. Despite their previous deployment by the Israeli military, their lethal use against civilians and protected targets in Gaza, as documented in this investigation, is unprecedented. Al Jazeera has reached out to Israeli authorities to request comment on the findings of this investigation but has received no response by time of publication. A DJI Matrice 300 captured in Gaza [Handout/Saraya al-Quds] Sanad has documented several DJI drones that have been adapted for military use. Advertisement However, it is the powerful DJI Agras drone, developed for agricultural use, that is the most significant. According to its manufacturers, the DJI Agras can carry a substantial payload and is capable of precision flight. As Sanad’s investigation shows, it can also be used to deliver an explosive payload to targets beyond the reach of conventional military forces. In addition to the DJI Agras, the DJI Mavic has been used by the Israeli military across Gaza for reconnaissance and target acquisition. Similarly, the compact DJI Avata drone, designed for recreational filming, has been repurposed by the Israeli military to navigate and map the intricate tunnel networks beneath Gaza. Israeli soldiers equip a DJI Agras drone with explosives [tamerqdh on X] Attacks on northern Gaza By late 2024, Israel had laid siege to Gaza’s north, pushing the population to the brink of famine and imposing conditions described as “apocalyptic” by United Nations observers. Residents and humanitarian organisations reported an alarming number of what appeared to be civilian drones armed with explosives. In an incident documented by displaced civilians, footage shared on July 17, 2024, shows a DJI Agras drone dropping a bomb onto the IHH Turkish charity’s building in Jabalia, northern Gaza, less than 100 metres (330ft) from a school serving as a shelter and aid distribution centre. A DJI Agras drone drops a bomb on a building next to a school used as a shelter [hamza20300 on Telegram] In November in Beit Lahia, northern Gaza, a DJI Agras drone dropped a bomb in a residential neighbourhood where civilians had fled after Israeli shelling of a UN-operated school-turned-shelter. Advertisement People who witnessed the bombing told Sanad the attack seemed calculated to instil fear. A DJI Agras drone drops a bomb on residential buildings [moneer._20 on Instagram] Surveillance and urban warfare Beyond direct attacks, Israeli-modified DJI drones have been used extensively for surveillance and tactical operations throughout Gaza. An Israeli soldier’s TikTok account shows him operating a DJI drone using first-person-view goggles. The DJI headset is compatible with drones like the Mavic and Avata [amitmaymoni via TikTok] In a further incident, footage obtained by Al Jazeera Arabic from one Israeli drone shows a DJI Avata helping to track an unnamed Palestinian being used by heavily armed Israeli soldiers as a human shield – an illegal practice under international law – in Shujaiya in December 2023. The individual is seen opening the school’s doors to make sure there were no Palestinian fighters inside, closely monitored by another drone that captured the entire operation. Israeli drone footage secured by Al Jazeera shows a second, DJI Avata, drone tracking a Palestinian detainee being used as a human shield to clear a school [Sanad/Al Jazeera] DJI double standards: Gaza vs Ukraine In 2022, in response to complaints from Ukrainian officials that DJI was sharing critical data with their Russian adversaries, the drone manufacturer suspended all sales to its retail partners in both countries. DJI explained the move: “We will never accept any use of our products to cause harm, and we will continue striving to improve the world with our work.” Despite evidence of DJI drones being weaponised by the Israeli military in Gaza, DJI has had no such response. Responding to direct inquiries from Sanad, DJI said: “Our products are for peaceful and civilian use only, and we absolutely deplore and condemn the use of [DJI] products to cause harm anywhere in the world.” Advertisement A subsequent direct query asked if it plans “to halt sales in Israel or implement measures similar to those taken in the Russia-Ukraine conflict”. But DJI did not respond to the query not has it undertaken any measures to halt sales or impose software restrictions on where drones can fly over Gaza, allowing continued military deployments of their drones by the Israeli military. Adblock test (Why?)