Defending champion Novak Djokovic knocked out of US Open
Alexei Popyrin stuns the world No 2, who will end the season without a Grand Slam title for the first time since 2017. Defending champion Novak Djokovic suffered a major upset at the US Open, losing to Alexei Popyrin, who ended the Serbian’s bid for a record-breaking 25th Grand Slam title. Australian Popyrin defeated Djokovic 6-4, 6-4, 2-6, 6-4 in the third round at Flushing Meadows on Friday. “I spent a lot of energy winning the gold, and I did arrive to New York just not feeling fresh mentally and physically,” Djokovic told reporters. He won the gold medal in the men’s singles at the Paris Olympics earlier this month. Popyrin, who lost to Djokovic at both the Australian Open and Wimbledon this year, raised his arms in triumph as he reached the round of 16 of a major for the first time. “Third time lucky I guess,” Popyrin said in an on-court interview. Djokovic, 37, was uncharacteristically sloppy, with 14 double faults – a record for him in a Grand Slam match – while his 25-year-old opponent smacked 50 winners. The world No 2 had five break point chances in the opener but failed to convert any of them, while Popyrin broke serve on his first opportunity for a 5-4 lead and won the first set. Popyrin broke again in the second when Djokovic’s volley landed wide for a 3-2 advantage and took control of the match with a perfectly executed serve and volley to take the second set. Alexei Popyrin will next try to reach his first Grand Slam quarterfinal by getting past Frances Tiafoe [Julia Nikhinson/AP Photo] Djokovic showed some life in the third, but the comeback was shortlived as Popyrin crushed a ferocious forehand winner for a break of serve and 3-2 lead in the fourth. “I have played some of the worst tennis I have ever played, honestly,” Djokovic said. “Serving – by far – the worst ever.” His defeat followed the shocking exit of the 2022 champion, Carlos Alcaraz. Alcaraz entered the US Open as the tournament favourite having won the French Open and Wimbledon, but was eliminated by 74th-ranked Botic van de Zandschulp 6-1, 7-5, 6-4 on Thursday. It’s only the third time in the Open era that two of the top three men’s seeds at the US Open crash out before the fourth round, the other such instances in 1973 and 2000. “It was just an awful match for me,” Djokovic said. “I wasn’t playing even close to my best. It’s not good to be in that kind of state where you feel OK physically, and of course you’re motivated because it’s a Grand Slam, but you just are not able to find your game. “That’s it. The game is falling apart, and I guess you have to accept that tournaments like this happen.” Djokovic was attempting to become the first player in tennis history with 25 Grand Slam singles titles. Instead, after knee surgery in June, he finishes a year without claiming at least one major championship for the first time since 2017. Djokovic has reached the US Open final 10 times, and won in 2011, 2015, 2018 and 2023. Popyrin will now try to reach his first Grand Slam quarterfinal by getting past Frances Tiafoe, who advanced on Friday with a 4-6, 7-5, 6-7 (5), 6-4, 6-3 win over Ben Shelton in a matchup between two Americans. “If he serves well, plays well, he can beat anybody,” Djokovic said about Popyrin. “Look, Alcaraz is out. I’m out. Some big upsets. The draw is opening up.” Adblock test (Why?)
The danger of ‘pro-EU’ Euroscepticism in the Western Balkans
Over the past few years, attitudes towards accession to the European Union in Western Balkan candidate states have been increasingly negative. In countries like Serbia, the desire to join the union has slumped to 40 percent from 57 percent in 2014; in North Macedonia – to 68 percent from 84 percent in 2012. While frustration over the slow pace of the process and various challenges along the way may be one of the main drivers of this trend, there is another, largely overlooked one: parts of the civil society in these countries, which largely identifies as pro-EU, have started to espouse what really are anti-EU stances. Indeed, there has been an inexplicable alignment of views between proponents of democracy and European values and their ideological opponents – those who support the authoritarian tendencies of Serbia’s Aleksandar Vučić, North Macedonia’s Hristijan Mickovski and Albania’s Edi Rama. This has taken place gradually and through the promotion of seemingly neutral ideas, such as regional projects of EU-like integration, the need for stability and respect for national sovereignty, and criticism of anti-democratic forces within the EU. Over the past decade, various ideas about how to approach regional integration have circulated among civil society actors in the Western Balkans. While there is nothing wrong with proposing and endorsing such initiatives, some of them have been pushed as a priority over EU accession. Some have argued that regional integration needs to take place first to “prepare” Western Balkan membership candidates to join the Union. The problem with this argument is that regional integration becomes a justification for indefinitely delaying serious action on EU accession. A case in point is the “Open Balkan” initiative launched in 2019 and championed by Vučić and Rama. Its declared aim was the economic integration of Serbia, Albania and North Macedonia, through increased trade, mobility of citizens, improved access to labour markets, and others. Despite the hefty goals of “Open Balkans” and inspirational declarations made by the leaders involved, little progress has been made on its implementation. While some civil society actors have criticised the initiative, others have continued to push the regional integration mantra, failing to see the danger it poses to delaying indefinitely EU accession and promoting Eurosceptism among the general population. Another idea that has crept into civil society in the Western Balkans is that the EU accession has led to internal divisions and instability and has infringed on the national sovereignty of candidate countries. This idea has been especially popular in North Macedonia where the negotiating framework for accession has been perceived to hurt the national interest due to special conditions imposed by Bulgaria, regarding the Bulgarian minority in the country. This has led some public supporters of EU membership to call for “pausing” the accession process until national cohesion and stability are regained. Like regional integration, promoting the idea that candidate countries need to “fix themselves” first implies that EU accession will be postponed indefinitely and may not be pursued at all. Finally, there has been the assertion that EU accession is driven by or empowers anti-democratic forces. This may appear confusing to some, so let me illustrate. At a 2023 event held in Skopje which I attended, a think tank researcher presented a study which emphasised that autocrats like Hungary’s Viktor Orbán want Western Balkan countries to join the EU. The takeaway from this presentation was that since bogeyman Orbán wants us in – irrespective of the fact that someone like Germany’s Olaf Scholz wants us in too – we should be careful about pursuing EU membership. Others have argued in papers and at conferences I have attended that aspects of the EU enlargement process itself encourages autocratic and anti-democratic tendencies. The implication is that accession should be delayed indefinitely supposedly in the name of democracy: “not to reward autocrats like Vučić”. There has also been vocal criticism of the EU: that it is “undemocratic” and “unprincipled” in its treatment of candidates. My most recent media monitoring study of the region of Western Balkans shows that this discourse coincides almost perfectly with the pro-Kremlin narratives on the question of EU enlargement in the region. This Euroscepticism creeping through the civil society in the Western Balkans may be wrapped up in “pro-democracy” rhetoric but it is essentially the same as the one espoused by leaders with autocratic tendencies in Serbia, North Macedonia and Albania. The EU is not a perfect organisation and there are legitimate concerns and reasons for criticism of its track record. However, by espousing Eurosceptic rhetoric, calling for a “pause” in accession efforts, and spreading mistrust within the general public towards the EU, self-declared EU-philes are helping forces that would like to see the Western Balkan enlargement sabotaged. We must be realistic about the current geopolitical environment. The idea of absolute sovereignty – which excludes geopolitical alignment with the major regional powers – is a political unicorn. The idea of nonalignment collapsed with the dissolution of Yugoslavia, and its resurrection in the present circumstances is unlikely. Countries like North Macedonia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Albania face a geopolitical choice. The EU may have its problems, but with its structures and organisation, it offers geopolitical stability – something that alignment with Russia and China does not. This has become even clearer after the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. Going down the Eurosceptic path at this time is dangerous. Pulling out of the accession process would set a precedent that would be destabilising to the regional and continental geopolitical equilibrium. No wonder Turkey is still at least formally an EU candidate country. Civil society actors would do well to consider the dangers of spreading “alternatives” to EU accession and undermining the public’s belief that this is the right path. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance. Adblock test (Why?)
Afghanistan is a US election issue. Will its refugees’ voices be heard?
Washington, DC – Nasrin will not be able to vote in the United States elections in November. Still, the 27-year-old has a message for the presidential candidates, on behalf of Afghans like herself who fled as the US withdrew its troops from Afghanistan in August 2021. “I really want them to hear us, especially to hear those voices that worked for the US,” Nasrin, who asked to use a pseudonym, told Al Jazeera. Friday marks three years since the last American soldiers left Afghanistan, ending a two-decade military presence that began with the toppling of the Taliban government in 2001. But the chaotic nature of the military withdrawal — and the swift reestablishment of Taliban rule — have cast a long shadow over US politics. A source of ongoing bipartisan criticism, the withdrawal has become a prominent talking point in the 2024 presidential race, with Democrats and Republicans exchanging blame for the lives lost during the troops’ departure. But Afghans like Nasrin say there is an important perspective lost in the election-year sparring: theirs. “This election is not only important for America. It’s also important for Afghans,” said Nasrin, who lives in the San Francisco Bay Area in California. “For Afghans who immigrated here and for Afghans in Afghanistan … especially the women, this election will have a huge impact.” A 2021 protest in Los Angeles called for an ‘open door’ policy for Afghan evacuees and expedited processing of immigration cases [File: Ringo HW Chiu/Reuters] Two parties, one controversy What happened in 2021 is a story that embroils the central players in this year’s presidential race. In 2020, the administration of Republican President Donald Trump reached a controversial agreement with the Taliban to withdraw all US forces from Afghanistan within 14 months. A few months later, Trump lost his bid for re-election. His successor, Democratic President Joe Biden, oversaw a mad-dash evacuation of US citizens, coalition allies and tens of thousands of vulnerable Afghans as the deadline loomed. By August 2021, the Taliban had swept across the country in a lightning offensive, reclaiming its former power. Its forces entered the Afghan capital Kabul on August 15. The last US plane flew out of the city on August 30. In those final days, a bomb attack killed about 170 Afghans hoping to enter the airport, as well as 13 members of the US military. Government investigators have blamed the administrations of both Biden and Trump for the chaotic situation: Trump for reaching an agreement seen as favouring the Taliban and Biden for moving forward with the plan without putting in safeguards to stop the Taliban. Trump has also faced criticism for limiting the pathways for Afghans to escape to the US. He is now, once again, the Republican candidate for president. Meanwhile, Biden’s vice president, Kamala Harris, is heading the Democratic ticket. A lingering failure But advocates say both parties must still confront an enduring dilemma: how to protect the hundreds of thousands of Afghans who fear repression under the Taliban. Many who were left behind are considered likely targets for the Taliban, especially if they worked for the US military or the US-backed government. Even among those who were evacuated, many have been left in perpetual uncertainty, with no clear path to US residency or citizenship. Others have found the legal pathways to the US too narrow and have sought more dangerous routes to enter the country. For her part, Nasrin said she worked as an interpreter for the US embassy in Kabul. After fleeing, she was able to become a US resident through a “Special Immigrant Visa” (SIV) programme designated for Afghans who worked for the US government. Another evacuee, who asked to be identified only as Nazanin, fled Kabul on an evacuation flight with her 16-year-old sister following the Taliban’s rise. She has since been granted asylum in the US, but she said she sees only broken promises from both parties as many other Afghans both in the US and in Afghanistan have been left in the lurch. “I don’t think Afghan voices are being heard by politicians,” she told Al Jazeera. “My message to the presidential candidates is that you do not represent the majority of the refugee society or Americans that I know or see their perspective on social media platforms and that your false promises are noted.” Inadequate immigration pathways Arash Azizzada — the executive director of Afghans for a Better Tomorrow, an advocacy group — said members of the Afghan community in the US, like him, feel a “sense of anger and disappointment” this election season “when we look at both candidates”. “We are feeling pretty invisible this election season,” he added. Azizzada’s group has spent the last three years pushing for more immigration pathways for those fleeing the Taliban, including an increase in special visas for Afghans who worked directly with the US and pathways to permanent residency for other evacuees. But little progress has been made, Azizzada explained. “It has been the hallmark of Biden’s presidency to consider anything related to Afghanistan radioactive,” Azizzada said. “And Democrats have gone through this election season with barely any mention of Afghanistan or the Afghan people.” That includes not mentioning the 160,000 Afghans who have been successfully relocated to the US since the withdrawal, something Azizzada argues could be framed as a victory for Democrats. The Biden administration has upscaled the processing of Special Immigrant Visa applications, which had all but ground to a halt under Trump. Still, as of March, 60,230 applicants had submitted all the required paperwork and were awaiting initial approval to move ahead with the process, according to the US State Department. Another 75,000 were also in the process of applying. The administration has also increased refugee processing for Afghans, with 11,168 refugees admitted so far in fiscal year 2024. That is up from approximately 6,500 admitted in fiscal year 2023 and just over 1,600 in the immediate wake of the withdrawal, in fiscal year 2022. Critics nevertheless say legal pathways
Typhoon Shanshan winds cause havoc at Japan’s Fukuoka Airport
NewsFeed Video shows how strong winds brought by Typhoon Shanshan forced several airplanes to abort landings at Japan’s Fukuoka Airport. Several people have died as a result of storms and millions of people have been ordered to leave their homes. Published On 30 Aug 202430 Aug 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
Israeli forces inflict major damage in occupied West Bank
NewsFeed Much of Tulkarem in the occupied West Bank has reportedly lost water access due to an Israeli military assault that has inflicted widespread damage over several days in Palestinian cities. Published On 30 Aug 202430 Aug 2024 Adblock test (Why?)
New Zealand’s Maori King Tuheitia dies aged 69
Tributes pour in after the king’s death in hospital where he was recovering from heart surgery. New Zealand’s Maori Kiingi Tuheitia Pootatau Te Wherowhero VII has died at the age of 69. Aides for the king of the country’s Indigenous Maori people said he died in hospital on Friday. He had been recovering from heart surgery just days after celebrating the 18th anniversary of his coronation. “The death of Kiingi Tuheitia is a moment of great sadness,” a spokesperson said in a statement. “A chief who has passed to the great beyond. Rest in love.” The Kiingitanga – Maori King movement – was founded in 1858 with the aim of uniting New Zealand’s Indigenous Maori under a single sovereign. The position has significant political and symbolic weight, but no legal status. New Zealand media reported the king’s funeral was likely to take place next Thursday and that he would be buried alongside his mother, Queen Dame Te Atairangikaahu, and previous Maori kings on the sacred Taupiri Mountain. Tuheitia succeeded his mother in 2006 to become the seventh Kiingitanga monarch, although the position is not necessarily hereditary. New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon led the tributes as flags on government and public buildings were flown at half-mast. “Today, we mourn,” Luxon said in a statement from Tonga, where he is attending the Pacific Islands Forum. “His unwavering commitment to his people and his tireless efforts to uphold the values and traditions of the Kiingitanga have left an indelible mark on our nation. “I will remember his dedication to Aotearoa New Zealand, his commitment to mokopuna [young people], his passion for te ao Maori [customs], and his vision for a future where all people are treated with dignity and respect.” Britain’s King Charles III, New Zealand’s formal head of state, said he was “shocked” by the news, having recently spoken to King Tuheitia by phone. “My wife and I were profoundly saddened to learn of the death of Kiingi Tuheitia,” the king said in a statement. “I had the greatest pleasure of knowing Kiingi Tuheitia for decades. “He was deeply committed to forging a strong future for Maori and Aotearoa-New Zealand founded upon culture, traditions and healing, which he carried out with wisdom and compassion,” he said, using the country’s Maori and English-language names. There are some 900,000 Maori people in New Zealand, about 17 percent of the population. The Maori monarch has been a powerful voice on the legacy of colonialism. The arrival of Europeans in New Zealand plunged the country into a conflict that ended in the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi between the British and hundreds of Maori chiefs. The document is considered the country’s founding document and granted the Maori the same rights as British subjects and authority over “taonga” or treasures that can be intangible. The next king is likely to be chosen by the heads of tribes or iwi associated with the Kiingitanga at the end of next week’s tangihanga, or funeral rites, according to Radio New Zealand. The event is expected to last for at least five days. Adblock test (Why?)
Ukraine says US-made F-16 fighter jet crashed, killing pilot
The crash is the first involving in an F-16 since they began arriving in Ukraine late last month. Ukraine has announced that one of a handful of F-16 fighter jets given by its Western allies to fight Russia’s invasion crashed while repelling a major Russian aerial attack. The pilot was killed in the incident, which took place on Monday after Russia launched more than 200 missiles and drones in one of its biggest bombardments of the war. It is the first reported destruction of an F-16 in Ukraine, and comes just weeks after Kyiv began taking delivery of the planes. At least six of the aircraft are believed to have been delivered. “F-16 fighters of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were used to repel a missile attack on the territory of Ukraine by the Russian Federation, along with units of anti-aircraft missile troops,” the Ukrainian army said. It added that communication with the F-16 was lost as the planes approached their next target. “As it turned out later, the aircraft crashed, killing the pilot,” the military said. The statement did not name the pilot, but a unit of Ukraine’s air force said one of its pilots, Oleksiy Mes, had died in a crash on Monday. “On 26 August, while repelling a Russian massive combined missile and air strike, Oleksiy destroyed three cruise missiles and one attack drone,” Ukraine’s Western air command unit said. “Oleksiy saved Ukrainians from deadly Russian missiles. Unfortunately, at the cost of his own life,” it added. Investigation under way Mes, known by his call sign Moonfish, travelled to the US as part of Ukraine’s efforts to convince the United States and other NATO allies to send F-16s. When I met with Ukraine pilots Juice (left) and Moonfish (right) I had a sick feeling they wouldn’t make it through the war. Juice died in Aug 2023, Moonfish died on Monday. They fought like hell for Ukraine, and the F16. Nickel on the grass men. Slava Ukrainii pic.twitter.com/uErBmyQGBa — Adam Kinzinger (Slava Ukraini) 🇺🇸🇺🇦🇮🇱 (@AdamKinzinger) August 29, 2024 The US approved the plan in 2023 and the first aircraft arrived in Kyiv in late July. Belgium, Denmark the Netherlands and Norway have committed to providing Ukraine with more than 60 F-16s. Russia’s jet fleet, however, is about 10 times bigger. Ukraine’s Ministry of Defence opened an investigation into Monday’s crash. A US defence official told the Reuters news agency that the crash did not appear to be the result of Russian fire, and possible causes from pilot error to mechanical failure were being investigated. Russia has continued its aerial bombardment of Ukraine since Monday’s attack. On Thursday, Ukraine’s air force said air defences stopped two out of five Russian missiles and 60 of the 74 Shahed drones that were fired. It said the 14 other drones are presumed to have fallen before reaching their target. Authorities in the capital, Kyiv, said the debris of destroyed drones fell in three districts of the city, but there were no injuries. Ukraine says it needs at least 130 F-16s to neutralise Russian air power. F-16s can fly up to twice the speed of sound and have a maximum range of 3,200 kilometres (more than 2,000 miles). They can also fire modern weapons used by NATO countries. Adblock test (Why?)
Donald Trump promises free IVF for women, criticises six-week abortion ban
Republican presidential candidate’s comments latest bid to present a moderate image on reproductive issues. Donald Trump has pledged to make in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment free for all women and criticised a six-week abortion ban in Florida, the latest bid by the Republican to rebrand himself as a defender of reproductive rights. Speaking at a campaign stop on Thursday, Trump said he would require the government or insurance companies to cover all costs for IVF if elected to a second term as president in November. “Because we want more babies, to put it very nicely,” Trump told supporters in Potterville, Michigan, a key battleground state. “But the IVF treatments are very expensive,” the Republican Party candidate added. “It’s very hard for many people to do it, and to get it. But I’ve been in favour of IVF right from the beginning.” Trump did not elaborate on how he would fund the plans. Trump also said he would allow new parents to deduct “major newborn expenses” from their taxes if re-elected. In an interview with NBC News earlier on Thursday, Trump said that a six-week limit on abortion signed by the Republican Governor of Florida Ron DeSantis is “too short” and there should be “more time”. Trump also appeared to suggest that he would vote in favour of an upcoming ballot measure in Florida to guarantee a right to an abortion until foetal viability, although a campaign adviser later said the former president had not revealed whether he would support the measure. Trump’s comments come as he seeks to moderate Republicans’ image on reproductive access, which has been cited as a drag on the party’s standing among women. On Friday, Trump, who appointed three of the US Supreme Court justices who voted to overturn the constitutional right to an abortion, said in a post on his Truth Social platform that his administration would be “great for women and their reproductive rights”. Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party candidate, has repeatedly cast Trump as a threat to women’s rights, including access to abortion, birth control and fertility treatments. Addressing supporters in the swing state of Georgia on Thursday, Harris reiterated her warning that Trump would sign a nationwide abortion ban in office. “Why don’t they trust women? Well, we trust women! And when Congress passes a bill to restore reproductive freedom, as president of the United States, I will proudly sign it into law,” she said. Senator JD Vance, Trump’s running mate, on Saturday told NBC News that Trump would veto a national abortion ban if sent to his desk by Congress. Opinion polls suggest that Trump has lost support among women voters since the vice president replaced President Joe Biden as the Democratic contender. In a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Thursday, Harris led Trump by 13 percentage points among women, up from a nine-point lead in July. While Trump’s effort to present a moderate image on reproductive issues could boost his appeal in some quarters, it risks alienating religious and anti-abortion voters, who make up a significant portion of the Republican base. “It’s a problem for Trump that after the speech which he wanted to settle the issue, he is, week by week, making his position on abortion more liberal, pulling the floorboards out from under his pro-life supporters and making them feel like he won’t stop,” Michael Brendan Dougherty, a writer for the conservative National Review, said in a post on X on Thursday. Adblock test (Why?)
Russia lashes out against ‘terrorist’ incursion in Kursk, pulls back planes
Ukraine’s deep strikes against Russian military targets and its three-week-old ground offensive inside Russian territory have appeared to be yielding military and political results during the past week. Russia was reported to be moving its aircraft back from airfields near the Ukrainian border while glide bomb attacks inside Ukraine were reported to have decreased. Evidence that Moscow was scrambling elite units from Ukraine to defend home turf also mounted during the week. An unnamed White House official told the Politico news website that “90 percent of the planes that launch glide bombs” against Ukrainian front-line positions had been moved back inside Russia. (Al Jazeera) The independent analysis website Frontelligence agreed that “between the second half of June and mid-July, Russian forces relocated many valuable assets away from the Ukrainian border,” including planes and helicopters. Ukrainian Colonel Vitaly Sarantsev told a joint news telethon broadcast by Ukrainian channels that the Kursk offensive had greatly reduced Russia’s use of aviation against northeastern Ukraine. “We felt relief in tactical aviation,” he said on Sunday. “The enemy has significantly reduced its use in our direction. If in previous periods we had 30 to 50 antiaircraft missiles per day only [in the Sumy region], then yesterday the enemy used air strikes twice, using four antiaircraft missiles and 11 unguided air missiles.” Units operating in hotly contested Chasiv Yar in the eastern region of Donetsk have also reported a drop in glide bombs this month. Vadym Mysnyk, a spokesman for the Siversk tactical group, said: “It is a sign that we are thinning out their air force and hitting airfields, and we have pushed the enemy away from the border a little.” A building is on fire in the town of Sudzha after a cross-border incursion of Ukrainian troops into the Kursk region of Russia in this still image from video taken on August 7, 2024 [MIC Izvestia via Reuters] No effect on the Pokrovsk front There was also increasing evidence that Moscow was having trouble stopping the Ukrainian counterinvasion in Kursk and was increasingly tapping elite units to do so. Russian military reporters and geolocated footage have revealed that elements of the 810th and 155th naval infantry brigades, the 11th Airborne Brigade, and the 51st and 56th airborne regiments were redeployed to fight in Kursk. The 810th and 155th naval infantry brigades had been fighting in Kharkiv, where Russia launched a new incursion in May. The 51st Airborne Regiment had been fighting in Siversk, and the 11th Airborne Brigade was in Chasiv Yar, both in Ukraine’s Donetsk region. (Al Jazeera) Estimates of how many soldiers Moscow has diverted from Ukraine vary. Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Syrskii estimated it was in the region of 30,000. If so, that would be a significant proportion of the more than 700,000 soldiers Russia is estimated to have in Ukraine. The Washington, DC-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a think tank, estimated that Russia would need 60,000 soldiers to win back territory in Kursk once Ukrainian defences were dug. London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies agreed with that figure. But Russia has refused to let up on its priority offensive towards the city of Pokrovsk in Donetsk, where roughly a third of its daily assaults have taken place. Here, it has progressed by at least 2km (1.2 miles) in the past week, advancing through the settlements of Hrodivka and Novohrodivka. Since taking Avdiivka in February, Russian troops have advanced 34km (21 miles) westwards, forming a salient that is now within 12km (7.5 miles) of Pokrovsk. Sarantsev admitted that the Kursk action had had no effect on the Pokrovsk front. Ukrainian servicemen gather around a pick-up truck in Pokrovsk, Ukraine, as they prepare to move into battle against Russian troops 12km (7.5 miles) away on August 24, 2024 [Thomas Peter/Reuters] An ‘insane and suicidal escapade’ Western analysts have offered differing explanations for the Kursk offensive – including the diversion of Russian troops and a psychological reset through seizing the initiative. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy last week said it was a preemptive defence to prevent another Kharkiv-type invasion in the north. But he also told Ukrainians it was “a way to compensate for the deficit in long-range capabilities”. For months, Zelenskyy has implored the United States to allow Ukraine to use the ATACMS long-range rocket artillery it provides to strike airfields deep inside Russia. He also wants the US to release Britain and France, for whose Storm Shadow missiles the US provides components, to authorise their use in the same way. Currently, the US allows Ukraine to use its weapons to counter battery fire within a limited range across the border but not to hit Russian airfields because it is afraid that this could draw the US into the war. (Al Jazeera) In a recent analysis, the ISW identified that “at least 209 of 245 (more than 85 percent) known Russian military objects in range of ATACMS are not air bases” but ammunition depots, communications centres, army bases and command centres. White House national security spokesman John Kirby told reporters on Monday that restrictions on the use of long-range weapons remain in place but “we’ll keep the conversations with the Ukrainians going” to potentially revise them. The European Commission, which does not command military assets, has openly supported a lifting of restrictions. The European Union’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, repeated that support on Monday and Thursday. “I reiterate that lifting restrictions on the use of capabilities against the Russian military involved in aggression against Ukraine, in accordance with international law, would strengthen Ukrainian self-defence, save lives and reduce destruction in Ukraine,” he said on Monday. Russian officials bared their teeth against any such decision and hit out against the fact that both Brussels and Washington have allowed the use of US and European equipment in Ukraine’s Kursk offensive. “The West does not want to avoid escalation. The West is asking for trouble,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said at a news conference in Moscow on Tuesday. “The impression is that
The Beijing Declaration is a key step to resolve the Palestinian question
The Palestinian question is at the core of the Middle East issue. Over the past years, China has put forward proposals and taken action to address the Palestinian question with Chinese wisdom and solutions. At China’s invitation, senior representatives of 14 Palestinian factions engaged in dialogue in Beijing in July and signed the Beijing Declaration on Ending Division and Strengthening Palestinian National Unity. The Beijing Dialogue was the most inclusive and in-depth reconciliation talks of 14 political factions to date. The important consensus from the Beijing talks is to achieve reconciliation and unity among the 14 factions. The core outcome is the affirmation of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the sole legitimate representative of all Palestinian people. The biggest highlight is the agreement on establishing an interim government of national reconciliation focusing on the post-conflict reconstruction of Gaza. The strongest call is for establishing an independent State of Palestine in accordance with relevant United Nations resolutions. Mousa Abu Marzouk, head of the Hamas delegation to the Beijing Dialogue, declared Hamas’s readiness to implement the Beijing Declaration, strengthen unity among factions and advance the reconciliation process to achieve Palestinian national unity. Mahmoud al-Aloul, deputy chief of the Fatah movement, said China is a light and its efforts to promote reconciliation among Palestinian factions are rare on the international stage. European Union Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process Sven Koopmans stressed it is a remarkable achievement and fully demonstrates China’s positive and constructive role in the Middle East peace process. The key to the Palestinian reconciliation process is to bolster confidence, keep in the right direction, and make incremental progress. Only by making continuous efforts to build consensus and put it into practice can the reconciliation process yield more and more substantive progress and greater unity. On the path towards reconciliation, China shares the same direction and destination with Arab and Islamic countries. At present, the Gaza conflict is dragging on and its spillovers continue to spread, as multiple regional conflicts are interconnected. To help get out of the current conflict and predicament, China proposes a three-step initiative. The first step is to achieve a comprehensive, lasting and sustainable ceasefire in the Gaza Strip as soon as possible, and ensure access to humanitarian aid and rescue on the ground. The international community should build more synergy for ending the hostilities and establishing a ceasefire. The second step is to make joint efforts towards post-conflict governance of Gaza under the principle of “Palestinians governing Palestine”. Gaza is an inseparable, integral part of Palestine. Restarting post-conflict reconstruction as soon as possible is an urgent priority. The international community needs to support Palestinian factions in establishing an interim national consensus government and realising the effective management of Gaza and the West Bank. The third step is to help Palestine become a full member state of the UN and get down to implementing the two-state solution. It is important to support the convening of a broad-based, more authoritative, and more effective international peace conference to work out a timetable and road map for the two-state solution. The three-step initiative lays out a detailed and feasible plan for peacefully resolving the Palestinian question, contributing to building consensus among all stakeholders and guiding the Palestinian question back on the right track of a political solution. China and many of the Middle Eastern countries are bound by similar memories of the devastation wrought by imperialism and colonialism, and share a kindred pursuit of national liberation, independence and self-reliance. China has never engaged in geopolitical confrontation or seeking proxies in the Middle East, nor does it intend to draw spheres of influence to fill the so-called power vacuum in the region. China has no selfish interests in the Palestinian question. It was among the first countries to recognise the PLO and the State of Palestine, and all along has firmly supported the Palestinian people in restoring their legitimate national rights. There is no simple solution to the Palestinian question, and peace cannot be achieved overnight. The intra-Palestinian reconciliation will bring hope and a future to the Palestinian people. It is an important step towards resolving the Palestinian question and achieving stability in the Middle East. China firmly supports the Palestinian people in restoring their legitimate national rights and supports the people of Middle Eastern countries in holding their future in their own hands. China looks forward to the day when Palestinian factions achieve internal reconciliation and, on that basis, realise national unity and independent statehood as early as possible. China will continue to work relentlessly to this end, making more contributions to promoting peace and prosperity in the region. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance. Adblock test (Why?)