Mehdi Yarrahi, an Iranian singer and musician known for his song encouraging women to remove their hijabs, was lashed 74 times as part of his punishment for supporting the protests that swept the country, his lawyer said Wednesday.

The punishment was “fully and completely implemented,” his attorney, Zahra Minoui, said in a post on X. Yarrahi, 42, was arrested in August 2023 and sentenced by the Tehran Revolutionary Court to two years and eight months in prison, as well as 74 floggings. He eventually served one year of his sentence and was fined, alongside the lashing.

Yarrahi had been accused of “releasing an illegal song that is against the morals and customs of Islamic society,” the state news agency IRNA said in 2023.

Flogging is a form of beating that involves a whip or rod and is commonly administered to the person’s back.

He was detained four days after releasing his famous song “Roosarito” – Farsi for “your headscarf” – where lyrics included the lines: “Take off your scarf, the sun is sinking. Take off your scarf, let your hair flow.”

“Don’t be afraid, my love! Laugh, protest against tears,” the lyrics add.

A month after Yarrahi’s arrest, protests erupted throughout Iran to commemorate the one-year anniversary of the death of Mahsa Amini, the 22-year-old woman who died in the custody of Iran’s morality police after being arrested for allegedly not wearing her headscarf properly.

Rights groups have been outraged over the hijab law and the cruel ways it is enforced.

In December, Amnesty International said that Iranian authorities had imposed new draconian laws against veil-wearing, including threats of “imposing the death penalty, flogging, prison terms and other severe penalties to crush ongoing resistance to compulsory veiling.”

Other artists in Iran have received floggings as part of their sentences, including acclaimed movie director Mohammad Rasoulof, who in May of last year was sentenced to eight years in prison and flogging for national security crimes, his lawyer said.

In 2015, two Iranian poets faced 99 lashes each for shaking hands with people of the opposite sex. They were also both sentenced to years in prison for “insulting the sacred” in their writings, a decision slammed by freedom of expression activists.

Chinese warships have been circumnavigating Australia’s coastline for more than three weeks, passing within 200 miles of Sydney, and staging unprecedented live-fire drills on its doorstep with New Zealand.

The exercises, which came without formal notice, has deep caused consternation in both nations. Suddenly, the specter of China’s military power was suddenly no longer confined to the distant waters of the South China Sea or the Taiwan Strait – where China’s territorial aggression has escalated under leader Xi Jinping – but a stark reality unfolding much closer to home.

At the same time, Chinese warships have been sighted near Vietnam and Taiwan, part of a show of Chinese naval strength in the Pacific region that regularly rattles US allies.

China was unapologetic and insisted it complied with international law, with state media suggesting Western countries should get used to Chinese warships in nearby waters.

In the past, Washington’s partners have found comfort in their firm ties with the US, but that was before Donald Trump’s explosive meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and the US leader’s subsequent order to halt aid to Ukraine as it battles Russia’s invasion.

The bust-up in the Oval Office served to sharpen anxieties in capitals across the Pacific: If the US is willing to turn its back on Ukraine – effectively rewarding Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression in Europe – would it do the same in Asia when faced with a belligerent Beijing?

Trump’s embrace of Russia and his cold shoulder to Europe – driven by a transactional approach that Singapore’s defense minister likened to a “landlord seeking rent” – has heightened trepidation in the Indo-Pacific region, where many nations look to the US to keep Chinese aggression in check.

“It does raise issues as to whether the US will be committed to regional security. And even if the US remains committed, what will the Trump administration ask in return?” said Collin Koh, research fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) in Singapore.

Experts say it’s a fair question from allies who’ve long relied on the US to provide security assurances, enabling them to limit their own defense spending.

Now might be the time, they add, for American partners, like Australia and New Zealand, to reexamine budgets and tighten regional alliances with other countries that could find themselves exposed as Trump pursues his “America first” mantra.

‘Test of resolve’

Australia has made sure the world is aware of China’s movements in international waters in the South Pacific, issuing daily location updates from trailing Australian Navy ships and spy planes.

Defense Minister Richard Marles said the data would be analyzed to determine exactly what China was doing – and what message it was intending to send.

China’s ambassador to Australia, Xiao Qian, maintained that China posed no threat to Australia while signaling that more warship visits should be expected. “As a major power in this region…it is normal for China to send their vessels to different parts of the region to conduct various kinds of activities,” Xiao told Australia’s public broadcaster the ABC.

Across the Pacific in Washington, Trump was sending his own message to US partners in Europe that they needed to step up military spending in defense of Ukraine.

Before his fractious meeting with Zelensky, Trump had intended to sign mineral resources deal with the Ukrainian leader so that the US could recoup some of the cost of its aid to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion. But the signing ceremony was abandoned, with Trump telling Zelensky on his social platform Truth Social to “come back when he is ready for Peace.”

By subsequently cutting off military aid to Ukraine, Trump was seeking to force rich European nations to shoulder more of the load, say experts.

“He believes they have all been free riding off the United States for half a century,” said Peter Dean, the director of foreign policy and defense at the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney.

The move seemed to reap rewards when on Tuesday the European Union unveiled a plan to allow member states to borrow €150 billion ($158 billion) to boost their defense spending and “massively step up” their military support for Kyiv.

Dean says Trump wants a deal for peace in Ukraine; however, he’s ignoring Zelensky’s concerns about the longevity of that peace without measures to keep Putin in check.

“It seems to be that (Trump) almost wants peace at any price, rather than a peace that is fair and equitable, or a peace that you keep,” he said. “The question is, what does the deal look like? And that’s what everyone’s worried about. How much is he willing to trade away?”

As Trump upends the transatlantic alliance – a pillar of Western security for decades – his administration has signaled that the US should wrap up conflicts elsewhere to focus on deterring China in the Pacific.

The urgency of that aim was highlighted by China’s latest flexing of its military muscle.

“It’s a test of resolve, for sure,” said Drew Thompson, a senior fellow at RSIS in Singapore, of China’s military drills. “China (is) carving out a sphere of influence in the Pacific to test to see if countries in the region are going to resist it.”

AUKUS: What’s that?

Even before Trump’s clash with Zelensky, the presence of Chinese warships on its southern coast had turned Australia’s attention to AUKUS, its multibillion-dollar security deal with the US and the United Kingdom.

Concerns had flared about whether the deal could withstand the whims of Trump’s White House when a British reporter asked the US president if he and his UK counterpart had spoken about AUKUS.

“What does that mean?” Trump replied. The incident was later brushed off by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent as an issue of accents. “I think we’re going to have to limit the questions to Americans he can understand,” he said.

Dean, from the University of Sydney, said it’s no bad thing that Trump wasn’t across the acronym because the deal already has the fulsome support of his closest advisers.

That support was cemented by Australia’s first down payment of $500 million to bolster America’s submarine production, with the agreement that some nuclear-powered subs will be sold to Australia to boost its military capability in the Indo-Pacific.

It’s the kind of deal Trump will want to focus on in the future, Dean said.

“He’s looking to make money for the United States, and he’s looking to do better deals. And AUKUS is a bit of an exemplar deal for them,” Dean said.

“For the Europeans, I wouldn’t underestimate Donald Trump looking at this and going, if the Australians can do this, why can’t you?”

‘No tolerance for free riders’

Elsewhere across the Pacific, US allies appeared unsettled by the extraordinary scenes in the Oval Office.

Japan’s Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba struck a cautious tone on Monday, insisting he had “no intention of taking sides” when asked about the Trump-Zelensky clash.

Yet, he vowed to do his utmost to “maintain US involvement and promote unity” among the Group of Seven nations – hinting at growing disquiet over the fracturing of the Western alliance.

“Today’s Ukraine could be tomorrow’s East Asia,” he added. “We must also consider steadily increasing our deterrent power to prevent war.”

Japan, which has territorial disputes with China in the East China Sea, has raised concern about increasing Chinese military maneuvers in its nearby waters. Last year, a Chinese aircraft carrier entered Japan’s contiguous waters for the first time.

South Korea, another US ally in East Asia, declined to comment on the meeting between Trump and Zelensky but said it was closely monitoring US suspension of military aid to Ukraine.

Trump has repeatedly called on allies like South Korea to pay more for US troops stationed on their territory. In a speech to Congress on Wednesday, he once again made a veiled threat while referencing what he called unfair tariffs South Korea places on US goods – something Seoul denies.

“We give so much help military and in so many other ways to South Korea. But that’s what happened, this is happening by friend and foe,” Trump said.

In Taiwan, the self-governing democracy China has vowed to one day absorb, Defense Minister Wellington Koo tried to reassure confidence despite what he described as “rapid and bizarre changes” in the international landscape.

“I think the United States won’t retreat from the Indo-Pacific region, because this is its core interests,” he told reporters in a briefing Tuesday, citing shared interests with Washington in economic development, geopolitics and US military security.

But Koo also nodded to Trump’s “America first” stance. “In international politics, we also deeply realize that we can’t just talk about values and not talk about interests. Of course, the United States must value its own national interests,” he added.

Experts say the US has become frustrated at having to shoulder the weight of other countries who fail to contribute to their own defense.

“The Trump administration has made clear its lack of tolerance. It’s had no tolerance for free riders,” said Thompson, from RSIS in Singapore.

“I think the countries that get that message clearest and fastest are the ones that are going to be the good partners of the United States, because it’s not like the US is abandoning allies. What the US is doing is prioritizing its most capable ones,” Thompson said.

European leaders will once again try to grasp control of negotiations over the war in Ukraine on Thursday, in an increasingly frantic tug-of-war against the US and Russia that could be nearing a climax.

Heads of the 27 European Union (EU) nations are meeting at a special summit in Brussels to discuss a path forward in the conflict. But some fear that the involvement of ambivalent countries could derail efforts to put together a peace plan which might satisfy both Kyiv and Washington.

Europe is “entering a new era,” French President Emmanuel Macron admitted in a televised address on Wednesday night, describing an increased weariness over the shift in tone of US President Donald Trump toward Moscow.

“The United States, our ally, has changed its position on this war, is less supportive of Ukraine and is casting doubt on what will happen next,” Macron warned.

Thursday’s meeting is the latest in a string of sessions aimed at finding a ceasefire deal with Ukraine’s support before the US and Russia force one on Kyiv. A Sunday summit in London saw some progress: UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said a small group of European nations would work with Ukraine’s President Voldoymyr Zelensky on a ceasefire proposal, then present it to the US – a workaround that might avert another meltdown in relations between Trump and Zelensky.

Zelensky said on Telegram Wednesday that Kyiv and Europe “are preparing a plan for the first steps to bring about a just and sustainable peace. We are working on it quickly. It will be ready soon.”

But Thursday’s EU-wide meeting has a key difference: It involves every nation in the bloc, not just the countries who opted to attend Starmer’s summit. And some countries are neither willing nor interested in supporting Ukraine’s fight for survival.

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has repeatedly resisted calls to support Kyiv militarily. Unlike most of his European counterparts, he supported Trump following the president’s argument with Zelensky, writing on X: “Strong men make peace, weak men make war.”

Sharing the burden

Reaching an agreement on that will prove difficult. Without singling any countries out, the diplomat highlighted how the countries that aren’t paying their “fair share” when it comes to Ukraine are also usually failing to spend over 2% of their gross domestic product on defence.

Some serious progress is nonetheless expected. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced a plan to rearm Europe in the build-up to the summit, and said the bloc could mobilize funds up to 800 billion euros ($862 billion) to achieve it. “We are in an era of rearmament,” she said in a statement Wednesday.

“The question is no longer whether Europe’s security is threatened in a very real way,” she added. “Or whether Europe should shoulder more of the responsibility for its own security. In truth, we have long known the answers to those questions.”

There are immediate discussions taking place too: including on what the peacekeeping force deployed to Ukraine to uphold a potential ceasefire might look like. First proposed just two weeks ago, the force has quickly morphed from an idea to an apparent condition of any deal.

But the official said Eastern European states that neighbor Russia were concerned that contributing to the force might leave their own borders vulnerable – a fear that Poland has been particularly open about since it was first raised.

“European NATO has about 5,000 kilometers (3,100 miles) of eastern border, so you don’t want to empty the eastern border,” the official said. “Most likely the boots on the ground, if there is to be such a component, will not come from countries like Finland or Poland who are frontline countries already and need to keep the boots on their own ground.”

The official said it was a “reasonable assumption” that most of the troops would come from Britain, France and Turkey.

The official said a timeline for confidence-building measures was under discussion, but said it might prove “challenging” for a limited ceasefire in Ukraine and prisoner swaps to begin by Easter. Agreeing and implementing a full-blown ceasefire across the whole front line in that timeframe would be “completely unrealistic,” they added.

Zelensky will attend Thursday’s meeting in Brussels. He has been welcomed warmly by European leaders at recent meetings in Paris and London, a dramatic contrast to his frosty reception at the White House. But on Thursday, there will be more ambivalent faces in the crowd.

The US government will stop sharing air quality data gathered from its embassies and consulates, worrying local scientists and experts who say the effort was vital to monitor global air quality and improve public health.

In response to an inquiry from The Associated Press, the State Department said Wednesday that its air quality monitoring program would no longer transmit air pollution data from embassies and consulates to the Environmental Protection Agency’s AirNow app and other platforms, which allowed locals in various countries, along with scientists around the globe, to see and analyze air quality in cities around the world.

The stop in sharing data was “due to funding constraints that have caused the Department to turn off the underlying network” read the statement, which added that embassies and consulates were directed to keep their monitors running and the sharing of data could resume in the future if funding was restored.

The fiscal cut, first reported by the New York Times, is one of many under President Donald Trump, whose administration has been deprioritizing environmental and climate initiatives.

The US air quality monitors measured dangerous fine particulate matter, known as PM2.5, which can penetrate deep into the lungs and lead to respiratory diseases, heart conditions, and premature death. The World Health Organization estimates that air pollution kills around 7 million people each year.

News of the data sharing being cut prompted immediate reaction from scientists who said the data were reliable, allowed for air quality monitoring around the world and helped prompt governments to clean up the air.

‘A big blow’ to global air quality research

Bhargav Krishna, an air pollution expert at New Delhi-based Sustainable Futures Collaborative, called the loss of data “a big blow” to air quality research.

“They were part of a handful of sensors in many developing countries and served as a reference for understanding what air quality was like,” Krishna said. “They were also seen to be a well-calibrated and unbiased source of data to cross-check local data if there were concerns about quality.”

“It’s a real shame”, said Alejandro Piracoca Mayorga, a Bogota, Colombia-based freelance air quality consultant. US embassies and consulates in Lima, Peru, Sao Paulo and Bogota have had the public air monitoring. “It was a source of access to air quality information independent of local monitoring networks. They provided another source of information for comparison.”

Khalid Khan, an environmental expert and advocate based in Pakistan, agreed, saying the shutdown of air quality monitoring will “have significant consequences.”

Khan noted that the monitors in Peshawar, Pakistan, one of the most polluted cities in the world, “provided crucial real-time data” which helped policy makers, researchers and the public to take decisions on their health.

“Their removal means a critical gap in environmental monitoring, leaving residents without accurate information on hazardous air conditions,” Khan said. He said vulnerable people in Pakistan and around the world are particularly at risk as they are the least likely to have access to other reliable data.

In Africa, the program provided air quality data for over a dozen countries including Senegal, Nigeria, Chad and Madagascar. Some of those countries depend almost entirely on the US monitoring systems for their air quality data.

The WHO’s air quality database will also be affected by the closing of US program. Many poor countries don’t track air quality because stations are too expensive and complex to maintain, meaning they are entirely reliant on US embassy monitoring data.

Monitors strengthened local efforts

In some places, the US air quality monitors propelled nations to start their own air quality research and raised awareness, Krishna said.

In China, for example, data from the US Embassy in Beijing famously contradicted official government reports, showing worse pollution levels than authorities acknowledged. It led to China improving air quality.

Officials in Pakistan’s eastern Punjab province, which struggles with smog, said they were unfazed by the removal of the US monitors. Environment Secretary Raja Jahangir said Punjab authorities have their own and plan to purchase 30 more.

Shweta Narayan, a campaign lead at the Global Climate and Health Alliance, said the shutdown of monitors in India is a “huge setback” but also a “critical opportunity” for the Indian government to step up and fill the gaps.

“By strengthening its own air quality monitoring infrastructure, ensuring data transparency, and building public trust in air quality reporting, India can set a benchmark for accountability and environmental governance,” Narayan said.

South Korean fighter jets accidentally bombed homes during a live-fire drill with US forces, injuring more than a dozen people, Seoul’s military said on Thursday.

Eight MK-82 general-purpose bombs were “abnormally dropped” from two KF-16 fighter jets and landed outside the designated firing range at approximately 10:07 a.m. local time, hitting civilian infrastructure in Pocheon city, northeast of the capital Seoul, according to the South Korean Air Force.

South Korea’s defense ministry said initial findings indicated the accident was caused by a pilot inputting incorrect bombing coordinates.

An image that local media outlets said captured the aftermath of the explosions showed thick smoke billowing into the air in a rural area.

The blasts destroyed two residential buildings, part of a church, and a truck.

“The scene of the incident is chaotic, resembling a battlefield,” Pocheon Mayor Baek Young-hyun said in a televised statement.

South Korea’s military said all live-fire training would be suspended from Thursday until a probe into the incident had concluded. An accident response team has been formed to investigate and the air force said it would provide compensation for damages.

The air force apologized that the “abnormal bomb release has caused civilian damage” and wished the injured a swift recovery.

The Freedom Shield drills were scheduled to run from March 10 to March 20 to strengthen the US-South Korean alliance’s combined defense posture, Seoul’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said earlier Thursday.

The annual drills often rile nuclear-armed North Korea, which views them as provocations.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has accused the United States and South Korea of increasing tensions with their joint drills and Pyongyang often responds with bellicose threats.

In 2023, as US strategic bombers took part in joint air drills with South Korean forces, North Korea carried out a ballistic missile test, according to the South Korean military.

This story has been updated with additional information.

US President Donald Trump’s tariffs on Canada and Mexico could severely impact the economies of both countries, potentially slowing down production of certain goods, raising prices on products and sparking fears of a recession, analysts warn.

The US on Tuesday imposed 25% tariffs on imports from both of its neighbors, as well as a 10% tax on Canadian energy.

Though both countries have also warned they will impose reciprocal tariffs that will affect the US economy, Canada and Mexico stand to lose far more because they depend so heavily on America for trade. The US is considered their largest export market.

Last year, Mexico exported roughly $505 billion to the US, roughly 30% of its GDP, while Canada exported over $412 billion, about 20% of its GDP. Meanwhile, US exports to Canada were valued at $349 billion last year – but this represents just over 1% of US GDP. Similarly, it exported roughly $334 billion in goods to Mexico, also only around 1% of its GDP.

Impact on Canada

Canada’s car manufacturing and energy sectors will be among the most affected, said Drew Fagan, a professor at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy.

According to the US Census Bureau, about $185 billion worth of goods in those sectors are imported into the United States from Canada.

Producers could then decide to pass those costs on to consumers, which could lead to inflation, he warned.

“If it’s a 25% tariff, that’s far bigger than profit. So, at a certain point, very quickly, unless you can pass those costs along to consumers, ultimately, it’s not profitable to continue to produce,” he said, warning that a pause in production could also lead to a loss of jobs.

Canada is also considered the single largest supplier of energy to the US. In 2023, it provided approximately 60% of crude oil imports to the US, 85% of electricity imports and 99% of natural gas imports, according to the Canadian government. The value of all three is roughly $100 billion, according to the US Census Bureau, with crude oil accounting for the vast majority of that sum.

If tariffs were to disrupt the energy supply chain, Canada would feel the impact more than the US given that its primary customer is the United States, while the US has more options to choose from.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau acknowledged that the trade war would hurt Canadian workers, saying, “This is going to be tough.” Speaking at a press conference Tuesday, he pledged government support for businesses to try to soften the impact.

Impact on Mexico

Like Canada, Mexico’s car manufacturing industry is deeply intertwined with the United States and heavily dependent on American consumers.

The US imported $87 billion worth of motor vehicles and $64 billion worth of vehicle parts from Mexico last year, excluding December, according to the Department of Commerce.

Tariffs would make these products more expensive for US consumers – so much so that Americans could stop buying from Mexico, and that could subsequently affect the Mexican economy, said Jason Marczak, Vice President and Senior Director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said Tuesday morning that her country would try to seek investments from other nations. “If this issue of tariffs is consolidated, an important evaluation of the geographic diversification of the Mexican economy must be made,” she said.

Marczak said Mexico’s economy is so dependent on the US that it’s hard to find alternative trading partners.

Although Mexico recently reached an agreement with the European Union to diversify its commercial relationships, Marczak said Mexico and the US are still bound by their free trade agreements, making it difficult for Mexico to avoid negative impacts from US tariffs.

How Mexico and Canada could respond

Trudeau said Tuesday that Canada will retaliate with levies of its own. It plans to impose 25% tariffs on C$155 billion worth of US goods over the next month, with C$30 billion coming into effect immediately.

Sheinbaum said her country would also respond with retaliatory tariffs and other non-tariff measures, which she is set to announce on Sunday. She did not provide details.

However, those retaliatory measures will have further negative consequences on all three economies, Marczak pointed out.

Moving forward, both countries will have to consider whether they can stomach these impacts or adjust to meet the demands of Trump.

Trudeau said Tuesday his country would work with Mexico to find new ways to deal with the tariffs.