Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei attended a religious gathering on Saturday, according to Iranian state media outlet Press TV, the first time he has appeared in public in several weeks.

Khamenei had not made a public appearance since his country was plunged into conflict on June 13, when Israel unilaterally bombed Iranian military and nuclear sites. The US later joined in, bombing three key Iranian nuclear sites before US President Donald Trump declared a ceasefire.

In video posted by Press TV on X, Khamenei waves to a crowd of black-clad worshippers marking the eve of Ashura, when Shia Muslims commemorate and mourn the death of the Prophet Muhammad’s grandson Husayn ibn Ali. The crowd greeted the cleric in turn with cheers and chants.

Weeks in hiding

Khamenei, the longest-ruling leader in the Middle East, reportedly spent the 12-day conflict with Israel and the US hiding in a bunker with little access to outside communications. During the conflict, both Israeli politicians and Trump openly discussed overthrowing Khamenei’s government and deposing him by force.

After reportedly rejecting an Israeli plan to kill Khamenei, Trump stated in late June that the cleric was an “easy target.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not rule out targeting Khamenei either, saying that his death would “not … escalate the conflict,” but rather “end” it.

In a recorded statement posted from an undisclosed location days after the ceasefire began, Khamenei was defiant, declaring victory over both Israel and the US. Khamenei took time to respond directly to US President Donald Trump, who had called for Iran’s “unconditional surrender” shortly before ordering US airstrikes.

“This (conflict) is not about our nuclear program,” Khamenei said. “This is about Iran surrendering … in his statement, (Trump) revealed the truth, he showed his hand. The Americans have had a fundamental issue with Islamic Iran since our revolution.”

“And it will never happen,” Khamenei said of Trump’s demand.

“The Islamic Republic had one social contract with society, which is that it deprived them of all freedoms … in return for providing security,” said Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group. “Now, that image has been shattered in the eyes of the Iranian people.”

US ‘won’t allow’ Iranian nuclear program

Khamenei’s new public appearance comes a day after Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that the US won’t allow Iran to restart its nuclear program.

“If they did start, there’d be a problem. We wouldn’t allow that to happen,” Trump said Friday.

Trump said he would discuss the previous strikes with Netanyahu, who is due to visit Washington on Monday.

The comments echo remarks made earlier on Friday by Israel’s defense minister, Israel Katz, who said his country must maintain “aerial superiority” over Iran to ensure it cannot rebuild its nuclear or missile production programs.

Trump reiterated his claim that Iran wants to meet with the US for talks, a statement Iranian officials have repeatedly denied.

The Trump administration has discussed possibly helping Iran access as much as $30 billion to build a nuclear program for civilian energy production, easing sanctions, and freeing up billions of dollars in restricted Iranian funds – all part of an intensifying attempt to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table, four sources familiar with the matter said.

A summit of leaders from the BRICS group of major emerging economies kicks off in Brazil Sunday – but without the top leader of its most powerful member.

For the first time in more than one decade of rule, Chinese leader Xi Jinping – who has made BRICS a centerpiece of his push to reshape the global balance of power – will not attend the annual leaders’ gathering.

Xi’s absence from the two-day summit in Rio de Janeiro comes at a critical moment for BRICS, which owes its acronym to early members Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, and since 2024 has expanded to include Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, Indonesia and Iran.

Some members are up against a July 9 deadline to negotiate US tariffs set to be imposed by US President Donald Trump, and all face the global economic uncertainty brought on by his upending of American trade relations – putting the club under more pressure show solidarity.

Xi’s absence means the Chinese leader is missing a key opportunity to showcase China as a stable alternative leader to the US. That’s an image Beijing has long looked to project to the Global South, and one recently elevated by Trump’s shift to an “America First” policy and the US decision last month to join Israel in bombing Iranian nuclear facilities.

But the Chinese leader’s decision not to attend – sending his No. 2 official Li Qiang instead – doesn’t mean Beijing has downgraded the significance it places on BRICS, observers say, or that it’s less important to Beijing’s bid to build out groups to counterbalance Western power.

“(BRICS) is part and parcel of Beijing’s effort to make sure it isn’t hemmed in by the US allies,” said Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor at the National University of Singapore.

But that pressure may have lessened with Trump in office, Chong added, referencing the US president’s shake-up of relations even with key partners, and for Xi, BRICS may just not be “his greatest priority” as he focuses on steering China’s domestic economy. Beijing may also have low expectations for major breakthroughs at this year’s summit, he said.

BRICS attendance sheet

Xi is not the only head of state expected to be absent in Rio.

The Chinese leader’s closest ally in the group, Russia’s Vladimir Putin, will only attend via video link, for the same reason he also joined a 2023 BRICS gathering in South Africa remotely. Brazil, like South Africa, is a signatory to the International Criminal Court and so would be obligated to arrest Putin on a court charge alleging war crimes in Ukraine.

The absence of two global heavy hitters leaves ample limelight for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who will visit Brazil both for the summit and a state visit. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa is also expected to attend.

Some new club members have yet to announce their plans, though Indonesia’s Prabowo Subianto is expected in Rio after Southeast Asia’s largest economy officially joined BRICS earlier this year. BRICS partner countries, including some who aspire to join the group, will also send delegations. Uncertainty remains over whether Saudi Arabia has accepted an invitation to become a full member.

The sting of Xi’s absence for Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva may be blunted by the fact that the Chinese leader visited Brazil in November for the G20 summit and a state visit, when he and Lula inked a raft of cooperation agreements. The Brazilian leader also visited China in May, after attending a military parade in Moscow alongside Xi.

That recent diplomacy, low expectations for major breakthroughs at this year’s summit, and a heightened focus on domestic issues all likely factored into Xi’s decision to send Li, a trusted second-in-command, observers say.

China is facing steep economic challenges in the face of trade frictions with the US – and its leaders are busy charting a course for the five years ahead of a key political conclave expected this year.

In Rio, Li will likely be charged with advancing priorities like shoring up energy ties between Beijing and BRICS’ major oil-exporting members, while pushing for the expanded use of China’s offshore and digital currency for trade within the group, according to Brian Wong, an assistant professor at the University of Hong Kong, who added that Xi’s absence shouldn’t be interpreted as a snub to BRICS.

“Whether it be the Sino-Russian partnership or Beijing’s desire to project its purported leadership of the Global South, there is much in BRICS+ that resonates with Xi’s foreign policy worldview,” said Wong, using a term for the extended group.

De-dollarization?

Launched in 2009 as an economic coalition of Brazil, Russia, India and China before South Africa joined a year later, BRICS roughly positions itself as the Global South’s answer to the Group of Seven (G7) major developed economies.

It’s taken on greater significance as countries have increasingly pushed for a “multipolar world” where power is more distributed – and as Beijing and Moscow have looked to bolster their international clout alongside deepening tensions with the West.

But BRICS’ composition – a mix of countries with vastly different political and economic systems, and with occasional friction between each other – and its recent expansion have also drawn criticism as leaving the group too unwieldy to be effective.

The disparate group’s efforts to speak with one voice distinct from that of the West often become mired in opposing views. A statement last month expressed “grave concern” over the military strikes against BRICS member Iran, but stopped short of specifically naming the US or Israel, the two countries that carried out the strikes.

Nonetheless, the US will be watching how the countries talk about one issue that has typically united them: moving their trade and finance to national currencies – and away from the dollar. Such de-dollarization is particularly attractive to member countries such as Russia and Iran, which are heavily sanctioned by the US.

Earlier this year, among the goals of Brazil’s host term, Lula included “increasing payment options” to reduce “vulnerabilities and costs.” Russia last year pushed for the development of a unique cross-border payments system, when it hosted the club.

What’s unlikely to be on the negotiating table, however, is the lofty goal of a “BRICS currency” – an idea suggested by Lula in 2023 that has drawn ire from Trump even as other BRICS leaders have not signaled it’s a group priority.

The US president in January threatened to place “100% tariffs” on “seemingly hostile” BRICS countries if they supported a BRICS currency, or backed another currency to replace “the mighty U.S. Dollar.”

As countries convene in Rio, observers will be tracking how strident their leaders are in promoting the use of national currencies at a meeting of a group where China is the leading member, but US global economic clout still looms large.

Thousands of people gathered in India’s Dharamshala on Sunday to celebrate the 90th birthday of the Dalai Lama – a key milestone in the life of the spiritual leader and Nobel Peace laureate known for his message of compassion and his quest for greater freedoms for Tibet under Beijing’s rule.

Undeterred by heavy monsoon rain and thick fog, crowds dressed in their finery packed the narrow streets from early morning and queued in droves hoping to catch a glimpse of the Dalai Lama at the Tsuklakhang Tibetan Buddhist complex.

Hundreds of hopeful attendees were left waiting to see if they would be allowed into the temple which reached full capacity before the festivities began, and was heavily manned by Indian police and security personnel.

Masked dancers in traditional outfits twirled to the sounds of gongs, pipes and horns as the Dalai Lama was led into the complex by two attendants.

Indian government ministers were set to attend the cutting of the celebratory cake, as well as Hollywood actor Richard Gere, a longtime supporter of the Dalai Lama.

The gathering marked the culmination of a days-long celebration that brought supporters and spiritual heads to the small city in India’s Himalayan foothills, which has served as the seat of the Tibetan government-in-exile and home of the Dalai Lama since he fled Tibet during a failed 1959 uprising against Chinese communist rule.

Many had traveled far to join the celebration, such as Namgyal Dorjee Gongpa, from New Jersey in the United States.

“Every year, we take trips to India, which is the epicenter of the exile Tibetan setup so that my kids who are born in a foreign country… get back to their roots and learn and live their culture. So this is a great occasion because we can all take part in the celebration of His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s 90th birthday.”

In a birthday message on X, the Dalai Lama emphasized the importance of “achieving peace of mind through cultivating a good heart and by being compassionate.” Woven into his reflections was a pledge to continue promoting human values, religious harmony, ancient Indian wisdom and Tibetan culture, which “has so much potential to contribute to the world.”

At a ceremony on Saturday, as attendees prayed for his long life, he assured them of his “great physical condition” and raised his longevity goal to 130, two decades beyond his previous prediction.

While crowds gathered to celebrate his life, this year’s festivities carry heightened significance as a stage for the charismatic leader to address the looming question of what happens after his death.

Reincarnation

In a video message to religious elders on Wednesday, the Dalai Lama announced that he will have a successor after his death, and affirmed that his office has the “sole authority” to recognize his future reincarnation.

“No one else has any such authority to interfere in this matter,” the Dalai Lama said in his recorded message.

The statement sets the stage for a struggle over his succession between Tibetan Buddhist leaders in exile and China’s atheist Communist Party, which insists it alone holds the authority to approve the next dalai lama.

The Dalai Lama’s announcement was welcomed by many Tibetan Buddhists, who had been waiting for his decision on whether the centuries-old institution would end with his death – a question he had earlier said he would re-evaluate around his 90th birthday.

“I feel that he has thoughtfully considered the future and made it clear that the decision will be guided by the Tibetan people and Buddhist traditions and not by any external political interference,” she added.

“At the same time, like many Tibetans, I do have concerns about China’s attempts to politicize the reincarnation process by potentially appointing its own dalai lama… Their appointment of a dalai lama would not only be a distortion of our faith but also a strategy to undermine Tibetan identity.”

Tibetan Buddhists believe in the circle of rebirth, and that when an enlightened spiritual master like the Dalai Lama dies, he will be able to choose the place and time of his rebirth through the force of compassion and prayer.

But the religious tradition has increasingly become a battleground for the control of Tibetan hearts and minds, and experts expect that Beijing will seek to establish its own dalai lama after the current one – part of the party’s campaign to “sinicize” religion to ensure it aligns with Communist Party leadership and maintain its tightening grip over Tibet.

The Dalai Lama has previously stated that his successor will be born in the “free world” outside China, urging his followers to reject any candidate selected by Beijing.

Asked about the Dalai Lama’s latest statement on his reincarnation, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry on Wednesday reiterated Beijing’s long-held stance that the spiritual leader’s reincarnation must comply with Chinese laws and regulations, with search and identification conducted in China and approved by the central government.

Beijing has long sought to discredit the Dalai Lama and claims he is a dangerous “separatist.”

Since the 1970s, however, the Dalai Lama has maintained that he no longer seeks full independence for Tibet, but “meaningful” autonomy that would allow Tibetans to preserve their distinct culture, religion and identity. His commitment to the nonviolent “middle way” approach has earned him international support and the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.

As China’s political and economic clout has grown, however, the Dalai Lama’s global influence appears to be waning, especially as old age makes it difficult to sustain his extensive globe-trotting. The spiritual leader has not met a sitting US president since Barack Obama in 2016, after numerous visits to the White House since 1991.

On his birthday, however, heartfelt messages poured in from world leaders, politicians, lawmakers and artists in a video compiled by Tibet TV, run by the Tibetan government-in-exile.

Obama wished a “very happy birthday to the youngest 90-year-old I know,” and thanked the Dalai Lama for his friendship.

“You’ve shown generations what it means to practice compassion and speak up for freedom and dignity. Not bad for someone who describes himself as a simple Buddhist monk,” he added.

Former US President Bill Clinton described the Dalai Lama as “one of the world’s greatest voices for peace, for dialogue, for understanding” whose teachings have “inspired millions to follow in your footsteps.”

He added: “In a time when we see the forces of division tearing at the fabric of our common humanity, we need your wisdom more than ever to remind us that what we share is more important than our interesting differences.”

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said in a statement on X: “I join 1.4 billion Indians in extending our warmest wishes to His Holiness the Dalai Lama on his 90th birthday.

“He has been an enduring symbol of love, compassion, patience and moral discipline. His message has inspired respect and admiration across all faiths. We pray for his continued good health and long life.”

But in Dharamshala, the Dalai Lama’s life and legacy were center stage on Sunday, a day Nyidon said “holds deep spiritual and emotional meaning for our community, symbolizing resilience and hope.”

The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) is now Germany’s largest opposition group and even topped several opinion polls – briefly putting it ahead of now-Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s center-right party – in the weeks after February’s federal election.

At the same time, the AfD is facing growing calls for an outright ban, most recently from another major political party.

In May, the country’s domestic intelligence agency formally classified the AfD as an extremist entity that threatens democracy. In a 1,100-page report, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution, or BfV, also laid out its findings that the party was racist, anti-Muslim, and devaluing of “entire segments” of Germany’s population.

That move, which enables the BfV to better monitor the group , has reignited attempts to impose a ban, despite the party claiming a significant 20.8% of the vote in February’s national election – the best performance by a far-right party in the country since World War II.

The AfD has also enjoyed very vocal support from the Trump administration, with Tesla billionaire Elon Musk – who has since left his position in the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) – urging Germans to vote for the party in the run-up to the election. More recently, both US Vice President, JD Vance, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio have criticized Germany’s decision to classify the AfD as extremist.

On Monday, the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), which is currently serving as the junior coalition partner in Berlin’s conservative-led government, voted unanimously to begin efforts to outlaw it.

Legal basis?

Yet the legal path to banning the AfD is lengthy – and largely unprecedented.

Set up to avoid a repeat of Nazi rule, Germany’s political system operates on the basis of streitbare Demokratie, or “militant democracy,” meaning it is a democracy “determined and able to defend itself.”

In other words, the German state can actively defend itself against internal threats to its democratic principles and constitutional order, including through the banning of political parties.

However, two criteria must be met by Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court to form a legal basis for a ban.

Firstly, the party in question must be found to work against the country’s free democratic order, demonstrating an “actively belligerent, aggressive stance.” Secondly, the party must be popular enough to pose a tangible threat to democracy, a provision created in 2017 and called “potentiality.”

Parties found to meet the first criterion, but not the second, can be prohibited from accessing public campaign financing, but are allowed to continue with other activities.

“The opposite is true: its size demonstrates that it fulfills the criterion of ‘potentiality.’”

To begin the process of banning a party, a formal request must be made to the federal court. This request can only be made by either the government itself, the Bundestag, Germany’s lower house of parliament, or the Bundesrat, the legislative body that represents the country’s 16 regional states.

The court then decides whether to begin proceedings or throw out the application as unsubstantiated.

It must hold a full trial, examining thousands of pages of evidence and hearing witnesses, and considers whether the party violates the constitution in practice, Holterhus explained.

The court can then declare a party unconstitutional. The party would then be dissolved and banned from all political activity. It would also be prohibited from creating any substitute organizations.

At least two-thirds of the court’s justices must be in agreement in order to make the declaration.

In practical terms, if the AfD were to be banned, its sitting lawmakers would receive an automatic loss of mandate at the regional and federal level as well as in the European parliament.

Of the 152 seats the AfD currently has in the Bundestag , 42 are direct seats, where the respective candidates individually won the districts by majority. These 42 districts would need to vote again to fill the seats with new candidates from other parties. The other 110 AfD seats, which are allocated using a party list system, would remain vacant until the next election cycle. Similarly, the AfD’s seats in the European Parliament would remain vacant.

In either case, this would result in a shifting of the majority ratio, meaning that the seats of all other parties would gain a higher significance.

The German Federal Constitutional Court has only banned two parties in the country’s history – and both were in the early postwar years. The Socialist Reich Party (SRP), a successor to the Nazi Party, was outlawed in 1952. Four years later, in 1956, the far-left Communist Party of Germany (KPD) was also banned.

Repeated attempts – in 2003, 2016 and 2021 – to ban the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party of Germany (NPD) have failed. Although the court in 2017 openly acknowledged the party was unconstitutional, it found that it didn’t pose a significant threat to the constitutional order. In January 2024, the court approved the freezing of the NPD’s state funding for six years.

Overall, Holterhus believes that it is difficult to impose a ban on a political party in Germany. “A party ban is considered a measure of last resort against the enemies of a democracy,” he said.

Adding fuel to the fire?

The rise of the AfD has triggered widespread unease, with protesters calling for it to be outlawed – most notably in early 2024, when tens of thousands of demonstrators descended on cities across Germany after it emerged that senior AfD party members had discussed a plan to deport migrants en masse.

Yet German lawmakers remain divided over the issue, with some fearing the move could backfire and fuel far-right sympathies.

Pointing to its classification as a right-wing extremist organisation, SPD co-leader Lars Klingbeil told party members at a conference Monday that efforts to ban the AfD should begin.

“The moment the domestic intelligence agency says this is a confirmed right-wing extremist party, there can be no more tactics,” he said.

Yet Merz’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) – which leads Germany’s coalition government – is hesitant.

German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt, a member of the Christian Social Union (CSU) – the CDU’s Bavarian sister party – poured cold water on the SPD’s motion. Speaking to German news podcast “Table. Today,” he said that “decisions made at the SPD party conference are not yet a mandate for the interior minister.”

Merz has himself expressed caution over the move, telling newspaper Die Zeit in May that he is “skeptical” of procedures to ban political parties.

The AfD’s unparalleled public approval, not to mention support from the Trump administration, a powerful transatlantic ally, means its prohibition could have significant reverberations.

Some opinion polls found that, in the weeks after the Germany’s election , support for the AfD had crept up even higher than its 20.8% official result, briefly making it the most popular party in the country.

National polling agency Forsa in April found that the AfD was polling at a record 26% – putting it two percentage points higher than the CDU, on 24%. Currently, Forsa shows the AfD at 24% – four points behind the CDU.

With the AfD’s support reaching such heights, Holterhus sees a risk of creating a “martyr effect” in the case of a ban, with the AfD “staging itself as a victim of political opponents.” This, he said, could result in further radicalization of some of its supporters and even politically motivated violence.

Lengthy legal proceedings, he said, could further heighten the AfD’s platform while the move also risks the “wrath” of the Trump administration and could play into the populist narrative of an “undemocratic Europe.”

President Donald Trump has ramped up expectations around a possible 60-day ceasefire in the war in Gaza after he said Thursday that a response from Hamas was expected within the next day.

Asked by a reporter whether Hamas has agreed to the latest ceasefire and hostage deal, Trump replied “We’ll see what happens, we’re going to know over the next 24 hours.” Qatar put forward an updated proposal to Israel and Hamas earlier this week, and Israel accepted it on Tuesday.

Hamas says it will announce its decision after consultations with other Palestinian factions, without specifying how long this might take.

Trump has pushed hard for a ceasefire, saying on Tuesday that Israel had “agreed to the necessary conditions” to finalize a deal for a 60-day cessation of hostilities. In a post on Truth Social, Trump warned Hamas to accept the proposal as well.

“I hope, for the good of the Middle East, that Hamas takes this Deal, because it will not get better — IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE,” he said, thanking Qatar and Egypt for their role in advancing the proposal.

The latest proposal does not differ markedly from previous plans put forward by negotiators, maintaining the same number of hostages released and the same length of the earlier temporary ceasefire. But the proposal offers two key concessions to Hamas demands, spacing out the release of hostages over the entire timeline and offering stronger guarantees – in this case, directly from Trump – that the ceasefire will continue beyond 60 days even if a comprehensive agreement to end the war has not yet been reached.

The plan calls for the release of 10 living Israeli hostages and 18 deceased hostages spread out over the full timeline, according to a source familiar with the negotiations who shared details of the plan.

On the first day of the ceasefire, Hamas would release eight living hostages. In exchange, Israel would release an unspecified number of Palestinian prisoners and detainees, and withdraw its forces from pre-agreed locations in northern Gaza. Israel would then withdraw from parts of southern Gaza on the seventh day, following the release of a number of deceased hostages.

Israel and Hamas would also immediately enter into negotiations for a permanent ceasefire once the initial truce goes into effect. A total of 50 hostages remain in Gaza, at least 20 of whom are believed to be alive.

The last two living hostages would be released on the fiftieth day of the ceasefire. Meanwhile, five deceased hostages would be released on the seventh and thirtieth days, while the final eight would be released on the final day.

Under the deal, hostages will be released without ceremonies or fanfare at Israel’s request – unlike during the last truce, when Hamas staged public propaganda events around hostage transfers that sparked outrage in Israel.

Humanitarian aid will immediately begin to flow into Gaza at the start of the ceasefire, including from the United Nations and from other aid organizations, similar to the previous ceasefire which began on January 19.

On Thursday, Israeli-American hostage Edan Alexander met with Trump in Washington and said he told the president that he worries continued fighting in Gaza endangers the remaining hostages. A statement from the Hostages and Missing Families Forum after the meeting quoted Alexander as telling Trump, “I fear continued fighting endangers the hostages and hope you can achieve another historic breakthrough — a comprehensive deal to free them all, all 50 hostages. You are the person who can make it happen.”

Hamas announced on Friday that it had “submitted a positive response” to a proposal for a 60-day ceasefire in Gaza, opening the path toward a deal to halt the conflict after months of failed efforts.

Hamas has “submitted a positive response to the mediators, and the movement is fully prepared to immediately enter into a round of negotiations regarding the mechanism for implementing this framework,” the group said in a statement.

Israel had previously accepted the US-sponsored framework, which means the two sides are now expected to enter final, detailed negotiations before a ceasefire agreement is officially reached.

Bishara Bahbah, a Palestinian-American interlocutor who has been in direct discussions with Hamas, praised the group’s response on Facebook, saying, “We are now much closer to ending this cursed war.”

He said Hamas had introduced “amendments it deemed necessary.”

“In my view, these amendments will not prevent reaching a ceasefire agreement within the coming week, God willing,” he said.

An Israeli source familiar with the matter said earlier Friday that Israel had expected a positive response from Hamas, with the rewording of a few points in the proposal language. The source said these changes were not expected to derail the ceasefire efforts.

Of the 50 Israeli hostages remaining in Gaza, the proposal calls for the release of 10 living hostages and 18 deceased during the ceasefire. On the first day of the ceasefire, Hamas would release eight living hostages in exchange for an unspecified number of Palestinian prisoners and detainees. Following the release, Israel would withdraw from parts of northern Gaza, and the two sides would begin negotiations toward a permanent ceasefire.

The release of the hostages is to take place without any Hamas ceremonies or fanfare. The remaining hostages would be released on four more dates specific in the proposal.

Efforts to secure a ceasefire intensified following the 12-day conflict between Israel and Iran last month. Qatar, a key negotiator, immediately launched a new round of indirect talks between Israel and Hamas to find a “middle ground” based on previous proposals.

This is a developing story and will be updated.

Families are demanding answers after authorities in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico, discovered that 383 bodies had been stored in a crematorium for months and years after the people had died.

Norma Guardado Meraz was one of many locals who visited the Chihuahua Prosecutor’s Office this week to get more information about its investigation into the discovery, fearing that among the bodies are those of their relatives.

The discovery was made on June 26 after several municipal police officers found a hearse containing two bodies and other corpses piled up in a room in the building’s courtyard.

Prosecutor César Jáuregui said the pile of bodies had accumulated since 2020, suggesting that the Plenitud crematorium had failed to perform services it had been subcontracted for by six funeral homes.

She and her family want clarity about the fate of the remains of her mother, María Nieves Meraz, who died three years ago and was mourned at one of the funeral homes that had subcontracted the crematorium.

Another resident, Javier Ramírez, went to the prosecutor’s office Wednesday to determine if the remains he had received actually belong to his father, who died two months ago and whose wake was held at one of the other funeral homes.

The office said Tuesday that of the 383 bodies found, 218 were men, 149 were women and the gender of 16 could not been identified.

As the case moves forward, the prosecutor’s office is promising a thorough investigation and says it encourages more people to come forward and demand answers.

A man set the door of a synagogue alight and a group of protesters stormed an Israeli restaurant in Melbourne on Friday night, the latest in a wave of antisemitic attacks in Australian cities.

About 20 people were inside the synagogue in the downtown area of East Melbourne when a man poured flammable liquid on the front door of the synagogue on Albert Street before setting it on fire, Victoria state police said.

The group was having Shabbat dinner, marking the beginning of the Jewish day of rest, when the attack took place at 8 p.m. local time, Alex Ryvchin, the co-CEO of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), wrote on X.

No one was injured and firefighters extinguished the small blaze, police said, adding that the perpetrator, who remains unidentified, fled the scene.

Just over 1 kilometer to the west on Hardware Lane – one of the city’s most popular areas for restaurants and nightlife – about 20 protesters stormed into an Israeli restaurant, chanting slogans, police said. A 28-year-old was arrested for hindering police, and has been released on a summons.

Speaking at a press briefing, Acting Commander Zorka Dunstan of Victoria state police said officers were also investigating a third attack early Saturday morning in which three cars were set on fire near a business in the northeastern suburb of Greensborough.

Suspects spray-painted the cars and the walls of the buildings, she said, adding that the business has been targeted by pro-Palestine protesters in the past.

The security investigation unit, part of the counter-terrorism command, is investigating all the incidents, though police have yet to declare whether they constitute a terrorism incident, Dunstan said.

“We will examine the intent and the ideology of the persons or person involved,” she said.

Many among Australia’s 117,000-strong Jewish population are anxious after spate of antisemitic attacks in the country’s two biggest cities, Sydney and Melbourne, since late last year – including arson attacks on synagogues, and swastikas scrawled on buildings and cars.

The latest attacks drew condemnation from officials and community leaders on Saturday.

Denouncing the synagogue attack on X Saturday, Premier of Victoria Jacinta Allan said it was “designed to shatter…peace and traumatize Jewish families.”

“That it happened on Shabbat makes it all the more abhorrent,” she added, noting that children and women were among the people present at the venue.

“Any attack on a place of worship is an act of hate, and any attack on a Jewish place of worship is an act of anti-Semitism,” she said.

Melbourne’s Lord Mayor Nicholas Reece described the attack as “shocking,” according to Nine News.

“I cannot condemn this sort of behavior in stronger terms… this is a city of peace and tolerance, and we will not stand for this,” he said.

Ryvchin, from the ECAJ, urged the nation to condemn “these deplorable crimes.”

“Those responsible cannot be reasoned with or appeased. They must be confronted with the full force of the law,” he wrote on X.

As Denmark takes over the presidency of the European Union, Danes are more strongly pro-European than at any time in the past two decades – a shift in sentiment that can at least partly be attributed to US President Donald Trump.

An eye-opening survey published in March by Berlingske, a Danish daily newspaper, said 41% of Danes now see the United States as a threat. It also said 92% of respondents either “agree” or “mostly agree” that the Nordic nation needs to rely more on the European Union than the US for its security.

Given the recent tensions between Washington and Copenhagen, those statistics may not be surprising.

Since his return to the White House, Trump has spoken frequently and aggressively about Greenland, an autonomous crown dependency of Denmark, saying he would like the US to own it.

Vice President JD Vance and members of the Trump family have made what many see as provocative trips to and statements about the world’s largest island.

After Vance’s visit to the US military’s Pituffik Space Base in Greenland in March, Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen pushed back on his claim that Denmark isn’t doing enough for defense in the Arctic, calling her country “a good and strong ally.”

Back in Trump’s first administration, too, Greenland was a hot topic. In 2019, he reportedly accused Frederiksen of making a “nasty” and “absurd” statement in discussions about the island.

Sinking trust in Trump

“Now we have a different Denmark,” she said.

“Things have dramatically changed in Denmark and our attitude toward Europe,” she said, without mentioning the president’s name directly.

She was also very clear that Denmark feels a sense of disappointment in its longtime ally.

Denmark would still like to have a strong relationship with the US, Bjerre said, “but in a situation where the US is closing itself more around itself… is threatening us with tariffs and also criticizing Europe, our freedom of expression and all sorts of other things. Of course, in that situation, we have to be stronger on our own.”

She added, “The world order, as we have known it since the Second World War, is changing and we have to deliver to that geopolitical new situation that we are standing in.”

The minister also referenced the historic ties and shared past experiences of both nations, expressing a degree of frustration, if not anger, about how that relationship has changed.

“You could not put a paper in between the US and Denmark, we have always supported the US. We went into war with our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan… Seeing us, as a country, being criticized for not being a good ally, of course, that does affect our opinion,” Bjerre said.

Per capita, Denmark lost the second-highest number of soldiers of all the US-led coalition partners fighting in Afghanistan. In total, 43 Danish soldiers died, equating to 7.82 deaths per million citizens. The US, by comparison, lost 7.96 soldiers per million.

“We used to be a very, very transatlantic country… that has plummeted,” said Friis. “There is now the feeling… we simply cannot trust him,” she said – the “him” being Trump.

‘Huge’ change in tone

The shift in Danes’ opinions coincides with Denmark taking up the rotating, six-month EU presidency.

Denmark has long worried about the EU wading into Danes’ lives, fearing in particular for its relatively unregulated labor market. It has various opt-outs on EU policy, including not joining the EU’s single currency, the euro.

“We do things differently to other European nations,” said Bjerre.

Politicians and citizens used to fear that the EU “would become too dominating and too powerful,” Friis said, but now “the fear is the complete opposite.” Danes feel the bloc is “too weak” to deal with Putin to the East and Trump to the West, she said.

Friis also described the prime minister’s shift in tone as “huge,” saying Frederiksen used to be “very skeptical towards the EU.”

In June, Frederiksen announced that Denmark was quitting the so-called “Frugal Four,” an informal group of EU nations that had pushed to limit common spending, saying that “the most important thing is to rearm Europe.”

Laying out Denmark’s priorities for the EU presidency later that month, she reiterated that view, saying: “Now more than ever Europe needs to step up and stand together. We have to build an even stronger Europe, a more secure Europe where we are able to protect our democracies.”

EU-commissioned, biannual polls show a clear trend of increased trust in the EU over the past two decades, rising from 46% in spring 2005 to 74% this past spring. Steeper increases can be seen during Trump’s first term, after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, and as Trump’s second term began.

The war in Ukraine has had a significant influence on Danish views on the EU, Friis said.

“The very fact that you had a war in our backyard has sort of created a completely new sort of atmosphere around security in Denmark, people are worried. People are prepping now because they’re scared about what could happen also to our own security,” she said.

Bjerre said Copenhagen’s EU presidency would prioritize a “stronger Europe and a changing world,” with Europe having a real focus on security.

Denmark takes the European helm, then, at a time of increasingly pro-European sentiment among its own population and a wider recognition in Europe that it must do more to stand on its own. The problem is that some of Europe’s most pressing issues – Ukraine, trade tariffs and security – mean talking to the US and Trump. And at the moment, there may not be much love lost between the two.