India and Pakistan agreed to an immediate ceasefire on Saturday, unexpectedly halting the worst fighting in decades between the nuclear-armed neighbors, just when their tit-for-tat strikes appeared to be spiraling out of control. Just hours after the announcement there have been reports of violations from both sides. “After a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a FULL AND IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE,” Trump said, congratulating the leaders of both countries for “using common sense and great intelligence.” Soon after, Secretary of State Marco Rubio claimed that India and Pakistan had not only agreed to a ceasefire, but also “to start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.” Rubio said that the ceasefire came after he and Vice President JD Vance spent the past two days speaking with senior officials from both countries. A minute later, Pakistan confirmed the ceasefire was effective immediately. India's Ministry of Information said the agreement was worked out “directly between the two countries,” downplaying US involvement and contradicting Trump's claim. The ministry also said there was “no decision” to hold further talks. But Pakistani officials have heaped praise on Washington. “We thank President Trump for his leadership and proactive role for peace in the region,” said Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. It should not be surprising that these bitter rivals have given contradictory accounts of how the ceasefire was reached. India, which views itself as an ascendant superpower, has long been resistant to international mediation, whereas Pakistan, which is heavily dependent on foreign aid, tends to welcome it, analysts say. “India has never accepted mediation in any dispute, be it India-Pakistan or India-China, or any other,” said Dr. Aparna Panda, research fellow for India and South Asia at the Hudson Institute, a think-tank in Washington, DC. “Pakistan, on the other hand, has always sought international mediation so they will praise it,” she added, saying it is “the only way it can put pressure on India to discuss and resolve the Kashmir dispute.” The fighting before Saturday's ceasefire was marked by claims, counterclaims and disinformation from both sides. Now that the conflict has paused, both sides are ramping up their efforts to shape perceptions of what the fighting achieved and how it ended. In the early hours of Saturday morning, Pakistan said India had launched missiles at several of its key military bases. It said the strikes spanned from sites in Pakistan-administered Kashmir to a military base close to its capital, Islamabad. Hours later, explosions were reported in Indian-administered Kashmir, including Srinagar, the region's largest city, and in the city of Jaamu. Sharif said Pakistan had delivered “a resounding reply” to Indian aggression. The two nations to emerge from the bloody partition of British India – Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan – both claim Kashmir in full, despite only controlling parts of it. At least 25 Indian citizens and one Nepali were killed in the massacre. New Delhi immediately blamed Islamabad, accusing it of supporting “cross-border terrorism.” Pakistan has denied all involvement in the attack. The theater of conflict since then has been far broader than in previous rounds of fighting, with both sides striking deep into the other's territory. “What we can do is try to encourage these folks to de-escalate a little bit, but we're not going to get involved in the middle of a war that's fundamentally none of our business and has nothing to do with America's ability to control it,” Vance told Fox News on Thursday. Trump administration officials told CNN that, after receiving alarming intelligence on Friday about the extent to which the conflict could escalate, the State Department felt it had no choice but to play a greater role in talks between the two sides Although India and Pakistan have stepped back from the brink for now, it remains to be seen whether the ceasefire will hold. India's Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri accused Pakistan of repeatedly violating the ceasefire agreement on Saturday, after explosions were heard in both the India- and Pakistan-administered parts of Kashmir. However, Pakistan's Information Minister Attaullah Tarar told Pakistani news channel Geo News that a violation of the ceasefire from Pakistan was “out of the question.” CNN's Rhea Mogul, Sophia Saifi, Esha Mitra, Aditi Sangal, Nic Robertson, Alayne Treene, Aishwarya S. Iyer, Kunal Seghal, Sophie Tanno and Mukhtar Ahmad contributed reporting.

With international backing, Israel is now openly planning for permanent occupation of Gaza and forced mass expulsion. With international backing, Israel is now openly planning for permanent occupation of Gaza and forced mass expulsion. It has been a year since Israel first invaded Rafah and crossed Biden's illusory “red line.” The Israeli army destroyed the Rafah crossing, isolating Gaza from Egypt and completely cutting it off from the outside world. Israel was free to conduct the mass displacement of Palestinians away from the Egyptian border, but it never admitted to that goal. But now, Rafah is no more, and Israel's recently approved plan to reoccupy Gaza indefinitely has made explicit what many have already expected for months: that the ulterior motive of creating permanent military installations and buffer zones in Gaza is to facilitate the mass expulsion of Palestinians. Israel is now openly announcing its intentions and publicly advertising ethnic cleansing as “voluntary migration.” This didn't happen overnight, but has been the result of a slow, deliberate process of hemming Palestinians into concentrated sub-ghettoes under fire while creating vast military buffer zones on swathes of flattened Gazan territory. The plan has been implemented in piecemeal over the past 18 months, but now those pieces are falling clearly into place. Just last week, Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel's main war aim of “defeating its enemies” superseded the goal of releasing Israeli captives in Gaza, echoing previous statements from his Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, the so-called hardliner. It has been Israel's plan all along, but the Israeli government has had to stagger its implementation over the course of a year and a half due to a series of internal and external constraints. Even a month earlier, Netanyahu had said in a televised statement that “Israel has no intention of permanently reoccupying Gaza or displacing its civilian population.” Since Trump made his February statement, which he later walked back, Israel has been emboldened to go full steam ahead with its plan. But Trump's February announcement was not where Israel's strategy to take over the strip and displace its people originated. Well before Israel was forced by Trump to enter into the ceasefire with Hamas, the army had thrown all its force behind a military plan proposed by a cohort of Israeli generals based on an earlier vision laid out by retired Israeli general Giora Eiland. Dubbed “the Generals' Plan,” its aim was to completely depopulate northern Gaza through siege and starvation. The last functioning hospital in the area, Kamal Adwan Hospital, was also forcibly evacuated following an 80-day siege and several direct attacks by Israeli drones. Israeli forces also abducted several members of the medical staff, including the hospital's director, Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya, who continues to be detained by Israeli forces to this day. The Generals' Plan failed after hundreds of thousands of Palestinians returned to the north in a historic return march during the ceasefire, setting up camp beside the rubble of their homes and sending a clear message that their displacement had been anything but “voluntary.” Israel's plans for realizing its solution to the “Gaza problem” had been frustrated, and it was dragged into the ceasefire kicking and screaming. Israel continued to stall at every stage of the ceasefire, sabotaging it at every opportunity and refusing to enter into negotiations that would see a permanent end to the war. It continued to bide its time, waiting for an opening. Trump gave Israel the opening it needed in February, and Netanyahu's war cabinet has been barreling through all internal obstacles within the Israeli political system ever since. Five days after the ceasefire broke, U.S. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz was still saying that the idea of transferring Palestinians was “practical” and “realizable.” Katz reiterated this plan weeks later, stating that Israel's strategy in Gaza included destroying infrastructure, blocking the entry of humanitarian aid, and “promoting voluntary transfer.” Since the beginning of Israel's genocide in Gaza, Israel has revealed parts of its final plan in stages. Every step of the way, Israel has met no practical consequences for its escalation, and no government with any leverage over Israel has moved to impose any political repercussions. Even the generalized official rejection by European and Arab governments of Trump's Gaza plan wasn't followed by any action. At this moment, we are witnessing a terrifying array of anti-democratic tactics to silence political opposition, increase surveillance and expand authoritarian reach. Truthout is appealing for your support as Trump and his sycophants crack down on political speech. Nonprofits like Truthout could be caught in Trump's crosshairs as he attacks dissenting groups with bad faith lawsuits and targeted harassment of journalists. As well, these attacks come at a time when independent journalism is most needed. The right-wing corporate takeover of media has left reliable outlets few and far between, with even fewer providing their work at no cost to the reader. Truthout is funded overwhelmingly by readers like you. Please make a tax-deductible one-time or monthly donation today. Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.

Rümeysa Öztürk, one of several pro-Palestine scholars kidnapped and imprisoned by the Trump administration under its dubious interpretation of an 18th-century law and a Cold War-era national security measure, was released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody Friday following a federal judge's order. She was targeted because of an opinion piece published in Tufts Daily advocating divestment from Israel amid the U.S.-backed nation's genocidal assault on Gaza and its apartheid, occupation, ethnic cleansing, and colonization in the rest of Palestine. Öztürk was arrested despite a U.S. State Department determination that there were no grounds for revoking her visa. “There has been no evidence that has been introduced by the government other than the op-ed,” said Sessions, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton. BREAKING: a federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to immediately release on bail Rumeysa Ozturk, a Muslim grad student at Tufts University who was abducted and abused by ICE agents, all because she wrote an editorial, yes, an editorial, critical of the Israeli government's genocide. “There is absolutely no evidence that she has engaged in violence, or advocated violence, she has no criminal record,” Sessions noted. The Trump administration has openly flouted judge's rulings — including a U.S. Supreme Court order — that direct it to release detained immigrants. “In light of the court's finding of no flight risk and no danger to the community, petitioner is to be released from ICE custody immediately on her own recognizance, without any form of body-worn GPS or other ICE monitoring at this time,” the judge wrote. @OscarJournalist the only Boston TV reporter in Louisiana as she walks out of ICE detention facility. Mahsa Khanbabai, Öztürk's attorney, told Courthouse News Service she's “relieved and ecstatic” that her client has been ordered released. When did speaking up against genocide become something to be imprisoned for?” Secretary of State Marco Rubio — who lied about Öztürk supporting Hamas — has used such determinations to target people for engaging in constitutionally protected speech and protest. Far-right, pro-Israel groups like Betar and Canary Mission have compiled lists containing the names of these and other pro-Palestine students that are shared with the Trump administration for possible deportation. Foreign nationals — and some U.S. citizens wrongfully swept up in the Trump administration's mass deportation effort — are imprisoned in facilities including private, for-profit detention centers, where there are widespread reports of poor conditions and alleged abuses. These include denial of medical care, insufficient access to feminine hygiene products, and rotten food at the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center, where Öztürk — who, according to Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass. ), has received no religious or dietary accommodations and had her hijab forcibly removed — is being held. Öztürk also suffers from asthma and told Sessions via Zoom Friday that her attacks have increased behind bars due to stress. Dr. Jessica McCannon, a pulmonologist, testified that Öztürk's asthma appears to be poorly controlled in ICE custody, according to courtroom coverage on the social media site Bluesky by freelance journalist Joshua J. Friedman. was among those who on Friday demanded Öztürk's immediate release, while other lawmakers and human rights and free speech defenders celebrated Sessions' decision. “Rümeysa Öztürk has finally been ordered released,” Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) “She has been unlawfully detained for more than six weeks in an ICE facility in Louisiana, more than 1,500 miles away from Somerville. No one here will lose their rights and freedom for publishing an op-ed. Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, said in a statement that “it is unfathomable that in the United States legal system, it takes 45 days for a judge to rule that people can't be put behind bars for writing op-eds the government doesn't like.” “Without a system committed to its principles, the Constitution is just words on paper, and they don't mean much if this can happen here,” Stern continued. “Öztürk's abduction and imprisonment is one of the most shameful chapters in First Amendment history.” Amid President Donald Trump's defunding threats and pressure from ICE officials, universities have told “many hundreds” of international students that they have lost their immigration status and must immediately self-deport. These notifications were based on the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) termination of students' records on the Student Exchange and Visitor Information System (SEVIS), a database used by schools and authorities to access visa information. Although DHS admitted in court that it had no authority to use SEVIS to revoke students' status, the Trump administration still canceled more than 1,800 visas before reversing course last month pending an ICE policy revamp. As with Öztürk and other detained students, the Trump administration has dubiously invoked the Alien Enemies Act in trying to deport García and others. However, federal judges — including multiple Trump appointees — have thwarted some of these efforts. On Friday, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said that Trump and his advisers are “actively looking at” suspending habeas corpus as a means of overcoming judicial pushback against the administration's deportation blitz. Critics pointed out that Miller's proposal is, in fact, blatantly unconstitutional. “Since it appears needs to be said: The authority to suspend habeas corpus lies with Congress, not the president, and is only legal during extreme circumstances of rebellion or invasion,” Democratic pollster and strategist Matt McDermott said on Bluesky. It wasn't just Democrats and Palestine defenders who cheered Sessions' ruling Friday. Billy Binion, who covers “all things injustice” for the libertarian website Reason, said on social media that the government's “entire case against her is that… she wrote an op-ed.” Anyway, I continue to be amazed at the number of people who claim to be free speech warriors while simultaneously weaponizing the power of the *federal government* to save them from words that offend them. “Hard to overstate how bleak — and frankly embarrassing — it is that the Trump administration wants to jail and deport someone for speech,” he continued. At this moment, we are witnessing a terrifying array of anti-democratic tactics to silence political opposition, increase surveillance and expand authoritarian reach. Truthout is appealing for your support as Trump and his sycophants crack down on political speech. Nonprofits like Truthout could be caught in Trump's crosshairs as he attacks dissenting groups with bad faith lawsuits and targeted harassment of journalists. As well, these attacks come at a time when independent journalism is most needed. The right-wing corporate takeover of media has left reliable outlets few and far between, with even fewer providing their work at no cost to the reader. Get the news you want, delivered to your inbox every day.

"We agreed that a full and unconditional ceasefire must begin on Monday, May 12, for at least 30 days. Ukrainian media outlet ZN.UA reported on May 10 that their law enforcement sources confirmed an ongoing probe by the National Anti-Corruption Bureau into suspected embezzlement, money laundering and bribery. Iran is preparing to send Russia Fath-360 short-range ballistic missile launchers, Reuters reported on May 9, citing Western security and regional officials familiar with the matter. "Ukraine and all allies are ready for a complete unconditional ceasefire on land, in the air, and at sea for at least 30 days, starting as early as Monday," Ukraine's Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha wrote. A notice about the airspace closure was published on the U.S. Defense Department's NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) website on May 10, as cited by Ukrainian defense news outlet Militarnyi. "As in the past, it is now for Russia to show its willingness to achieve peace," the EU's statement reads. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov rejected the idea of a 30-day ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, claiming in an interview with ABC News on May 10 that it would be "an advantage" for Ukraine. "Our involvement in the war was justifiable, and this belongs to our sovereign rights," North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un said. "I regard this as part of the sacred mission we must execute for our brothers and comrades-in-arms." Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico arrived in Moscow on May 9 to celebrate Victory Day, commemorating the 80th anniversary of the defeat of Nazi Germany in World War II. Slovak and Russian press agencies reported that Fico was accompanied by other politicians from his party, including Erik Kaliniak, Lubos Blaga, Richard Gluck. Fico, who anticipated arriving in Moscow on May 8, was delayed in his arrival, following the Baltic states' decision to bar Slovakia's government plane from flying over their respective country's airspace en route to Moscow. "Estonia informed us a couple of minutes ago that it will not allow us to fly over its territory," Fico wrote on Facebook. Fico is known for inflammatory statements on Ukraine and the war that often echo Moscow's talking points. Fico's planned visit comes as another jab at the Western efforts to internationally isolate Putin over Russia's full-scale war in Ukraine. Slovakia is a member state of both NATO and the EU.

MOSCOW, May 10. /TASS/. The positions of Russia and Zimbabwe on most topical international issues are very close, President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting with Zimbabwean leader Emmerson Mnangagwa. "Russia and Zimbabwe take common or very close positions on most topical issues on the international agenda. We seek a just, multipolar world order based on the rule of international law," the Russian head of state said. Putin noted that Russia appreciates the Zimbabwean leader's support for Russian initiatives at the UN and on other multilateral platforms. "Of course, Russia attaches special importance to the comprehensive strengthening of relations with the countries of the African continent," Putin said. The Russian leader also recalled that the first conference of the Russia-Africa Partnership Forum at the level of foreign ministers was held in Sochi last November. "We are preparing for another ministerial conference at the end of this year and expect to see your country's Foreign Minister there," Putin added.

In early May, 64-year-old film critic and journalist Ekaterina Barabash made international headlines when it was revealed that she had pulled off a daring escape from house arrest in Russia and sought political asylum in France. Barabash was put under house arrest in February for posts that she had made criticizing Russia's war against Ukraine. She was accused of spreading “knowingly false” information about the military on her social media. The Kremlin has intensified its crackdown on dissent in Russia since the start of its full-scale war against Ukraine, not only targeting those who dare to speak out against the war but also fostering a climate of surveillance that hearkens back to the worst periods of the Soviet era, urging Russian citizens to police one another. For Barabash, the war struck a personal chord — she is the daughter of a renowned Ukrainian academic and her son lives in Ukraine with his family. Unlike many Russians — who either seek to justify the war or retreat into indifference — Barabash felt a moral imperative to speak out “They've always been taught that Ukraine is just a part of Russia. But this belief is a kind of poison. In this exclusive interview, Barabash reflects on the moment she decided to risk her life to flee Russia, how her Ukrainian heritage shaped her perspective on Russian culture over the years, why even “good Russians” who oppose the war don't understand Ukraine, and the bleak future facing anyone with a conscience who chooses to remain in today's Russia. This interview has been edited for length and clarity.The Kyiv Independent: Since the idea for this interview originally came after you escaped house arrest in Russia, I just wanted to start off by asking, how are you doing? Ekaterina Barabash: I escaped from house arrest in Russia on April 13. I got past the checkpoints and left my home. We had a plan — I was supposed to be free within 24 hours. But things didn't go as expected, and I ended up having to hide for two and a half weeks. Unfortunately, I can't share all the details right now. It's a shame, because some parts are really interesting. It was a bit frightening and definitely dangerous. We had hoped they wouldn't notice my absence for at least a few hours, but they realized I was gone very quickly — within just minutes, maybe half an hour. After that, I had to cross the border into a European country. From there, things were arranged to help me move forward. Ekaterina Barabash: No, I didn't make the decision right away. At first, when they placed me under house arrest, it felt almost like a breath of fresh air. It was so unexpected — usually, in political cases, people accused of such “crimes” are held in jail while they await trial. But the judge said that because I had a very old mother, and I myself am not so young, they decided to place me under house arrest until the court date. At first, it gave us hope — even my lawyer believed that I might only receive a large fine rather than jail time. But within a few days, after some conversations with certain people, I realized the risk was very high. The chance of being sentenced to prison was real. I believed I could face five, six, even seven years in a Russian prison — and a Russian prison is worse than death. That was when some people from Europe, who help political prisoners like me, told me clearly: even though I was at home, I needed to plan my escape. But eventually, I realized it was the best option. I had to choose between two impossible outcomes: prison or fleeing the country. I had coordinators from Europe who guided me through every step. The Kyiv Independent: What makes your case unique among other Russian opposition figures is that you have very strong ties to Ukraine. Does your Ukrainian heritage influence how you view Russia and Russian culture? So my entire life has been connected to Russia. My family has always had very strong ties to Ukraine. My father, who passed away five months ago, was a well-known figure there. He was a literary critic and the author of many books written in Ukrainian. He was highly respected in the academic community. Years earlier, my son also moved to Ukraine for personal reasons. He lives there now with his wife and my grandchildren. My closest relatives were there, being targeted by drones and missiles. I couldn't hold back my grief or outrage. I couldn't keep this anger and pain inside me. My perspective on the war was deeply personal. It wasn't just politics for me — it was about my family, my roots, and the suffering of people I love. Even intelligent and well-educated Russian people often don't truly understand Ukraine. Almost all Russians have been poisoned by imperial propaganda. They've always been taught that Ukraine is just a part of Russia. That the Ukrainian language is just a slightly different version of Russian. But this belief is a kind of poison. I knew at least a little about Ukrainian culture and history — something most Russians don't. I've done interviews and written about Ukrainian culture. So yes, my point of view was different from the beginning. The Kyiv Independent: We know that Russia's war against Ukraine started in 2014, not 2022. Even many anti-Putin individuals, including some of my friends, didn't grasp that the war actually started in 2014. I had to remind them, "No, the war started eight years ago." Later on, many of them started to understand, at least a little, what had been happening. But the truth is, almost no one cared. They saw (the invasion of Ukraine's Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts) as some small conflict in eastern Ukraine, maybe with some Russian soldiers involved, but they didn't recognize it as the coming of something horrific. But they thought that (Soviet leader Nikita) Khrushchev had “given” Crimea to Ukraine many years ago and that Russia had long claimed it. Ekaterina Barabash: You know, I've recently realized one thing that I didn't understand at first: it's impossible to change their minds. If you want to know the truth, you can seek out information, but most people in Russia aren't willing to look for it. There are plenty of (Ukrainian) outlets that offer Russian-language versions of the news, and many people understand English, so they could easily access European media, too. The answer I often hear is, "Everyone lies." They're willing to accept the lies from Russian propaganda, but they won't even consider competing narratives from other sources. It's an awful argument — a foolish one, really. It's unfortunate, really, but what can I say to these people? I understand — everyone has families, property, and they don't want to end up in jail. I know it's not easy to leave behind elderly parents. Hey there, Kate Tsurkan here, thanks for reading my latest interview. It's horrific that in Russia you're considered a criminal for calling out the actual criminals who are murdering innocent people, but thankfully we have people in this world like Ekaterina Barabash who are not afraid to call evil what it is. I hope her story inspires you and helps show that if a 64-year-old grandmother can stand up to authoritarianism in this world, then so can you. It you like reading about this sort of thing, please consider supporting The Kyiv Independent. Kate Tsurkan is a reporter at the Kyiv Independent who writes mostly about culture-related topics in Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. Her newsletter Explaining Ukraine with Kate Tsurkan, which focuses specifically on Ukrainian culture, is published weekly by the Kyiv Independent.

Six-year-old Lilly Sullivan and her four-year-old brother Jack were reported missing on May 2 Lilly and Jack Sullivan, along with their mother Malehya Brooks-Murray and baby sister Meadow, moved to the community two years ago, into the childhood home of Daniel Martell, pictured.Chris Donovan/The Globe and Mail The community is in a far-flung corner of Pictou County, with the closest town a 15-minute drive away. A few local cars, logging trucks and the big yellow school bus are usually the only traffic to be seen. A network of backcountry roads that only the locals know criss-cross rivers and dense forest that's swarming with blackflies. Many of the roughly 100 people who live in Lansdowne are related, and have been there for generations. Lilly and Jack, along with their mother Malehya Brooks-Murray and baby sister Meadow, moved to the community two years ago, into the childhood home of Daniel Martell, who describes himself as the missing children's stepfather. The children's biological father has no contact with them, according to their family. Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following. © Copyright 2025 The Globe and Mail Inc. All rights reserved.

Trump announced breakthrough after talks apparently secured by secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and vice-president, JD Vance India and Pakistan have agreed to a US-mediated ceasefire with immediate effect, though its longevity was thrown into question after reports of cross-border shelling and explosions in Indian-administered Kashmir just hours after it was announced. The ceasefire – which was hoped to end days of escalating clashes between the two nuclear-armed countries – was first declared by the US president, Donald Trump, on Saturday afternoon, after 48 hours of diplomacy between India and Pakistan, apparently brokered by the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, and vice-president, JD Vance. Trump, in a post on his Truth Social platform, said: “After a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a FULL AND IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE. Congratulations to both Countries on using Common Sense and Great Intelligence. Instructions have been given on both sides to give effect to this understanding.” The top military officials would speak again on 12 May, Misri added. An Indian government source told AFP that Pakistan had violated the ceasefire. A senior Pakistani security source said it was India that had started the ceasefire violations. “When news of the ceasefire broke, displaced families in camps began dancing with joy,” he said. “We've been here before – temporary ceasefires brokered by global powers. But until India and Pakistan seriously settle their disputes, we must brace for even greater conflicts,” he said. However, those who gathered in the streets to celebrate were then driven indoors as explosions began to boom out over parts of Indian-Kashmir on Saturday night. Historically, the US has played an important role as a mediator between India and Pakistan when hostilities have flared up. The Trump administration's proactive role in brokering peace was, however, a notable reversal of Vance's position 48 hours earlier, when he said the US would not intervene in the India-Pakistan conflict as it was “none of our business”. “India has consistently maintained a firm and uncompromising stance against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations,” said India's foreign minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. In Pakistan it was met with a chorus of approval. The ceasefire came after India and Pakistan accused each other of cross-border missile strikes against significant military targets on Saturday, with many fearful it would escalate into all-out war. India and Pakistan have fought four wars, most recently in 1999. The fighting this week was first inflamed on Wednesday after Indian missiles struck nine sites in Pakistan, killing 31 people. India claimed to have intercepted more than 400 drones targeting cities, military bases and places of worship across the north of the country on Thursday. In retaliation, India said it had launched four drone strikes on Pakistan, directly targeting military defence infrastructure. By Saturday morning, India had accused Pakistan of launching strikes on dozens of airbases and military headquarters across north India, using long-range weapons, drones and fighter aircraft. The accusations came a few hours after Pakistan said India had fired six surface-to-air missiles targeting three of Pakistan's most important military bases early on Saturday morning. At a press conference, the Indian army spokesperson Col Sofiya Qureshi accused Pakistan of attacking 26 sites in India, including the Pathankot military airfield in Punjab, Srinagar airport and Udhampur air force base in Indian-administered Kashmir, as well as “deplorable and cowardly” attacks on civilian infrastructure. Qureshi said “Indian armed forces successfully neutralised these threats” but added that some damage was done to equipment and personnel at four airbases. The Indian army alleged its attack on Pakistan's military bases on Saturday was in retaliation for high-speed missiles fired at several airbases in Punjab at about 2am. “In a swift and calibrated response, Indian armed forces carried out precision attacks only on identified military targets,” said Qureshi. In an address broadcast on state TV at about 3.30am, the military spokesperson Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry claimed India had struck first, using fighter jets to fire surface-to-air missiles at Pakistan's Nur Khan, Murid and Rafiqui military bases. He said the “majority” of India's missiles were intercepted by air defence systems. Shortly after, Pakistan confirmed it had begun its counterattack against India, under the name Operation Bunyan Ul Marsoos, a phrase from the Qur'an roughly translating to “wall of lead”. Earlier on Saturday, the G7 had called for both countries to exercise “maximum constraint”.

US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has offered US assistance in starting “constructive talks” to end the conflict between India and Pakistan, as the two states traded heavy missile fire on Saturday, prompting concerns over wider military escalation. Fighting between India and Pakistan started on Wednesday after Indian missiles hit nine sites in Pakistan, killing 31 people and triggering a cycle of tit-for-tat attacks between the two countries. Clashes peaked on Saturday, as both countries launched missile strikes deep in each other's territories, using long-range weapons, drone swarms and fighter jets. Both Indian and Pakistani officials have said that they did not wish to see further escalation. At a press briefing on Saturday, Indian military officers said: “Indian armed forces reiterated their commitment to non-escalation, provided the Pakistan side reciprocates.” Pakistan's defence minister, Khawaja Asif, said while they had no “issue to de-escalate,” that he did not trust India's statements. There has been a flurry of international diplomacy to head off conflict, as despite both India and Pakistan stating that they do not want escalation, there has been a steady uptick in intensity during the week of clashes. US efforts to try to mediate between India and Pakistan have been spearheaded by Rubio, who has been in regular contact with both Pakistani prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, and Indian foreign minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, since the Kashmir attack. The US, in turn, is India's largest trading partner, and Reuters reports that it has offered preferential trading terms to the Americans in order to secure a stronger partnership with its ally. The vice-president, JD Vance, said an India-Pakistan war would be “fundamentally none of our business and has nothing to do with America's ability to control it”. Pakistan's defence minister said on Saturday that Saudi Arabia was playing a key role as interlocutor and that the Saudi foreign minister had sent a representative to Pakistan. UK foreign secretary, David Lammy, joined G7 ministers in calling for calm, with the G7 issuing a statement on Saturday urging “maximum restraint” from both India and Pakistan. “We call for immediate de-escalation and encourage both countries to engage in direct dialogue towards a peaceful outcome,” the statement read.

The case arises from a challenge to Trump's birthright citizenship executive order. With more than 100 lawsuits against Trump's policies, lower court judges have issued a raft of nationwide injunctions halting parts of the administration's agenda, from federal spending freezes to immigration enforcement to canceling diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. The injunctions are highly controversial because they impose policy changes for the entire country rather than offer relief only for plaintiffs in the lawsuits, drawing scrutiny from some Supreme Court justices and members of Congress. Trump has said they are detrimental to the nation's future. “STOP NATIONWIDE INJUNCTIONS NOW, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. If Justice Roberts and the United States Supreme Court do not fix this toxic and unprecedented situation IMMEDIATELY, our Country is in very serious trouble!” “Children will lose access to health care and may indeed be deported, notwithstanding that at the conclusion of the litigation they will be found to have been U.S. citizens all along,” their brief read. Republicans have argued that Article III of the Constitution limits relief to parties involved in a case and introduced legislation attempting to limit judges' authority in this area. They've pointed to the constitutional phrasing “cases and controversies.” Florida State University Law Professor Jacob Eisler, however, told The Epoch Times that Trump's policies have nationwide implications. Relief, therefore, could not be confined to discrete parties before the court. While some of the plaintiffs suing Trump are pregnant immigrants, others have included state governments. In issuing one of the injunctions before the high court, U.S. District Judge John Coughenour said in February that a geographically limited injunction would be “ineffective” because plaintiff states would have to pay for the children of illegal immigrants who travel from other states. In contrast to typical Supreme Court cases, they're expected to offer tentative legal conclusions rather than an outright ruling that Trump's order is unconstitutional. They could also comment on whether New Jersey and others challenging the administration are likely to succeed in arguing that Trump's order violates the Constitution. But the administration and others, like the state of Tennessee and some members of Congress, have argued it's more limited.

The Canadian energy industry is looking to LNG Canada as a promising sign that the country is capable of shipping its resources to new markets and reducing its U.S. economic dependence At a sprawling construction site in northern British Columbia, LNG Canada chief executive officer Chris Cooper points out the finishing touches being made at the terminal that will soon be exporting liquefied natural gas. With extra insulation installed over here and new cladding added over there, the finish line is finally within sight, more than 12 years after the joint venture received its export licence. The $18-billion export terminal is now more than 98 per cent completed after nearly seven years of construction, and the first LNG shipment from Kitimat, B.C., is slated to set sail to Asia by mid-2025. “We're actually leading the way on a new industry and we're helping Canada to diversify its export markets – and that's a huge deal,” Mr. Cooper said in his first media interview since becoming CEO on April 1. With a hard hat and safety glasses on, he is dwarfed by the towering energy equipment and the network of pipes surrounding him at what will be Canada's first LNG export terminal. One of the largest industrial projects ever constructed in Canada has risen on the 400-hectare site, a huge footprint equivalent in size to Vancouver's popular tourist attraction, Stanley Park. Chris Cooper, a global energy specialist who joined LNG Canada in late 2021 and became CEO in April this year, says the company is helping Canada to diversify its export markets. From various vantage points across Kitimat, residents can see LNG Canada's flare stacks that have been used to burn off natural gas during the commissioning process. Within weeks, LNG produced in Kitimat will start being loaded onto Asia-bound ships that will be docked at the wharf at the head of Douglas Channel, an inlet lined with rolling coastal mountains. But Canada, the world's fifth-largest natural gas producer, exported 45 per cent of its gas supplies last year south of the border. Shell PLC SHEL-N and the four co-owners of LNG Canada are considering whether to approve Phase 2. The other participants in the venture are PetroChina and Japan's Mitsubishi Corp. (each with a 15-per-cent stake) and South Korea's Kogas (5 per cent). Canada remains far behind the United States in constructing and opening LNG export terminals. The first LNG export facility in the lower 48 states began operating in 2016 and another seven U.S. sites have opened since then. Mr. Trump has been touting Alaska LNG as a promising proposal to reach Asian markets. A report last year by Clean Energy Canada, a think tank at Simon Fraser University, said the focus on fossil fuels such as LNG ends up delaying the global transition to renewables such as wind and solar. “That energy addition drives the need for, in general, more energy from all sources,” said Teresa Waddington, LNG Canada's vice-president of corporate relations. “Our chance with Phase 2 to truly put Canada squarely on the map in terms of an LNG exporting nation with significant capacity is really exciting.” An era of major projects in British Columbia is winding down as LNG Canada's first phase nears completion, and attention is turning to what the future might hold. include the Trans Mountain oil pipeline expansion and Coastal GasLink. Calgary-based TC Energy Corp. TRP-T owns 35 per cent of Coastal GasLink and is the operator of the 670-kilometre pipeline for natural gas that stretches from northeast B.C. is scheduled to be fully in service later this year. The energy spotlight is shifting to prospects such as Ksi Lisims LNG, a proposal backed by the Nisga'a Nation. 's North Coast in 2029, with other vessels exporting LNG to Asia. But Ksi Lisims must first undergo an environmental review. government loosened its net-zero rules for Ksi Lisims and other proposals to export LNG from the province, given uncertainty over how long it will take for new hydroelectricity supplies to be added to the grid. include FortisBC's expansion plans at its domestic Tilbury LNG site in Delta and Summit Lake PG LNG near Prince George. Mr. Cooper, a global energy specialist who rose through the ranks at Shell, joined LNG Canada in late 2021. He took over last month as the project's CEO, replacing Jason Klein, who returned to his home state of Texas after three years at the helm of LNG Canada. Pacific NorthWest LNG, led by Petronas, cancelled its project near Prince Rupert, B.C., in 2017 after struggling to navigate various environmental issues. It marked a breakthrough for the country's energy sector after years of failed or stalled proposals. “Less dependence on the U.S. is a good thing, for sure,” said Ron Burnett, president of the Kitimat Economic Development Association. There is a diversity of viewpoints among Indigenous groups over the fledgling LNG industry in B.C. will supply natural gas to LNG Canada and Cedar, which are situated in Kitimat on the traditional territory of the Haisla Nation. TC Energy CEO touts Asia as key to Canada's economic diversification away from U.S. Crystal Smith, the Haisla's elected chief councillor who is also chair of the First Nations Natural Gas Alliance, said Haisla leaders opposed the now-defunct Northern Gateway oil pipeline proposal from Alberta to Kitimat, but they support LNG as a fuel that will be safe to transport. “The community support had a lot to do with, definitely, the commodity that was being proposed for our territory, when it came to the impacts of LNG being exported through our waters,” said Ms. Smith, who will be seeking re-election in July. Cedar will use electricity from BC Hydro for powering electric motors that drive compressors for liquefaction on a floating production vessel. Cedar will rely on upgrades to an existing transmission line for hydroelectricity. The construction of LNG Canada has led to much-needed revenue for the Haisla Nation and has sparked local economic development, notably in Kitamaat Village, where an affordable-housing complex is among the new buildings. The First Nations Natural Gas Alliance, an Indigenous group that formed in 2015, believes that resource development will be crucial for economic reconciliation. The alliance supports tapping into abundant reserves of natural gas in northeast B.C. and transporting the commodity to the West Coast, viewing LNG as a crucial part of creating prosperity in Indigenous communities. First Nations that have endorsed LNG Canada include the Haisla, Kitselas, Kitsumkalum, Gitxaala and Gitga'at. But a group of Wet'suwet'en Nation hereditary chiefs has led a campaign opposing the contentious Coastal GasLink project, the first export pipeline for natural gas across northern B.C. A second pipeline, needed to supply Ksi Lisims, is called the Prince Rupert Gas Transmission (PRGT) project, which is co-owned by the Nisga'a and Western LNG. Environment Minister Tamara Davidson is expected to rule on the fate of PRGT this spring after she reviews arguments, including from climate activists opposed to it. Building LNG Canada's export terminal has been a test of stamina. At the peak of construction last year, the project required more than 9,000 workers on rotation in Kitimat, including room for 4,500 people at any given time at the on-site accommodation centre called Cedar Valley Lodge. There were still about 7,500 workers recently helping to finish the remaining bits and pieces of equipment. The District of Kitimat itself has nearly 9,000 year-round residents. The first phase of LNG Canada will rely on natural gas-fired turbines. High-efficiency turbines using Baker Hughes “aeroderivative” technology will help supercool natural gas into liquid form. LNG Canada, which has a 40-year export licence, will employ up to 350 workers during operations. The project‘s first phase will have two “trains,” or separate LNG cooling processes. government's standard for “emissions intensity,” targeting 0.15 carbon dioxide equivalent tonnes for each tonne of LNG produced – below the government's limit of 0.16. JGC Fluor BC LNG JV, a joint venture between JGC Corp. and Fluor Corp., is the project's engineering, procurement and construction contractor. line between Prince George and Terrace could take a decade to complete. In the meantime, LNG Canada is fully permitted to use natural gas-fired turbines for liquefaction for both Phase 1 and Phase 2. The new export terminal is on the former site of a methanol plant that was closed in 2006 by Methanex Corp. The marine terminal for LNG vessels used to be a wharf that formerly belonged to the Eurocan pulp and paper mill that West Fraser Timber Co. Ltd. shut down in 2010. When Eurocan and Methanex closed within a few years of each other, that was a tough time,” Kitimat Mayor Phil Germuth said. Along the waters of Douglas Channel, LNG Canada's industrial neighbour is Rio Tinto PLC's RIO-N aluminum smelter. Rio Tinto employs more than 1,100 workers in the Kitimat region. Kitimat was carved out of the wilderness in the early 1950s by Rio Tinto's predecessor, Alcan, when it built an aluminum smelter and a hydroelectric dam to power it. While U.S. tariffs on Canadian aluminum have sparked much uncertainty and anxiety, Rio Tinto insists that it will maintain a calm approach to its business strategy. “We can control what's in our sphere of control, which is safe operations,” said Simon Pascoe, general manager at Rio Tinto's Kitimat smelter. It takes roughly 10 days for a ship to sail from Kitimat to North Asia, versus 20 days from U.S. Gulf Coast, via the Panama Canal. Bryce Mathew Watts, executive director of the Kitimat Museum and Archives, said residents know the economic stakes are high with Rio Tinto's local smelter, LNG Canada's expansion potential and Cedar's construction. “Everyone understands what puts food on our tables,” Mr. Watts said. “There have been good years and bad years, so with new resources coming through, it diversifies and gives us more life as a community.” The next chapter in local history to be documented will be LNG, now part of a broader tale of Canada's quest to wean itself off economic reliance on the United States. Study and track financial data on any traded entity: click to open the full quote page. Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

MOSCOW, May 10. /TASS/. Russian Defense Minister Andrey Belousov has held a bilateral meeting with his Kyrgyz counterpart Baktybek Bekbolotov, the Russian Defense Ministry said. "I am very happy to hold this meeting with you. Yesterday, you put it right by saying that we are all the children of one family called the Soviet people. And that family broke Fascism's spine," the Russian military official said during the meeting. Belousov added that "our common history is very closely intertwined." The Russian Defense Ministry noted that during the talks, the sides discussed the issues of bilateral military and technical cooperation.

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor told a lawyers' conference that amid escalating criticism in the nation of some federal judges, lawyers need to “stand up” and “fight this fight.” Sotomayor made the comments during an on-stage conversation on May 8 at an American Bar Association conference at the Smithsonian Museum of African American History and Culture in Washington. The remarks by Sotomayor came after President Donald Trump, members of his administration, and Republicans in Congress have repeatedly criticized court rulings in recent months that have blocked or delayed the president's agenda. Several federal judges have said the Trump administration has not complied with various court orders on immigration enforcement, federal spending, the firing of government employees, and foreign aid. Sotomayor did not identify Trump or other officeholders who have criticized judges' rulings by name. “Our job is to stand up for people who can't do it themselves. “I am more grateful that in my role as a public servant, I can continue to serve all communities and represent America as the very best version of itself,” she said. Judicial independence is “the only real political-science innovation in our Constitution,” said Roberts, who became chief justice in 2005 after being nominated by President George W. Bush. “And that innovation doesn't work if ... the judiciary is not independent. Roberts also said, “impeachment is not how you register disagreement with [judicial] decisions.” “That's what we're there for,” he said, in reference to the appeals process. Jackson took her seat on the high court in June 2022 after being nominated by President Joe Biden.