What the UK general election might mean for the Middle East 

Special Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, soaked in rain, stands at a lecturn as he delivers a speech to announce July 4 as the date of the UK’s general election. (File/AFP)
Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, soaked in rain, stands at a lecturn as he delivers a speech to announce July 4 as the date of the UK’s general election. (File/AFP)
Short Url
Updated 03 July 2024
Follow

What the UK general election might mean for the Middle East 

Labour Party leader Keir Starmer and Britain’s Prime Minister and Conservative Party leader Rishi Sunak attend a live TV debate.
  • Perceived inaction on Gaza has hung over the election contest between Rishi Sunak and Sir Keir Starmer
  • If the polls prove correct and Labour sweeps to power, analysts predict a far closer UK-Gulf relationship

LONDON: It was clear from the moment that British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak stood outside 10 Downing Street on May 22 and announced that he was calling a snap general election that the next six weeks would not go well for his ruling Conservative party.

For many, the raincloud that burst over Sunak’s head as he spoke seemed to sum up the past 14 years, which, riven by factional infighting, saw no fewer than four leaders in the eight years since Theresa May succeeded David Cameron in 2016.

Adding to the comedy of the moment was the soundtrack to the announcement, courtesy of a protester at the gates of Downing Street, whose sound system was blasting out the ’90s pop hit “Things Can Only Get Better” — the theme tune of Labour’s 1997 election victory.




Britain’s Prime Minister Rishi Sunak delivers a speech at a Conservative Party campaign event at the National Army Museum in London. (File/AP)

Headline writers were spoiled for choice. Contenders included “Drown and out,” “Drowning Street” and — probably the winner — “Things can only get wetter.” That last one was also prescient. 

In theory, under the rules governing general elections, Sunak need not have gone to the country until December. The reality, however, was that both Sunak and his party were already trailing badly in the polls and the consensus at Conservative HQ was that things could only get worse.

As if to prove the point, in one early Conservative campaign video, the British Union Flag was flown upside down. A series of mishaps and scandals followed, with some Conservative MPs found to have been betting against themselves and the party.




Former British PM Boris Johnson gestures as he endorses British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak at a campaign event in London, Britain, July 2, 2024. (Reuters)

Judging by the steady slide in support for the government, the electorate has neither forgotten nor forgiven the chaos of the Boris Johnson years, typified by the illegal drinks parties held in Downing Street while the rest of the nation was locked down during COVID-19 restrictions.

Nor has the electorate forgotten the failure to deliver on the great promises of Brexit, the shock to the UK economy delivered by the 44-day premiership of Liz Truss, and the inability of the government to control the UK’s borders — which was, after all, the chief reason for leaving the EU.

On the day the election was announced, a seven-day average of polls showed Labour had twice as much support as the Conservatives — 45 percent to 23 percent.

Compounding the government’s woes was the rise of Reform UK, the populist right-wing party making gains thanks largely to the failure of Sunak’s pledge to reduce immigration and “stop the boats” carrying illegal migrants across the English Channel.

On 11 percent, Reform had overtaken the Lib Dems, Britain’s traditional third-placed party, and the vast majority of the votes it seemed certain to hoover up would be those of disenchanted Conservative voters.

By the eve of today’s election, a poll of 18 polls carried out in the seven days to July 2 showed Labour’s lead had eased only very slightly, to 40 percent against the Conservatives’ 21 percent, with Reform up to 16 percent.




Labour Party leader Keir Starmer and Britain’s Prime Minister and Conservative Party leader Rishi Sunak attend a live TV debate, hosted by the BBC. (File/AFP)

On Wednesday, a final YouGov poll on the eve of voting predicted that Labour would win 431 seats, while the Conservatives would return to the new parliament on July 9 with only 102 MPs — less than a third of the 365 seats they won in 2019.

If this proves to be the case, Starmer would have a majority of 212, not only bigger than Tony Blair’s in 1997, but also the strongest performance in an election by any party since 1832.

After the polls close tonight at 10pm, there is a very good chance that Sunak may even lose his own seat, the constituency of Richmond and Northallerton, which the Conservatives have held for 114 years.

Either way, the Conservative party will be thrust into further turmoil as the battle begins to select the party’s next leader who, as many commentators are predicting, can look forward to at least a decade in opposition.




Reform UK leader Nigel Farage scratches his head as he delivers a speech during the “Rally for Reform” at the National Exhibition Centre in Birmingham. (File/AFP)

The return of Labour, a completely regenerated party after 14 years in the wilderness, is likely to be good news for Britain’s relationships in the Middle East, as Arab News columnist Muddassar Ahmed predicted this week.

Distracted by one domestic or internal crisis after another, the Conservatives have not only neglected their friends and allies in the region but, in an attempt to stem the loss of its supporters to Reform UK, have also pandered to racial and religious prejudices.

“The horrific scenes unfolding in Gaza, for example, have rocked Muslims worldwide while pitting different faith communities against one another,” Ahmed wrote.




A Palestinian boy who suffers from malnutrition receives care at the Kamal Adwan hospital in Beit Lahia in the northern Gaza Strip on July 2, 2024. (AFP)

“But instead of working to rebuild the relationships between British Muslims, Jews and Christians, the Conservative government has branded efforts to support Palestinians as little more than insurgent ‘hate marches’ — using the horrific conflict to wedge communities that ought to be allied.”

On the other hand, Labour appears determined to reinvigorate the country’s relationship with a region once central to the UK’s interests.

January this year saw the launch of the Labour Middle East Council (LMEC), founded with “the fundamental goal of cultivating understanding and fostering enduring relationships between UK parliamentarians and the Middle East and North Africa.”

Chaired by Sir William Patey, a former head of the Middle East Department at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and an ambassador to Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Sudan, and with an advisory board featuring two other former British ambassadors to the region, the LMEC will be a strong voice whispering in the ear of a Labour government that will be very open to what it has to say.




Britain’s Labour Party leader Keir Starmer speaks on stage at the launch of the party’s manifesto in Manchester, England, Thursday, June 13, 2024. (AP)

Writing in The House magazine, Sir William predicted “a paradigm shift in British foreign policy is imminent.”

He added: “As a nation with deep-rooted historical connections to the Middle East, the UK has a unique role to play in fostering a stable and prosperous region.”

The role of the LMEC would be “to harness these connections for a positive future. We will work collaboratively to address pressing global issues, from climate change to technological advancement, ensuring that our approach is always one of respect, partnership, and shared progress.”

David Lammy, Labour’s shadow foreign secretary, has already made several visits to the region since Oct. 7. In April he expressed “serious concerns about a breach in international humanitarian law” over Israel’s military offensive in Gaza.




Britain’s main opposition Labour Party Shadow Foreign Secretary David Lammy addresses delegates at the annual Labour Party conference in Liverpool. (File/AFP)

It was, he added, “important to reaffirm that a life lost is a life lost whether that is a Muslim or a Jew.” In May, Lammy called for the UK to pause arms sales to Israel.

In opposition, Labour has hesitated to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, but this has been a product of its own internal and domestic tensions. Starmer has brought the party back on track after years of accusations by UK Jewish activist groups that under his predecessor Jeremy Corbyn it was fundamentally antisemitic.

Whether the charges were true, or whether the party’s staunch support of the Palestinian cause was misrepresented as antisemitism, was a moot point. Starmer knew that, in the run-up to a general election, this was hard-won ground that he could not afford to lose.

Nevertheless, even as he has alienated some Muslim communities in the UK for his failure to call for a ceasefire, he has spoken out repeatedly against the horrors that have unfolded in Gaza.




A protester looks on in Parliament Square, central London, on June 8, 2024 at the end of the “National March for Gaza”. (File/AFP) 

Crucially, he has consistently backed the two-state solution, and the creation of “a viable Palestinian state where the Palestinian people and their children enjoy the freedoms and opportunities that we all take for granted.”

In broader terms, Lammy has also made clear that Labour intends to re-engage with the Middle East through a new policy of what he called “progressive realism.”

Less than a week before Sunak called his surprise general election, Lammy spoke of the need for the UK to mend relations with the Gulf states, which he saw as “hugely important for security in the Middle East” and “important in relation to our economic growth missions.”

Because of missteps by the Conservative government, he added, relations between the UAE and the UK, for example, were at “an all-time low. That is not acceptable and not in the UK’s national interests (and) we will seek to repair that.”

In an article he wrote for Foreign Affairs magazine, Lammy went further.

China, he said, was not the world’s only rising power, and “a broadening group of states — including Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE — have claimed seats at the table. They and others have the power to shape their regional environments, and they ignore the EU, the UK, and the US ever more frequently.”

Lammy expressed regret for “the chaotic Western military interventions during the first decades of this century,” in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, which had proved to be a “recipe for disorder.”

As shadow foreign secretary, he has traveled extensively across the MENA region, to countries including Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkiye, the UAE, and the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

All, he wrote, “will be vital partners for the UK in this decade, not least as the country seeks to reconstruct Gaza and — as soon as possible — realize a two-state solution.”

For many regional observers, Labour is starting with a clean sheet, but has much to prove.

“It is an acknowledged fact among scholars that foreign policies don’t radically change after elections,” Arshin Adib-Moghaddam, professor in global thought and comparative philosophies at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, told Arab News.

“Therefore, I don’t expect major shifts once Labour forms the government in the UK.

“That said, the composition of the Labour party and its ‘backbench’ politics are likely to shift the language and probably even the code of conduct, in particular with reference to the question of Palestine. For a Labour leader it may be that much more difficult to be agnostic about the horrific human rights situation in Gaza.”




Displaced Palestinians flee after the Israeli army issued a new evacuation order for parts of Khan Yunis and Rafah on July 2, 2024. (AFP)

For political analysts advising international clients, however, the implications of a Labour victory extend beyond the situation in Gaza.

“In an attempt to secure political longevity, the party will renegotiate key policy priorities in the Middle East,” said Kasturi Mishra, a political consultant at Hardcastle, a global advisory firm that has been closely following the foreign policy implications of the UK election for its clients in business and international politics.

“This could include calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, ending arms sales to Israel, reviving trade and diplomacy with the Gulf states and increasing the UK’s defense spending in the region,” Mishra told Arab News.

“This renegotiation is important at a time when the UK finds itself increasingly uncertain of its global position.




Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan meets with Shadow Foreign Secretary of the British Labor Party David Lammy on the sidelines of the Manama Dialogue 2023 held in Bahrain. (SPA)

“The Middle East has significant geopolitical and security implications for the West. Labour policy-makers recognize this and are likely to deepen British engagement with the region to reshape its soft power and influence.”

Mishra highlighted Lammy’s multiple trips to the region as a foretaste of a Labour’s intention to strengthen ties with the Gulf states, “which have been neglected in post-Brexit Britain. 

“Given the influential role of Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar in regional security and the potential to collaborate with them on climate mitigation and other international issues, it is clear that he will seek to forge partnerships.

“His doctrine of progressive realism combines a values-based world order with pragmatism. It is expected that he will favor personalized diplomacy, more akin to that of the UAE, India and France.”

 


Trump’s portrait to be taken down at Colorado Capitol after president claimed it was ‘distorted’

Trump’s portrait to be taken down at Colorado Capitol after president claimed it was ‘distorted’
Updated 30 sec ago
Follow

Trump’s portrait to be taken down at Colorado Capitol after president claimed it was ‘distorted’

Trump’s portrait to be taken down at Colorado Capitol after president claimed it was ‘distorted’
  • Trump’s Sunday night comments had prompted a steady stream of visitors to pose for photos with the painting before the announcement that it would be taken down

DENVER: A painting of Donald Trump hanging with other presidential portraits at the Colorado state Capitol will be taken down after Trump claimed that his was “purposefully distorted,” according to a letter obtained by The Associated Press.
House Democrats said in a statement that the oil painting would be taken down at the request of Republican leaders in the Legislature. Colorado Republicans raised more than $10,000 through a GoFundMe account to commission the oil painting, which was unveiled in 2019.
Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen, a Republican, said that he requested for Trump’s portrait to be taken down and replaced by one “that depicts his contemporary likeness.”
“If the GOP wants to spend time and money on which portrait of Trump hangs in the Capitol, then that’s up to them,” the Democrats said.
The portrait was installed alongside other paintings of US presidents. Before the installation, a prankster placed a picture of Russian President Vladimir Putin near the spot intended for Trump.
Initially, people objected to artist Sarah Boardman’s depiction of Trump as “nonconfrontational” and “thoughtful” in the portrait, according to an interview with Colorado Times Recorder from the time.
But in a Sunday night post on his Truth Social platform, Trump said he would prefer no picture at all over the one that hangs in the Colorado Capitol. The Republican lauded a nearby portrait of former President Barack Obama – also by Boardman – saying “he looks wonderful.”
“Nobody likes a bad picture or painting of themselves, but the one in Colorado, in the state Capitol, put up by the Governor, along with all other Presidents, was purposefully distorted to a level that even I, perhaps, have never seen before,” Trump wrote.
The portraits are not the purview of the Colorado governor’s office but the Colorado Building Advisory Committee. The ones up to and including President Jimmy Carter were donated as a collection. The others were donated by political parties or, more recently, paid for by outside fundraising.
The Legislature’s executive committee, made up of both Democratic and Republican leadership, signed a letter directing the removal of Trump’s portrait. Lundeen, the Republican senator who requested it, noted that Grover Cleveland, whose presidential terms were separated like Trump’s, had a portrait from his second term.
Boardman did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The Associated Press. In interviews from the time with The Denver Post, Boardman said it was important that her depictions of both Obama and Trump looked apolitical.
“There will always be dissent, so pleasing one group will always inflame another. I consider a neutrally thoughtful, and nonconfrontational, portrait allows everyone to reach their own conclusions in their own time,” Boardman told the Colorado Times Recorder in 2019.
Trump’s Sunday night comments had prompted a steady stream of visitors to pose for photos with the painting before the announcement that it would be taken down.
Aaron Howe, visiting from Wyoming on Monday, stood in front of Trump’s portrait, looking down at photos of the president on his phone, then back up at the portrait.
“Honestly he looks a little chubby,” said Howe of the portrait, but “better than I could do.”
“I don’t know anything about the artist,” said Howe, who voted for Trump. “It could be taken one way or the other.”
Kaylee Williamson, an 18-year-old Trump supporter from Arkansas, got a photo with the portrait.
“I think it looks like him. I guess he’s smoother than all the other ones,” she said. “I think it’s fine.”


’Nazis got better treatment,’ judge says of Trump admin deportations

James Boasberg, chief judge of the US District Court in Washington. (Photo/social media)
James Boasberg, chief judge of the US District Court in Washington. (Photo/social media)
Updated 25 March 2025
Follow

’Nazis got better treatment,’ judge says of Trump admin deportations

James Boasberg, chief judge of the US District Court in Washington. (Photo/social media)
  • “Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemies Act,” said Millett, an appointee of former Democratic president Barack Obama

WASHINGTON: A federal judge on Monday sharply criticized the Trump administration’s summary deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members, saying “Nazis got better treatment” from the United States during World War II.
President Donald Trump sent two planeloads of Venezuelan migrants to a prison in El Salvador on March 15 after invoking an obscure wartime law known as the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (AEA).
James Boasberg, chief judge of the US District Court in Washington, issued a restraining order that same day temporarily barring the Trump administration from carrying out any further deportation flights under the AEA.
The Justice Department is seeking to have the order lifted and a three-judge US Court of Appeals panel heard oral arguments in the closely watched case on Monday.
Justice Department attorney Drew Ensign said the judge’s order “represents an unprecedented and enormous intrusion upon the powers of the executive branch” and “enjoins the president’s exercise of his war and foreign affairs powers.”
Judge Patricia Millett appeared unconvinced and said the lower court judge was not disputing Trump’s presidential authority only the denial of individual court hearings to the deportees.
Attorneys for several of the deported Venezuelans have said that their clients were not members of the Tren de Aragua (TdA) gang, had committed no crimes and were targeted largely on the basis of their tattoos.
“Nazis got better treatment under the Alien Enemies Act,” said Millett, an appointee of former Democratic president Barack Obama. “They had hearing boards before people were removed.”
“People on those planes on that Saturday had no opportunity to challenge their removal under the AEA,” she said. “Y’all could have picked me up on Saturday and thrown me on a plane thinking I’m a member of Tren de Aragua and given me no chance to protest it.
“Somehow it’s a violation of presidential war powers for me to say, ‘Excuse me, no, I’m not. I’d like a hearing?’“
Judge Justin Walker, a Trump appointee, also suggested that court hearings were warranted but appeared more receptive to the arguments that the judge’s order impinged on presidential powers.
The third judge on the panel is an appointee of former Republican president George H.W. Bush.
The AEA, which has previously only been used during the War of 1812, World War I and World War II, gives the government vast powers to round up citizens of a “hostile nation” during wartime.

Lee Gelernt, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed suit against the deportations, told the appeals court panel that the Trump administration was using the AEA “to try and short circuit immigration proceedings.”
The government would likely immediately resume AEA deportations if the temporary restraining order was lifted, Gelernt said.
“We are talking about people being sent to El Salvador, to one of the worst prisons in the world, incommunicado,” he said. “They’re essentially being disappeared.”
In a 37-page opinion issued on Monday, Boasberg, the district court judge, said that migrants subject to potential deportation under the AEA should be “entitled to individualized hearings to determine whether the Act applies to them at all.”
Trump has repeatedly lashed out at Boasberg, even going so far as to call for his impeachment, a remark that drew a rare public rebuke from Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.
The contentious case has raised concerns among legal experts that the Trump administration would potentially ignore the court order, triggering a constitutional crisis.
Ahead of the hearing, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced plans to send three alleged TdA members facing extortion and kidnapping charges to Chile under the AEA.
Blanche said the Justice Department “is taking every step within the bounds of the law to ensure these individuals are promptly sent to Chile to face justice.”
 

 


Trump officials texted war plans to a group chat in a secure app that included a journalist

Trump officials texted war plans to a group chat in a secure app that included a journalist
Updated 54 sec ago
Follow

Trump officials texted war plans to a group chat in a secure app that included a journalist

Trump officials texted war plans to a group chat in a secure app that included a journalist
  • The material in the text chain “contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Iran-backed Houthi-rebels in Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the US would be deploying, and attack sequencing”
  • Government officials have used Signal for organizational correspondence, but it is not classified and can be hacked

WASHINGTON: Top national security officials for President Donald Trump, including his defense secretary, texted war plans for upcoming military strikes in Yemen to a group chat in a secure messaging app that included the editor-in-chief for The Atlantic, the magazine reported in a story posted online Monday. The National Security Council said the text chain “appears to be authentic.”
Trump told reporters he was not aware that the sensitive information had been shared, 2 1/2 hours after it was reported.
The material in the text chain “contained operational details of forthcoming strikes on Iran-backed Houthi-rebels in Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the US would be deploying, and attack sequencing,” editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg reported.
It was not immediately clear if the specifics of the military operation were classified, but they often are and at the least are kept secure to protect service members and operational security. The US has conducted airstrikes against the Houthis since the militant group began targeting commercial and military vessels in the Red Sea in November 2023.
Just two hours after Goldberg received the details of the attack on March 15, the US began launching a series of airstrikes against Houthi targets in Yemen.
The National Security Council is looking into the matter
The National Security Council said in a statement that it was looking into how a journalist’s number was added to the chain in the Signal group chat.
Trump told reporters, “I don’t know anything about it. You’re telling me about it for the first time.” He added that The Atlantic was “not much of a magazine.”
Government officials have used Signal for organizational correspondence, but it is not classified and can be hacked. Privacy and tech experts say the popular end-to-end encrypted messaging and voice call app is more secure than conventional texting.
The sharing of sensitive information comes as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s office has just announced a crackdown on leaks of sensitive information, including the potential use of polygraphs on defense personnel to determine how reporters have received information.
Sean Parnell, a spokesman for Hegseth, did not immediately respond to requests for comment on why the defense secretary posted war operational plans on an unclassified app.
The breach in protocol was swiftly condemned by Democratic lawmakers. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer called for a full investigation.
“This is one of the most stunning breaches of military intelligence I have read about in a very, very long time,” Schumer, a New York Democrat, said in a floor speech Monday afternoon.
“If true, this story represents one of the most egregious failures of operational security and common sense I have ever seen,” said Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, in a statement.
He said American lives are “on the line. The carelessness shown by Trump’s Cabinet is stunning and dangerous. I will be seeking answers from the Administration immediately.”
Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that he was “horrified” by the reports.
Himes said if a lower-ranking official “did what is described here, they would likely lose their clearance and be subject to criminal investigation. The American people deserve answers,” which he said he planned to get at Wednesday’s previously scheduled committee hearing.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he wants to learn more about what happened.
“Obviously, we got to to run it to the ground, figure out what went on there,” said Thune, a South Dakota Republican.
There are strict laws around handling defense information
The handling of national defense information is strictly governed by law under the century-old Espionage Act, including provisions that make it a crime to remove such information from its “proper place of custody” even through an act of gross negligence.
The Justice Department in 2015 and 2016 investigated whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton broke the law by communicating about classified information with her aides on a private email server she set up, though the FBI ultimately recommended against charges and none were brought.
In the Biden administration, some officials were given permission to download Signal on their White House-issued phones, but were instructed to use the app sparingly, according to a former national security official who served in the Democratic administration.
The official, who requested anonymity to speak about methods used to share sensitive information, said Signal was most commonly used to communicate what they internally referred to as “tippers” to notify someone when they were away from the office or traveling overseas that they should check their “high side” inbox for a classified message.
The app was sometimes also used by officials during the Biden administration to communicate about scheduling of sensitive meetings or classified phone calls when they were outside the office, the official said.
The use of Signal became more prevalent during the last year of the Biden administration after federal law enforcement officials warned that China and Iran were hacking the White House as well as officials in the first Trump administration, according to the official.
The official was unaware of top Biden administration officials — such as Vice President Kamala Harris, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and national security adviser Jake Sullivan — using Signal to discuss sensitive plans as the Trump administration officials did.
Some of the toughest criticism targeted Hegseth, a former Fox News Channel weekend host. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Iraq War veteran, said on social media that Hegseth, “the most unqualified Secretary of Defense in history, is demonstrating his incompetence by literally leaking classified war plans in the group chat.”
 

 


Ethiopian, Eritrean officials accused of war crimes

Ethiopian, Eritrean officials accused of war crimes
Updated 25 March 2025
Follow

Ethiopian, Eritrean officials accused of war crimes

Ethiopian, Eritrean officials accused of war crimes

ADDIS ABABA: Eight survivors of the devastating conflict in Ethiopia’s northern Tigray region have accused 12 high-ranking Ethiopian and Eritrean civilian and military officials of war crimes and crimes against humanity, the legal rights group representing them said on Monday.

The Tigray region, bordering Eritrea, endured a war between 2020 and 2022 that claimed up to 600,000 lives, according to some estimates.

The conflict pitted Tigray People’s Liberation Front rebels against federal Ethiopian forces, supported by local militias and the Eritrean army.

Both sides were accused of committing atrocities, with the government sealing off Tigray for most of the war and restricting humanitarian aid to the region.

Eight survivors “have filed a groundbreaking criminal complaint with the German Federal Public Prosecutor, alleging that 12 senior Ethiopian and Eritrean government officials and military officers committed war crimes and crimes against humanity during the conflict,” nonprofit Legal Action Worldwide said in a statement.

The Swiss-based organization did not disclose the identities of those accused in the filing, submitted in 2024 but announced last week.

A LAW spokesperson said on Monday they could not “confirm or deny” whether Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed or Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki were mentioned.

The case is being filed in Germany under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows the prosecution of crimes regardless of where they were committed, as they violate international law.

“We are asking the German authorities to open a criminal investigation and to issue arrest warrants for 12 suspects,” Nick Leddy, head of LAW’s strategic litigation department and a former prosecutor at the International Criminal Court, told AFP.

He said they would not be naming the suspects as it could “jeopardize the chances of their arrest.”

The identities of the plaintiffs have not been made public either. “I’ve lost two of the most important people in my life in this war: my younger brother and my mom,” LAW quoted one of them as saying.

“The suffering and agony continues.”

“Tigrayans are still dying every day,” they added, saying justice must be brought to those “who orchestrated and engineered these unimaginable crimes.”

Allegations of massacres, mass rapes, and other atrocities by all sides marked the two-year conflict. In 2022, a United Nations commission said it had “reasonable grounds to believe that, in several instances, these violations amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.”

Anna Oehmichen, a lawyer involved in the case, said the “gravity of the crimes in Tigray is dramatic.”

It requires investigation and prosecution. 

She said: “To put an end to the ongoing violations of international law and to prevent other heads of state from committing similarly devastating crimes.”

Although a peace agreement was signed in November 2022, around 1 million of the region’s pre-war population of 6 million remain displaced.

In recent weeks, a rift within the TPLF has reignited fears of renewed conflict.


Mozambique leader meets opposition chief to reset relations

Mozambique leader meets opposition chief to reset relations
Updated 25 March 2025
Follow

Mozambique leader meets opposition chief to reset relations

Mozambique leader meets opposition chief to reset relations

MAPUTO: Mozambican President Daniel Chapo met main opposition figure Venancio Mondlane for talks to ease tension following months of violent clashes between protesters and security forces, the president’s office said late on Sunday.

Political turmoil has gripped the nation since October’s disputed general election.

The election, which several international observer missions said was tainted by irregularities, was followed by more than two months of demonstrations and blockades, during which more than 360 people died, according to a local civil society group.

Chapo and Mondlane met in the capital, Maputo, to “discuss solutions to the challenges facing the country,” the presidency said.

“The meeting is part of the ongoing effort to promote national stability and reinforce the commitment to reconciliation,” it said.

Mondlane confirmed the meeting in a social media post, saying it had been aimed at “embarking on a mutual process in answer to the calls and desires of the Mozambican people.”

He said he would soon provide more details of the meeting as well as lay out the next steps.