SYDNEY: Australia’s defense minister Richard Marles will travel to the Philippines to observe joint training drills focussed on regional security, his office said on Monday, amid tensions between the Philippines and China in the South China Sea.
More than 2,000 Australian and Philippine defense personnel will participate in amphibious landing and air assault drills, with two Australian navy vessels, HMAS Canberra and HMAS ANZAC, having arrived to conduct the bilateral exercises with the Philippines Navy.
Australia holds annual defense exercises in South East Asia, although it is the first amphibious exercise — the movement of ground and air forces from ship to shore — with the Philippines.
Philippines military chief Romeo Brawner told reporters the exercise in Palawan, held on Monday by Australia, the Philippines and a US aircraft, was “not directed against China.”
Palawan is a southwest island province near the South China Sea.
China and the Philippines have been embroiled for years in on-off confrontations at a disputed shoal in the South China Sea.
At the bilateral drills in the Philippines, Exercise Alon will involve 1,500 Australian defense personnel, 1,200 Philippine personnel and 150 US Marines who are part of the US rotational force in Darwin in Australia’s north.
An Australian defense statement last week said Exercise Alon will involve a “simulated, combined air assault using [US Marines Corp] Osprey tiltrotor aircraft in Palawan, a combined amphibious demonstration at Zambales and artillery and aviation live-fire serials at Crow Valley” in the Philippines.
Zambales is also near the South China Sea.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said he will make the first visit by an Australian leader to the Philippines in 20 years next month, to discuss defense and security cooperation.
Albanese on Monday played down the Australian navy deployment to the Philippines for training exercises, against the backdrop of the China tensions.
“This is business as usual, Australia conducts activities in our region,” he said.
Marles will also stop in Malaysia to meet his counterpart, his office said.
Australia defense minister to travel to Philippines to observe drills
https://arab.news/mdwxm
Australia defense minister to travel to Philippines to observe drills
- HMAS Canberra and HMAS ANZAC earlier arrived to conduct the bilateral exercises with the Philippine Navy
- Australia holds annual defense exercises in South East Asia, although it is the first amphibious exercise with the Philippines
Americans split on Trump’s use of military in immigration protests, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
- Poll shows partisan divide on military use in protests
- Few approve of Trump’s handling of Los Angeles protests
- Support for increased deportations remains mainstream in US
WASHINGTON: Americans are divided over President Donald Trump’s decision to activate the military to respond to protests against his crackdown on migrants, with about half supportive of the move, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll that closed on Thursday.
Some 48 percent of respondents in the two-day poll agreed with a statement that the president should “deploy the military to bring order to the streets” when protests turn violent, while 41 percent disagreed. Views on the matter split sharply along partisan lines, with members of Trump’s Republican Party overwhelmingly backing the idea of calling in troops while Democrats were firmly opposed.
At the same time, just 35 percent of respondents said they approved of Trump’s response to the protests in Los Angeles, which has included sending National Guard troops and US Marines to the city and also threatening to arrest Democratic officials, including the governor of California. Some 50 percent of people in the poll said they disapproved of Trump’s response.
Trump has argued the military deployment in Los Angeles was needed due to protests there following a series of immigration raids in the city. Some of the demonstrations in Los Angeles have turned violent — leaving burned out cars on city streets — and 46 percent of respondents in the Reuters/Ipsos poll said protesters opposing Trump’s immigration policies had gone too far, compared to 38 percent who disagreed with that view.
The protests have spread to other US cities including New York, Chicago, Washington and San Antonio, Texas — all of which have large immigrant populations and tend to vote for Democrats rather than Republicans.
Trump campaigned and won last year’s election on a promise to increase deportations of undocumented immigrants and Reuters/Ipsos polls have shown that his support on immigration policy has been consistently higher than on other matters, such as his stewardship of the US economy.
The Reuters/Ipsos poll, which surveyed 1,136 Americans nationwide and has a margin of error of about 3 percentage points, showed wide support for increased deportations. Some 52 percent of respondents — including one in five Democrats and nine in 10 Republicans — backed ramping up deportations of people in the country illegally. Still, 49 percent of people in the poll said Trump had gone too far with his arrests of immigrants, compared to 40 percent who said he had not done so.
The most heated protests have taken place in Los Angeles County, where one in three residents are immigrants and about half of people born abroad are naturalized US citizens, according to US Census estimates.
Nationwide, Americans took a generally dim view of Trump’s threats to arrest Democratic officials like California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat. Just 35 percent of respondents said Trump should order arrests of state and local officials who try to stop federal immigration enforcement.
Nationwide protests against immigration raids escalate, leading to arrests and curfews
- Volatile protests prompted city officials to enforce curfews in Los Angeles and Spokane, Washington state
- Activists are planning “No Kings” events across the country on Saturday to coincide with Trump’s planned military parade in the US capital
AUSTIN, Texas: Protests over federal immigration enforcement raids are flaring up around the country, as officials in cities from coast to coast get ready for major demonstrations against President Donald Trump over the weekend.
While many demonstrations against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency have been peaceful, with marchers chanting slogans and carrying signs, others have led to clashes with police who have sometimes used chemical irritants to disperse crowds. Hundreds have been arrested.
Volatile protests prompted city officials to enforce curfews in Los Angeles and Spokane. And Republican governors in Texas and Missouri mobilized National Guard troops to be ready to help law enforcement manages demonstrations in those states.
Activists are planning “No Kings” events across the country on Saturday to coincide with Trump’s planned military parade in Washington, D.C. While those were already scheduled, they will happen amid the rising tensions of the week.
The Trump administration said immigration raids and deportations will continue regardless.
A look at some recent protests and reactions across the country:
Las Vegas
Police said 94 people were arrested on “various criminal and traffic” charges, and four officers were injured in a Wednesday night protest. Some in the estimated crowd of about 800 threw bottles and rocks at law enforcement, police said.
A large crowd gathered on Las Vegas Boulevard near the city’s federal courthouse and blocked several streets before police deemed the gathering an unlawful assembly. Police announced in English and Spanish that protesters must leave the area. Local media reported that tear gas, flash-bang grenades and rubber bullets were used to disperse the crowds.
Chicago
Hundreds of demonstrators packed a park plaza near Lake Michigan on Thursday. Veronica Castro, an organizer with the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, urged people to learn how to protect themselves and elected officials to speak out.
Demonstrators chanted “No hate, no fear.”
The group later marched along the city’s iconic Michigan Avenue, flanked by their own security marshals and Chicago police officers on bicycles and in slow-moving patrol cars.
The crowd, including parents with strollers, students and longtime organizers chanted, “Power to the people, no one is illegal.”
Seattle
Hundreds of protesters marched through downtown Seattle Wednesday evening to a federal building where immigration cases are heard. Some of them dragged a dumpster nearby and set it on fire. The building was covered in graffiti, with “Abolish ICE Now” written in large letters across its front window. They moved electric bikes and cones to block its entrance.
Dozens of officers squared off with protesters near the federal building, with some shooting pepper spray. Police worked to move the crowd away and some protesters threw fireworks and rocks at officers, according to the Seattle Police Department.
Spokane, Washington
Mayor Lisa Brown imposed an overnight curfew in downtown Spokane after a protest Wednesday afternoon outside an ICE office that ended with more than 30 arrests and police firing pepper balls at the crowd.
Brown said the curfew would “protect public safety,” and that the majority of protesters were peaceful.
“We respect their right to peacefully protest and to be upset about federal policies,” she said. “I have been that person who has protested federal policies and that is a right we have.”
San Antonio
Several hundred protesters marched through downtown San Antonio and near the historic Alamo mission. Although Texas National Guard troops were seen in the area, the demonstration was mostly peaceful with no significant clashes with law enforcement.
The Alamo building and plaza, among the most popular tourist attractions in the state, was closed to the public early and police guarded the property as the crowd gathered and marched nearby.
Tuscon, Arizona
A protest Wednesday outside an ICE office in Tuscon, Arizona, turned into a clash between masked security officers and demonstrators who blocked a roadway, threw balloons filled with paint and spray painted anti-ICE graffiti on the gates and walls of the facility.
Video clips showed a security officer who was hit with a water bottle. Masked protesters held makeshift shields as they inched toward the security team, and a member of the security team set off what appeared to be a flash-bang device.
At one point, a security officer sprayed a chemical irritant at protesters and a protester responded by firing irritant back at the officers. It was unclear if the officers were private security or federal agents. The Associated Press left messages with the Tucson Police Department and ICE’s operation in Arizona.
‘No Kings’
This week’s protests are leading into the scheduled “No Kings” demonstrations that organizers say are planned in nearly 2,000 locations around the country, from city blocks to small towns, courthouse steps to community parks, according to the movement’s website.
Organizers plan a flagship march and rally in Philadelphia, but no protests are scheduled to take place in Washington, D.C., where the military parade will be held.
In Florida, state Attorney General James Uthmeier warned that any “No Kings” protesters who become violent will be dealt with harshly.
“If you want to light things on fire and put people in danger, you are going to do time. We do not tolerate rioting,” said Uthmeier said Thursday.
Federal prosecutors are watching as well.
In a message sent Thursday, a Justice Department official told US attorneys across the country to prioritize cases against protesters who engage in violence and destruction. The email cites several potential federal charges, including assault, civil disorder and damage of government property.
Governors and the Guard
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe mobilized National Guard troops in their states ahead of the weekend demonstrations.
Abbott said more than 5,000 guard troops and more than 2,000 state police would be ready to assist local law enforcement if needed.
Several “No Kings” rallies are planned in Texas, including in San Antonio, Houston, Dallas and Austin. There were brief clashes between protesters and police who used chemical irritants during demonstrations in Austin and Dallas earlier in the week. Police in Austin made about a dozen arrests.
Mayors in San Antonio and Austin have said they didn’t ask for help from the National Guard.
Kehoe’s announcement called his decision a “precautionary measure” and did not provide specific troop levels or duties. His order authorized guard leadership to call up as many members as necessary.
Abbott and Kehoe stand in sharp contrast to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has publicly sparred with Trump over the president’s decision to send National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles, where volatile demonstrations have mostly been contained to a five-block section of downtown.
All 22 other Democratic governors signed a statement backing Newsom, calling the Guard deployment and threats to send in Marines “an alarming abuse of power.”
Trump administration hit with second lawsuit over restrictions on asylum access
- CIvil lawsuit was filed in a Southern California federal court by four civil rights advocates
- Lawsuit focuses on people who are not on US soil and are seeking asylum at ports of entry
MCALLEN, Texas: Immigration advocates filed a class-action lawsuit Wednesday over the Trump administration’s use of a proclamation that effectively put an end to being able to seek asylum at ports of entry to the United States.
The civil lawsuit was filed in a Southern California federal court by the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies, the American Immigration Council, Democracy Forward and the Center for Constitutional Rights.
The lawsuit is asking the court to find the proclamation unlawful, set aside the policy ending asylum at ports of entry and restore access to the asylum process at ports of entry, including for those who had appointments that were canceled when President Donald Trump took office.
Unlike a similar lawsuit filed in February in a Washington, D.C., federal court representing people who had already reached US soil and sought asylum after crossing between ports of entry, Wednesday’s lawsuit focuses on people who are not on US soil and are seeking asylum at ports of entry.
US Customs and Border Protection did not respond to a request for comment, but the agency does not typically comment on litigation. The Department of Homeland Security, another agency among the listed defendants, did not respond to a request for comment either.
Trump’s sweeping proclamation issued on his first day in office changed asylum policies, effectively ending asylum at the border. The proclamation said the screening process created by Congress under the Immigration and Nationality Act “can be wholly ineffective in the border environment” and was “leading to the unauthorized entry of innumerable illegal aliens into the United States.”
Immigrant advocates said that under the proclamation noncitizens seeking asylum at a port of entry are asked to present medical and criminal histories, a requirement for the visa process but not for migrants who are often fleeing from immediate danger.
“Nothing in the INA or any other source of law permits Defendants’ actions,” the immigrant advocates wrote in their complaint.
Thousands of people who sought asylum through the CBP One app, a system developed under President Joe Biden, had their appointments at ports of entry canceled on Trump’s first day in office as part of the proclamation that declared an invasion at the border.
“The Trump administration has taken drastic steps to block access to the asylum process, in flagrant violation of US law,” the Center for Gender & Refugee Studies stated in a press release Wednesday.
After feud with Trump, role of Musk’s SpaceX in Golden Dome missile shield in question
- Trump in May said the defense shield should be operational by the end of his presidency, January 2029
- The White House had considered a plan for SpaceX to play a key role in Trump's “Golden Dome" program
WASHINGTON: The role of Elon Musk’s SpaceX in an ambitious new US missile defense system is in question following the dramatic feud last week between the billionaire entrepreneur and President Donald Trump, according to three people familiar with the project.
The White House until recently had considered a plan for SpaceX, Musk’s rocket and satellite venture, to partner with software maker Palantir and drone builder Anduril to construct crucial elements of the project, dubbed “Golden Dome.” The administration had instructed the Pentagon to prioritize a network of satellites for the purpose, these people said.
But a new framework for the system, which would seek to track and prevent possible missile attacks against the United States, is now being considered that could reduce the role of SpaceX. One possibility, the three people said, could initially forego SpaceX’s satellite capabilities and focus on the expansion of existing ground systems for missile defense instead.
In a statement, a White House spokesman said “the Trump Administration is committed to a rigorous review process for all bids and contracts.” A senior Defense Department official said the Pentagon “has no announcements regarding future contracts associated with the Golden Dome effort.”
SpaceX, Anduril and Palantir didn’t respond to requests for comment.
A reduced role for SpaceX would represent the first known setback to Musk’s huge volume of business with the US government since his break with Trump last week. The shift in plans, especially for a project that Trump has touted as paramount for US defense strategy, also underscores the highly personalized nature of the president’s leadership, aerospace and defense experts said.
“That people guiding the program or building it are approved based on their political affiliation signals a real concern that the project itself is very politicized and not being conducted on the technical merits,” said Laura Grego, a missile defense expert and research director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, a non-profit based in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
In its statement to Reuters, the White House said any decision would be made “prioritizing the best deal for America and leveraging the most advanced and innovative technology.”
Trump in May said the defense shield should be operational by the end of his presidency, January 2029. But industry experts have said that timeframe, and a projected cost of some $175 billion, could be too optimistic.
The change in the proposed “architecture” of the system, the three people said, could have the political advantage of allowing the current administration to deliver at least a portion of it. It isn’t clear how soon a final decision on the project could come or whether the ultimate role of any company, including SpaceX, has been determined.
Trump’s efforts to roll out the project fast have led to uncertainty about the project’s details and a scramble by contractors to be involved, industry experts and some of those involved in its development told Reuters. “To this day, no one knows what the requirements are,” said one of the people familiar with the process. “There isn’t a coordinated effort with a true vision. All of these companies are just grabbing at this pot of money.”
SpaceX, Anduril and Palantir were all founded by entrepreneurs who have been major political supporters of Trump. The three companies had previously met with top administration officials and decisionmakers from the Defense Department to discuss Golden Dome, according to people familiar with those discussions.
Before his high-profile falling out with the president, Musk served as a key Trump adviser and donated more than a quarter of a billion dollars to help elect him. But the recent dispute, which included Musk calling for Trump’s impeachment and accusing the president of improper involvement with disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, triggered the change in direction, the three people told Reuters.
“Because of the blowup, the Pentagon has been given the space to look at other alternatives,” one of the people said.
In recent days, Musk has sought to temper the dispute, saying he regretted some of his comments and taking down some of his social media criticism of Trump, including the call for impeachment. Earlier this week, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Trump appreciated Musk’s apology and that she was unaware of any administration efforts to review Musk contracts because of the dispute.
Reuters couldn’t determine whether Musk’s conciliatory overtures might improve SpaceX’s chances of winning Golden Dome contracts or securing further new business with the US government.
SpaceX had pitched for a part of the Golden Dome initiative called the “custody layer,” a constellation of between 400 and 1,000 satellites that would detect missiles, track their trajectory, and determine if they are heading toward the US, Reuters reported in April. In a January 27 executive order, Trump mandated the selection of a proposed “architecture” for Golden Dome and an implementation plan by the end of March.
The order called a missile attack “the most catastrophic threat facing the United States.”
UN General Assembly overwhelmingly votes for Gaza ceasefire resolution amid US, Israeli opposition
- 149 nations vote in favor, 12 against, including Israel and the US, and 19 abstain, including India
- Experts and human rights workers say hunger is widespread in Gaza
- US describes the result as a reward for Hamas, says it does nothing to relieve the suffering of Gazans or secure release of hostages, and undermines negotiations
The UN General Assembly on Thursday overwhelmingly voted to adopt a draft resolution demanding an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the release of all hostages and Palestinian prisoners, the unrestricted flow of aid to the starving population of the territory, and the full withdrawal of Israeli forces.
The resolution was introduced by Spain in coordination with the Palestinian delegation and a bloc of more than 30 nations, including Saudi Arabia.
A total of 149 nations voted in favor of the resolution, and 12 against, including Israel and the US. Nineteen abstained, including India.
The resounding support for the measure came despite lobbying from Israel against what it described as a “politically motivated, counter-productive charade.”
Danny Danon, Israel’s permanent representative to the UN, said the resolution “rewards the terrorists responsible for the suffering of our hostages. This is not a peace proposal. It is surrender.”
General Assembly resolutions are nonbinding on member states but they carry significant moral and political weight as a reflection of prevailing global opinion.
The president of the General Assembly, Philemon Yang, opened the session by calling on member states to transform their commitment to international law and justice into “meaningful action on the ground … and end the horrors in Gaza.”
Palestine’s ambassador to the UN, Riyad Mansour, urged the international community to take “requisite actions to end this genocide” and secure the release of the hostages.
He said: “Israel’s blatant contempt for international law and UN resolutions must lead to resolute action, and it has to be done now.
“No arms, no money, no trade to oppress Palestinians, ethnically cleanse them and steal their land. This illegal, immoral situation cannot continue. It has to stop and stop immediately.
“We reject attacks on civilians, whether Palestinians or Israelis. Enough bloodshed, enough suffering.
“The actions you take today to stop the killing, displacement and famine will determine how many more Palestinian children die a horrific death. The actions you take today will determine if Palestinian children ever get a chance at life.”
Speaking of behalf of Gulf Cooperation Council member states, Kuwait’s permanent representative to the UN, Tarek Albanai, accused Israel of committing genocide and using starvation as a weapon of war. He called on the international community to uphold its responsibilities and “end these atrocities.”
The GCC has urged all countries to officially recognize the State of Palestine at a summit that will take place in New York next week on a two-state solution to the wider conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
“It is high time Palestine became a full-fledged member of the UN,” Albanai said. Palestine has held the status of Permanent Observer State at the UN since 2012 but is denied full membership.
The General Assembly vote came a week after the US vetoed a similar resolution in the Security Council, arguing that it would undermine Washington-led negotiations aimed at brokering a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas. The remaining 14 members of the council members backed the resolution.
Spain’s permanent representative to the UN, Hector Gomez Hernandez, introduced the draft resolution to the General Assembly and called on the international community to send “a robust message with the regard to Gaza.”
The text of the resolution, presented under the Uniting for Peace framework during the resumption of an Emergency Special Session on Palestine, went further than previous resolutions on the issue. It included language that underscored the need for accountability to ensure Israeli compliance with the rule of international law, a provision that drew a sharp rebuke from Israel and concern from the US.
“This is both false and defamatory,” Danon said in a letter to member states this week, in which he described the draft resolution as “immensely flawed and harmful.”
He warned that its undermines hostage negotiations, and criticized its failure to condemn the Hamas attacks in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, in which 1,200 people were killed and about 250 were taken hostage.
The vote on the resolution followed stark warnings from UN agencies that famine is looming in Gaza, which is home to more than 2 million people. Israeli authorities lifted an 11-week humanitarian blockade on the enclave in mid-May but aid deliveries remain sporadic.
The text of the resolution supports a UN-coordinated plan to resume deliveries of humanitarian aid and urges all states to always protect aid workers, UN personnel and medical staff in accordance with the principles of international law.
The resolution, the text of which was seen by Arab News, explicitly states that it “strongly condemns the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare,” and demands that Israel end its blockade on Gaza and “open all border crossings” to ensure aid reaches the Palestinian population “immediately and at scale.”
It calls on UN member states to “individually and collectively take all measures necessary,” consistent with the rule of international law and the UN Charter, to ensure Israeli compliance with its legal obligations. It also reaffirms the UN’s permanent responsibility for the Palestinian question until a two-state solution is achieved.
The vote on Thursday was the fourth on a Gaza ceasefire resolution by the General Assembly since the war in Gaza began in October 2023. The US has vetoed several ceasefire resolutions within the Security Council, even as support in the General Assembly has grown and abstentions from such votes have steadily dropped.
Dorothy Shea, the US envoy to the UN, described the Spanish-backed resolution as “yet another failure of the UN to condemn Hamas.” She said it does nothing to help free the hostages, improve lives of civilians in Gaza or move closer to a ceasefire, and instead sends message to Hamas that it was being rewarded.
“We will not support resolutions that do not call for violent terrorist groups to disarm and leave Gaza, and fail to recognize Israel’s right to defend itself,” Shea said.
“This resolution falsely accuses Israel of the use of starvation as a method of warfare, while at the same time ignoring Gaza Humanitarian Foundation efforts to cut out Hamas and deliver aid consistent with the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence.”
The vote took place in the run-up to a UN conference next week that aims to revive the international push for a two-state solution, which will be co-chaired by Saudi Arabia and France.
The US warned that countries who back “anti-Israel actions” in connection with the conference could be seen to be opposing US foreign policy and might face diplomatic consequences.
Despite the US efforts to dissuade support for the Spanish resolution, it gathered wide sponsorship ahead of the vote. Alongside Spain, the initiators included Chile, Egypt, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Jordan, Malaysia, Norway, Qatar, Slovenia, South Africa, Turkiye and the State of Palestine. Additional sponsors, numbering more than 30, included Brazil, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and Pakistan.
Palestinian casualties during the ongoing war in Gaza have surpassed 55,000. Thousands more are believed to be dead under the rubble of countless destroyed buildings. The resolution explicitly condemns the destruction of civilian infrastructure and stresses the importance of protecting humanitarian operations and medical facilities.
It also references Security Council Resolution 2735, adopted a year ago, which outlines a US-backed road map for a phased ceasefire, hostage release, and eventual Israeli withdrawal, but has yet to be implemented.
