World News

Trump threatens destruction of key Iranian gas field amid escalating Gulf energy attacks

Iranian Conflict

Trump threatens destruction of key Iranian gas field amid escalating Gulf energy attacks

Donald Trump has warned that the United States could target Iran’s vast South Pars gas field if Tehran continues strikes against energy infrastructure in Qatar, marking a sharp escalation in rhetoric as tensions intensify across the Gulf. In a social media post, Trump said Washington would “massively blow up the entirety” of the South Pars field if Iran persisted in attacking Qatari facilities. The warning followed a series of missile strikes by Iran on Qatar’s major energy hub, which caused significant damage but no reported casualties.

Get today's headlines by email

Qatar confirmed that Iranian missiles struck Ras Laffan Industrial City, home to one of the world’s largest liquefied natural gas export terminals. Officials described the damage as extensive, with emergency teams deployed to contain fires at the site.

Strikes hit major energy facilities
The attack came after Israel targeted Iran’s South Pars gas field, the world’s largest natural gas reserve shared between Iran and Qatar. It marked the first known strike on Iran’s gas production infrastructure since the conflict began in late February.

Trump denied any prior knowledge of the Israeli operation, stating that the United States had not been involved and that Qatar had no warning of the attack.

Rising tensions and military considerations
The developments underscore a widening regional conflict, with both sides increasingly targeting energy infrastructure. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has warned it could extend attacks to oil and gas facilities in other Gulf states, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

Meanwhile, reports indicate the United States is considering deploying additional forces to the Middle East, raising concerns that the conflict could broaden further.

Global markets have reacted sharply. Oil prices rose significantly following the latest attacks, reflecting fears of prolonged disruption to supply chains. The Strait of Hormuz — a critical route for global oil and gas shipments — has seen a steep decline in tanker traffic amid ongoing threats.

International calls for restraint
European leaders have urged de-escalation. Emmanuel Macron called for an immediate halt to strikes on civilian infrastructure, particularly energy and water facilities, following discussions with regional leaders.

Germany’s foreign minister warned that continued disruption to energy supplies could trigger a severe global crisis, while Gulf states also expressed alarm at the growing risks to energy security.

The United Arab Emirates described attacks on energy sites as a “serious escalation,” warning of environmental and economic consequences. Qatar condemned the Israeli strike on South Pars as “dangerous and irresponsible” and has expelled Iranian diplomatic staff in response to Tehran’s actions.

Risk of wider conflict
Iranian officials have vowed retaliation, with President Masoud Pezeshkian warning that attacks on energy infrastructure could have “uncontrollable consequences” extending beyond the region.

The conflict has already had a significant impact on global energy markets, with oil prices climbing sharply since the outbreak of hostilities. Analysts warn that continued disruption — particularly in the Strait of Hormuz — could have far-reaching effects on inflation, trade and global economic stability.

As both sides signal readiness to escalate further, diplomatic efforts are intensifying to prevent a broader regional crisis.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026

• 7 comments
• 175 views

webfact

March 19Mar 19

UK passport fees set to exceed £100 under new government proposals

UK

UK passport fees set to exceed £100 under new government proposals

The cost of applying for a UK passport online could rise above £100 for the first time, under new plans announced by the Home Office. If approved by Parliament, the proposed changes would see the standard online application fee for adults increase from £94.50 to £102. Fees for children would also rise, from £61.50 to £66.50.

Get today's headlines by email

The government said the increase is intended to move the passport system closer to full cost recovery, meaning users rather than taxpayers would cover more of the service’s expenses.

Broad increases across services
The proposed changes, expected to take effect from 8 April, would apply across a range of application methods.

For postal applications within the UK, adult fees would rise from £107 to £115.50, while child applications would increase from £74 to £80.

Premium services would also become more expensive. The one-day fast-track option, commonly used for urgent travel needs, would increase from £222 to £239.50.

Applicants based overseas would face higher charges as well. Online applications from abroad would cost £116.50 for adults, up from £108, and £75.50 for children, up from £70.

For paper applications submitted overseas, adult fees would rise to £130 from £120.50, while children’s applications would increase from £82.50 to £89.

Government justification
According to the Home Office, the fees help cover the cost of processing passport applications, providing consular assistance to British nationals overseas, and managing border services for UK citizens.

Officials said the move reflects a broader policy of reducing reliance on public funds for such services.

The department also advised travellers to apply well in advance of planned trips, particularly during peak periods such as school holidays when demand can increase processing times.

Recent rises and processing times
The latest proposal follows a series of recent increases, with passport fees rising by 9% in 2023 and a further 7% in 2024.

Processing times in the UK are typically up to three weeks, although delays can occur during busy periods.

If the new pricing structure is approved, it would mark another step in a gradual increase in passport costs, with the standard online application crossing the £100 threshold for the first time.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026

• 8 comments
• 161 views

webfact

March 19Mar 19

Starmer declines to confirm if he questioned Mandelson over Epstein links before appointment

Epstein Files

Starmer declines to confirm if he questioned Mandelson over Epstein links before appointment

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has refused to say whether he personally discussed Peter Mandelson’s past association with Jeffrey Epstein before appointing him as the UK’s ambassador to the United States, as pressure mounted in Parliament over the handling of the decision. Facing repeated questions during Prime Minister’s Questions, Starmer did not confirm whether any direct conversation had taken place with Mandelson. Instead, he acknowledged the appointment had been a mistake and reiterated an apology to victims linked to Epstein.

Get today's headlines by email

The issue was raised by Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who challenged the prime minister over whether he had personally vetted Mandelson regarding his relationship with the convicted sex offender.

Commons confrontation
Badenoch accused Starmer of avoiding scrutiny and relying on staff rather than exercising direct oversight. She questioned how the prime minister could claim he had been misled if he had not spoken directly to Mandelson before making the appointment.

In response, Starmer said: “This was my mistake in making the appointment, and I've apologised to the victims of Epstein.” He added that the process had since been reviewed and strengthened following advice from an independent standards adviser.

However, he did not directly address whether a personal conversation with Mandelson had taken place, instead turning to criticise Badenoch over her stance on the conflict involving Iran.

Documents raise concerns
The exchange follows the release of official documents indicating that Starmer had been warned about potential “reputational risk” linked to Mandelson’s past association with Epstein.

The files, published after MPs voted to make them public, included references to a 2019 report suggesting Epstein had maintained a close relationship with Mandelson. The documents also noted claims that Mandelson had stayed at Epstein’s residence in 2009 while the financier was in custody.

Mandelson was removed from his ambassadorial role last year after further details about the relationship emerged. Starmer has previously said he was unaware of the full extent of the connection at the time of the appointment.

Questions over vetting process
Reports have suggested that Starmer did not personally question Mandelson, instead delegating inquiries to his then chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, who later resigned amid the fallout.

Mandelson has denied misleading the prime minister, saying he answered written questions about his contact with Epstein “truthfully and fully” and does not recall being asked directly about the matter in person.

A spokesperson for Downing Street said after the Commons session that the correct procedures had been followed at the time and that a formal interview with the prime minister was not required under existing rules.

Political tensions persist
The row underscores ongoing political tensions over accountability and transparency in senior appointments, with opposition figures continuing to press for clarity over the vetting process.

While Starmer has accepted responsibility for what he described as an error of judgement, questions remain over how the appointment was handled and whether sufficient checks were carried out before Mandelson took up the diplomatic post.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026

• 4 comments
• 147 views

webfact

March 19Mar 19

London mayor urges Labour to commit to future EU membership

UK

London mayor urges Labour to commit to future EU membership

Sadiq Khan has called on the Labour Party to adopt a clear pledge to rejoin the European Union ahead of the next UK general election, intensifying debate over Britain’s long-term relationship with the bloc. In remarks that diverge from the current government line, the London mayor said rejoining the EU was ultimately “inevitable” and argued that steps towards closer economic integration should begin before voters next go to the polls.

Get today's headlines by email

In an interview with the Italian newspaper la Repubblica, Khan said the UK should seek to rejoin both the EU customs union and single market within the current parliamentary term, which is expected to run until 2029.

Push for closer ties with Europe
He pointed to what he described as the economic, social and cultural consequences of Brexit, adding that more recent global pressures — including US tariffs and the war involving Iran — had compounded the cost-of-living challenges facing households.

“The facts have changed. The evidence has changed,” Khan said, suggesting that the UK’s long-term trajectory would lead back towards EU membership.

However, he stopped short of explicitly stating whether such a move would require another public referendum.

Government rejects shift
Downing Street has repeatedly ruled out rejoining either the customs union or the single market, maintaining that the government’s position on Brexit remains unchanged.

Khan’s intervention drew swift criticism from political opponents. A spokesperson for the Conservative Party said the comments highlighted divisions within Labour, arguing that Prime Minister Keir Starmer was “in office but not in power”.

The statement also referenced other senior Labour figures, including Angela Rayner, suggesting policymaking was being driven by multiple voices within the party.

Wider political debate
Khan also voiced support for reconsidering aspects of the government’s proposed asylum measures, aligning himself with other Labour figures who have raised concerns about stricter migration policies.

His comments come amid broader political disagreement over Brexit’s long-term impact. Critics across parties have argued that leaving the EU has harmed the UK economy, while supporters continue to back independence from European institutions.

John Major recently said Brexit had failed to deliver on key promises, though he added that full re-entry to the EU was unlikely in the near term.

Other political voices have taken varied positions. The Green Party has expressed support for eventual rejoining, while Reform UK has said it would oppose any move to re-enter European economic structures.

Long-term outlook uncertain
Khan’s remarks highlight growing debate over whether the UK should revisit its post-Brexit arrangements, particularly as economic pressures and geopolitical tensions evolve.

While there is no immediate shift in government policy, the issue is likely to remain a point of contention in the run-up to the next general election, with differing visions emerging across the political spectrum.


Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026

• 24 comments
• 156 views

webfact

March 19Mar 19

Urgent Alert Issued as Meningitis Outbreak Spreads Rapidly in Kent

UK

Urgent Alert Issued as Meningitis Outbreak Spreads Rapidly in Kent

Health authorities have issued a rare nationwide alert following a fast-moving meningitis outbreak in Kent that has claimed two lives and left dozens of suspected and confirmed cases. The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) warned healthcare providers across England to remain vigilant for symptoms, as officials attempt to contain what has been described as an unusually rapid spread of infection.

Get today's headlines by email

A 21-year-old university student and a sixth-form pupil from a local school have died amid the outbreak. Authorities say around 20 cases have now been identified, including both confirmed and suspected infections.

Deaths and rising case numbers
The cluster is believed to be linked to a nightclub in Canterbury, with cases also reported among students at both the University of Kent and Canterbury Christ Church University.

Health officials say the speed at which the disease has spread is highly unusual. UKHSA chief executive Susan Hopkins said investigations are ongoing to determine the cause, including the possibility of a “super-spreader” event.

Vaccination and treatment efforts
In response, a targeted vaccination campaign has begun, focusing on approximately 5,000 students at the University of Kent. Hundreds of doses were administered in the first phase, with further clinics planned.

Authorities have also distributed around 2,500 courses of antibiotics across Kent. General practitioners nationwide have been advised to prescribe antibiotics to anyone who visited the nightclub between 5 and 7 March, as well as to certain student groups.

Officials emphasise that antibiotics remain the most effective immediate treatment, while vaccination is being used to prevent further spread.

Impact on students and community
The outbreak has had a noticeable impact on university life in Canterbury, with some students choosing to leave the area amid concerns about infection.

Vaccination centres have been set up on campus, with health workers operating large-scale clinics reminiscent of the Covid-19 response. Students have been urged to take precautions, monitor symptoms and seek medical advice if needed.

Families of those affected have described how symptoms initially resembled common illnesses such as flu, before rapidly worsening.

Wider monitoring and response
Cases linked to the outbreak have also been reported beyond the UK, including a patient in France who is said to be in stable condition after travelling from England.

UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting said the situation was not a nationwide outbreak but required a coordinated national response due to the speed of transmission.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer described the situation as “deeply difficult” for affected families and said efforts were under way to trace contacts and limit further infections.

Health officials continue to monitor the situation closely, warning that while meningitis cases occur each year, the pace and scale of this outbreak are particularly concerning.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026

• 1 comment
• 116 views

webfact

March 19Mar 19

US Lawmakers Subpoena AG Pam Bondi Over Handling of Epstein Files

Epstein Files

US Lawmakers Subpoena AG Pam Bondi Over Handling of Epstein Files

A senior Republican lawmaker has issued a subpoena to Attorney General Pam Bondi, compelling her to testify before Congress about the Justice Department’s handling of documents linked to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
The move was announced on Tuesday by James Comer, chair of the House Oversight Committee, after a bipartisan vote earlier this month backed a request for Bondi to appear before lawmakers. Several Republicans joined Democrats in supporting the motion, highlighting growing cross-party concern over the issue.

Get today's headlines by email


Questions over document release
In a letter accompanying the subpoena, Comer said the committee is seeking clarity on how the Department of Justice has managed its review and release of materials connected to Epstein and his associates.
Lawmakers are particularly focused on compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which was passed last year and requires the department to make relevant documents public.
“As Attorney General, you are directly responsible for overseeing the Department’s collection, review, and determinations regarding the release of files,” Comer wrote, adding that Bondi’s testimony would provide crucial insight into the process.

Tensions with lawmakers
The subpoena follows a contentious congressional hearing last month, during which Bondi declined to answer several questions about the files. The exchange drew criticism from members of both parties, including Thomas Massie, a Republican who has been vocal in pushing for greater transparency.
Massie, who co-led efforts to pass the legislation alongside Ro Khanna, said he had lost confidence in Bondi’s leadership following the hearing.

Expanding investigation
The Oversight Committee’s inquiry has widened to include other prominent figures linked to Epstein. Subpoenas have already been issued to Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton as part of the ongoing investigation.
Separately, lawmakers are also examining the role of Howard Lutnick, the U.S. commerce secretary, who has acknowledged visiting Epstein’s private island in 2012. Lutnick has denied any knowledge of wrongdoing and has not been accused of misconduct.
A closed-door briefing involving Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is expected to take place, with further public testimony anticipated in the coming weeks.

Mounting political pressure
Bondi has faced increasing scrutiny from both Democrats and some Republicans over the Justice Department’s approach to the Epstein case, particularly regarding the release of millions of documents.
The controversy dates back months, with critics arguing that earlier disclosures contained little new information. Epstein died in custody in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges, leaving many questions unresolved and fuelling continued political and public interest.

The latest subpoena signals that pressure on the Justice Department is unlikely to ease, as lawmakers push for greater transparency and accountability in one of the most high-profile cases in recent years.
META: A congressional committee has subpoenaed Attorney General Pam Bondi to testify over the Justice Department’s handling of Epstein-related documents.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 19 March 2026

• 2 comments
• 126 views

webfact

March 19Mar 19

Judge Questions Legal Basis of Trump’s White House Ballroom Project

USA

Judge Questions Legal Basis of Trump’s White House Ballroom Project

A U.S. federal judge has raised fresh concerns over the legality of President Donald Trump’s plan to construct a large ballroom at the White House, as he considers a renewed effort by preservation groups to halt the project. During a hearing on Tuesday, Richard Leon of the U.S. District Court expressed scepticism about the legal arguments presented by the Justice Department in defence of the $400 million development. He pointed to inconsistencies in the administration’s reasoning, describing the case as marked by “shifting theories” from the outset.

Get today's headlines by email

The planned ballroom, a 90,000-square-foot venue intended for state functions and major events, is being built on the site of the demolished East Wing. Construction began in October and is expected to continue through 2028, with most funding reportedly coming from private donors.

Dispute over legal authority
However, the National Trust for Historic Preservation has challenged the project in court, arguing that it violates federal requirements. The group says the administration failed to seek congressional approval and did not carry out mandated reviews or allow for public consultation.

Lawyers representing the preservationists accused the government of providing inconsistent explanations about who holds authority over the project. Attorney Thaddeus Heuer told the court officials had created confusion over several months before now, arguing that construction has progressed too far to be stopped.

Government defends project
In response, Justice Department lawyer Yaakov Roth maintained that the project rests on both public and private authority, describing it as having a “dual source of funding and dual source of authority.”

Judge Leon appeared unconvinced, calling that interpretation a “brazen” reading of the law. He emphasised the symbolic importance of the White House, describing it as an “iconic” national landmark and noting that the president acts as a steward rather than an owner of the property.

Ongoing legal battle
The courtroom exchange follows an earlier ruling in which Leon declined to block construction, citing procedural shortcomings in the preservationists’ initial complaint. He invited the group to revise its case, leading to the current legal challenge.

In his previous opinion, Leon noted that the administration had initially suggested constitutional grounds for the project before later abandoning that argument, further complicating the legal landscape.

The preservation group has now filed an updated complaint, again seeking to stop the construction. Government lawyers have urged the court not to intervene, citing national security considerations and practical difficulties in halting work already underway.

Decision expected soon
The dispute has drawn criticism from historians, preservation advocates and some lawmakers, particularly over the demolition of the East Wing and the perceived bypassing of established procedures.

Judge Leon indicated that he aims to issue a decision by the end of the month, which could determine whether construction continues or faces further legal obstacles.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 5 comments
• 462 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

US Judge Orders Restoration of Voice of America After Shutdown

USA

US Judge Orders Restoration of Voice of America After Shutdown

A U.S. federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to reinstate operations at Voice of America (VOA), reversing a move that had sidelined much of the government-funded broadcaster and placed hundreds of employees on administrative leave. In a ruling issued on Tuesday, Royce C. Lamberth directed the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) to submit a plan within a week to restore VOA’s broadcasting capacity. The outlet has been operating with only a limited staff since President Donald Trump signed an executive order last year effectively shutting down large parts of its operations.

Get today's headlines by email

The judge ruled that the administration’s actions to drastically reduce VOA’s workforce and programming were unlawful. More than 1,000 employees had been placed on leave, leaving the organisation functioning at what officials described as the “statutory minimum” level required by Congress.

Court rejects shutdown decision
Lamberth described the decision as “arbitrary and capricious,” stating that authorities failed to properly consider legal requirements governing VOA’s mandate, including its obligation to broadcast in specific languages and regions.

“Defendants have provided nothing approaching a principled basis for their decision,” he wrote in his judgement.

Leadership dispute and legal challenge
The ruling follows an earlier decision by Lamberth that Kari Lake, who had been selected by Trump to lead USAGM, lacked the authority to implement the shutdown because she had not been confirmed by the Senate.

Her actions, taken in response to the president’s directive, were central to the legal challenge brought by VOA staff. The case was supported by journalists including Patsy Widakuswara, the broadcaster’s White House bureau chief.

Widakuswara welcomed the ruling, saying staff were ready to rebuild the organisation and restore its global reach after months of disruption.

Administration response and next steps
Lake has previously criticised the court’s intervention and indicated that the decision would be appealed. Meanwhile, Trump has nominated Sarah Rogers, a State Department official, to lead USAGM, though the appointment requires Senate approval.

It remains unclear how quickly VOA can return to full operations, given the scale of the workforce reductions and programming cuts implemented over the past year.

Global broadcaster with long history
Founded during the Second World War, Voice of America has long served as a U.S.-funded international broadcaster, delivering news to audiences in countries with limited press freedom.

Before the shutdown, VOA operated in dozens of languages and reached hundreds of millions of people worldwide. The court’s ruling is expected to pave the way for the restoration of those services, though officials have acknowledged that rebuilding capacity and trust may take time.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 0 comments
• 139 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

One Killed, Another Injured in Shooting at New Mexico Air Force Base

USA

One Killed, Another Injured in Shooting at New Mexico Air Force Base

A shooting at Holloman Air Force Base has left one person dead and another injured, prompting a temporary lockdown of the military installation, officials said. The incident occurred on Tuesday evening near a convenience store on the base, located in southern New Mexico. Authorities responded after reports of an active shooter at approximately 5:30 p.m., according to a statement from the 49th Wing, the unit stationed at the base.

Get today's headlines by email

Following the initial reports, base officials swiftly implemented a lockdown as emergency personnel moved to secure the area. The wounded individual was transported for medical treatment, though their condition has not been disclosed.

Lockdown and emergency response
Military authorities later confirmed that the situation had been contained and that there was no ongoing threat. The lockdown was subsequently lifted once security teams determined the base was safe.
“Emergency personnel are responding to the situation, and there is no threat at this time,” the statement said.

Limited details released
Officials have not yet released the identities of those involved, nor have they provided further information about the circumstances surrounding the shooting. It remains unclear what led to the incident or whether any suspects are in custody.

The base convenience store where the shooting occurred has been closed indefinitely, according to a social media update from base authorities.

Key military installation
Holloman Air Force Base covers an area of roughly 93 square miles and plays a significant role in U.S. national security operations. It is home to the 49th Wing, which includes combat-ready personnel and supports a range of military missions.

The base is situated near the city of Alamogordo and is a major employer and strategic site in the region.

Investigation ongoing
Authorities have not said whether the shooting is being treated as an isolated incident or part of a broader investigation. Additional details are expected as officials continue to gather information.

The shooting adds to concerns about security incidents at military facilities, though officials emphasised that there is currently no wider danger to personnel or the surrounding community.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 1 comment
• 136 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Trump–UK Dispute Over Iran Raises Doubts About King Charles Visit to Washington

UK Monarchy

Trump–UK Dispute Over Iran Raises Doubts About King Charles Visit to Washington

A growing diplomatic rift between the United States and the United Kingdom over the war in Iran is casting uncertainty over a potential state visit by King Charles III to Washington. The tensions follow increasingly sharp criticism from U.S. President Donald Trump directed at British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, raising concerns in London about whether the visit should proceed as planned.

Get today's headlines by email

Earlier this year, Starmer had sought to cultivate a positive relationship with Trump, even presenting him with an invitation from the monarch for a second state visit to the UK. The move was widely seen as part of a broader strategy to maintain close ties with Washington and secure favourable outcomes on issues such as trade and security.

Strategy of engagement under strain
However, that approach now appears under pressure. Trump has publicly criticised Starmer’s leadership and questioned Britain’s reliability as an ally, remarks that have unsettled political figures in the UK.

Dispute over military support
The dispute stems largely from Britain’s reluctance to fully back U.S. military efforts against Iran. While the UK declined to allow the use of its bases for offensive operations—citing legal concerns—it did participate in defensive actions after its assets in the region came under attack.

Trump has since alternated between dismissing Britain’s offers of support and criticising London for not doing enough. He has also voiced frustration over the UK’s hesitation to contribute naval forces to secure the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping route disrupted by the conflict.

Concerns over royal visit
Amid the escalating rhetoric, some British lawmakers have urged caution over the proposed visit by King Charles, which had been expected to coincide with celebrations marking the 250th anniversary of U.S. independence.

Emily Thornberry, a senior Labour MP, warned that the monarch could face embarrassment if tensions persist, suggesting the trip might need to be reconsidered or delayed.

Officials have not confirmed details of the visit, and Downing Street has declined to comment on future royal engagements.

Political reactions and shifting positions
The row has also prompted shifts in domestic political positions within the UK. Nigel Farage, initially supportive of joining U.S.-led military action, has since argued against British involvement in another foreign conflict.

Similarly, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who had earlier backed participation, later criticised the tone of exchanges between Washington and London, describing the dispute as unproductive.

Uncertainty over next steps
Despite the tensions, Trump has indicated he expects King Charles to visit the United States soon, though no firm timeline has been announced.

Analysts say the situation places the British government in a difficult position—balancing the risk of diplomatic embarrassment against the potential fallout of postponing a high-profile visit.

As relations between the two allies come under strain, the decision on whether to proceed with the royal visit may hinge on whether both sides can stabilise ties in the coming weeks.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 3 comments
• 172 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Iran Fires Cluster-Capable Missiles at Tel Aviv as Regional Conflict Intensifies

Middle East

Iran Fires Cluster-Capable Missiles at Tel Aviv as Regional Conflict Intensifies

Iran has launched missiles carrying cluster-type warheads at Tel Aviv, in what it described as retaliation for the killing of senior official Ali Larijani, marking a further escalation in the ongoing conflict with Israel and the United States. Iranian state media reported that the overnight strikes killed at least two people, bringing the total number of fatalities in Israel since the war began to at least 14.

Get today's headlines by email

According to a statement from Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the attack involved Khorramshahr-4 and Qadr missiles, both capable of deploying multiple warheads over a wide area. Israeli officials have previously accused Iran of using such munitions, which disperse smaller explosives mid-air and are difficult to intercept.

Retaliation following high-profile killing
The strikes came days after Iran confirmed the death of Larijani, who had been a central figure in national security decision-making. He was killed in an Israeli strike, alongside his son and deputy, Alireza Bayat.
The killing followed the earlier death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, further destabilising the country’s leadership during wartime.

Nuclear concerns and calls for restraint
In a separate development, Iran reported that a projectile struck near the Bushehr nuclear power plant but caused no damage or injuries. Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, urged all sides to exercise maximum restraint to avoid the risk of a nuclear incident.

The United States and Israel have said that curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions is a central objective of their military campaign, which began in late February.

Hardening positions on both sides
Iran’s new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has reportedly rejected proposals to reduce tensions or agree to a ceasefire. According to officials, he said it was not the right time for peace and insisted that Iran would continue its resistance until its adversaries accepted defeat.

The conflict has already caused heavy casualties across the region. A U.S.-based monitoring group estimates that more than 3,000 people have been killed in Iran since the fighting began, while Israeli strikes have also caused significant loss of life in Lebanon.

Global impact and economic pressure
The war continues to disrupt global energy supplies, with the Strait of Hormuz—a key route for oil shipments—largely closed. Prices have surged sharply, raising concerns about inflation and economic instability worldwide.
U.S. President Donald Trump has criticised allied nations for declining to assist in securing the waterway, though he has also said Washington could act independently.

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas called for diplomatic solutions, warning of potential food, energy and fertiliser crises if the conflict persists.

Widening regional and global disruption
Iran has expanded its response beyond Israel, targeting Gulf states that host U.S. bases. Thousands of missile and drone attacks have reportedly struck infrastructure across the region, including ports, airports and oil facilities.
The United States military said it had carried out strikes on Iranian coastal positions to counter threats to shipping.

The broader fallout is being felt across global industries. Airlines have warned of rising fuel costs and potential route cuts, while international shipping faces severe disruption. Aid agencies, including the World Food Programme, have cautioned that prolonged conflict could push tens of millions of people into acute hunger.

As fighting shows no sign of easing, the escalation in attacks and leadership losses is raising fears of a prolonged and increasingly destabilising regional war.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 14 comments
• 158 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Trump: BBC as 'corrupt, criminal and beyond fake news'

Trump

Trump: BBC as 'corrupt, criminal and beyond fake news'

US President Donald Trump has sharply criticised the BBC, accusing it of producing misleading coverage as a legal dispute between the two sides continues.
Speaking at the White House, Mr Trump described the broadcaster in strongly critical terms while responding to questions about a defamation lawsuit he has filed over a television documentary.

Get today's headlines by email

Legal dispute over documentary
The case centres on an episode of the BBC’s Panorama programme broadcast in 2024, which drew controversy over its portrayal of comments made by Mr Trump following the 2020 US presidential election.
The programme was criticised for suggesting that the then former president had encouraged supporters to storm the US Capitol in January 2021 after losing the election to Joe Biden.
Mr Trump has denied that characterisation and launched a lawsuit seeking $10bn (£7.5bn) in damages.
The BBC has since filed a motion to dismiss the case, arguing against the claims made in the lawsuit.

BBC response and internal fallout
The controversy surrounding the programme led to significant internal repercussions at the broadcaster.
Director-general Tim Davie resigned following criticism that the documentary may have selectively edited footage of Mr Trump’s remarks.

BBC chairman Samir Shah also issued an apology, acknowledging what he described as an “error of judgment” in how the material had been presented.
He said the editing created the impression that Mr Trump had made a direct call for violent action, a characterisation that has been strongly disputed by the former president and his supporters.

Trump’s latest criticism
Mr Trump renewed his criticism of the BBC while hosting Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin in the Oval Office.
He told reporters that footage used in the documentary had been manipulated and claimed that artificial intelligence may have been used to generate certain clips. He did not provide evidence to support that claim.

The US president also criticised the BBC’s reporting on the ongoing conflict involving the United States and Iran, describing it as inaccurate.
According to Mr Trump, coverage of the war did not reflect what he characterised as US military success.

Broader tensions with media
Mr Trump has frequently criticised media organisations, both in the United States and internationally, accusing them of bias and misrepresentation.
His use of the term “fake news” has been a recurring feature of his political rhetoric, often directed at outlets he considers critical of his administration.

The latest comments come as tensions remain high between the White House and sections of the media over coverage of both domestic and international issues.

Ongoing proceedings
It remains unclear how the legal case between Mr Trump and the BBC will proceed.
When asked about the lawsuit, Mr Trump said he would wait to see how the situation develops.

The dispute highlights broader questions about media accountability, editorial standards and the use of footage in political reporting, particularly in cases involving high-profile public figures.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 16 comments
• 163 views

ASEAN NOW News

March 18Mar 18

Trump Drops Call for Allies to Secure Strait of Hormuz Amid War Tensions

Iranian Conflict

Trump Drops Call for Allies to Secure Strait of Hormuz Amid War Tensions

U.S. President Donald Trump has said the United States no longer needs assistance from allies to protect the Strait of Hormuz, reversing an earlier appeal for international support as tensions with Iran escalate. Speaking at the White House, Trump said, “We don’t need any help, actually,” just a day after urging other nations to join efforts to safeguard the strategic waterway, a key route for global oil shipments.

Get today's headlines by email

The shift follows a muted response from U.S. partners, with several European leaders declining to participate in military operations linked to the conflict.

Allies hesitant to join effort
France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, said his country would not take part in efforts to reopen the strait during the current hostilities, though it could assist after fighting ends. Germany’s defence minister, Boris Pistorius, also distanced Berlin from involvement, saying the conflict was not one his country had initiated.

The reluctance highlights divisions within Western alliances as Washington seeks support for its campaign against Iran, launched alongside Israel in late February.

‘America First’ approach under scrutiny
The situation is being seen as a test of Trump’s long-standing “America First” foreign policy, which emphasises reduced reliance on international alliances. The president has frequently criticised what he views as unequal burdens within partnerships such as NATO.

A White House spokesperson said the administration would continue to prioritise U.S. national security “with or without” allied backing, pointing to ongoing military operations in the region.

Trump had previously suggested that multiple countries were prepared to assist, but no formal coalition has been announced. His change in stance comes as efforts to rally international support appear to have stalled.

Strategic and economic stakes
The Strait of Hormuz remains a critical chokepoint for global energy supplies, and recent attacks have disrupted shipping, contributing to rising fuel prices. The economic impact has added domestic pressure on the administration ahead of upcoming congressional elections.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham indicated tensions behind the scenes, saying Trump was deeply frustrated by the lack of allied support and warning of broader consequences for both Europe and the United States if the route remains unstable.

Strained diplomatic relations
The dispute reflects broader strains between Washington and its European allies. Critics say the administration’s approach has complicated coalition-building, particularly as the military campaign began without extensive prior consultation.

Diplomats have suggested that trust has been weakened in recent months, making cooperation more difficult. Some also questioned whether foreign naval deployments would be sufficient to secure the strait, given the nature of the threats involved.

Despite differences, officials on both sides acknowledge the importance of maintaining stability in the region. However, it remains uncertain whether the U.S. will renew efforts to build a coalition or continue to act independently.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 64 comments
• 166 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Federal Judge Blocks Arkansas Law Requiring Ten Commandments in Classrooms

USA

Federal Judge Blocks Arkansas Law Requiring Ten Commandments in Classrooms

A federal judge has struck down an Arkansas law mandating the display of the Ten Commandments in public school classrooms, marking a significant development in an ongoing legal battle over religion in U.S. education. In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Timothy L. Brooks concluded that the requirement violated constitutional principles, stating there was no valid justification for placing religious texts in a wide range of academic settings.


Get today's headlines by email

The law, passed in 2025, required all public elementary and secondary schools in Arkansas to prominently display the Ten Commandments in classrooms and libraries. It was challenged by a group of families from diverse religious and nonreligious backgrounds, who argued it breached the separation of church and state.

Court ruling challenges constitutionality
In his written judgment, Brooks said that displaying the Ten Commandments—even with historical context—could not be justified in subjects such as science, languages or vocational classes. He added that there was no constitutional framework under which such a mandate could stand.

The decision effectively blocks enforcement of the law, although it remains unclear whether the ruling applies statewide or only to the specific school districts involved in the lawsuit.

A spokesperson for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Arkansas, which supported the legal challenge, said the judgment made clear the measure was unconstitutional and warned schools against proceeding with displays.

Political response and appeal plans
Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the state would appeal the decision, pledging to defend what she described as Arkansas’s values.
The legislation is part of a broader push by Republican lawmakers, including Donald Trump, to expand the presence of religious content in public schools. Similar laws have been enacted in other states, including Louisiana and Texas, prompting a wave of legal challenges.

Wider legal battles across states
In Louisiana, a comparable law requiring Ten Commandments displays recently cleared a legal hurdle after a federal appeals court lifted a previous block, allowing implementation to move forward. Governor Jeff Landry has since instructed schools to comply, although some institutions remain cautious due to ongoing litigation.

Meanwhile, in Texas, a similar mandate has been partially enforced. While some school districts have installed the displays, others have been prevented from doing so following court injunctions. Legal proceedings are still ongoing, with federal appeals judges reviewing the case.

Debate over religion in public education
The issue has reignited a long-standing debate in the United States over the role of religion in government institutions. Supporters argue that the Ten Commandments hold historical and cultural significance, while critics maintain that mandatory displays in public schools violate constitutional protections.

The Arkansas ruling adds to a patchwork of legal decisions across the country, increasing the likelihood that the matter could ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 16 comments
• 119 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Killing of Senior Iranian Figure Ali Larijani Intensifies Leadership Turmoil

Iranian Conflict

Killing of Senior Iranian Figure Ali Larijani Intensifies Leadership Turmoil

The death of senior Iranian official Ali Larijani in an Israeli airstrike has deepened uncertainty within Iran’s leadership, removing a key strategist at a pivotal moment for the country. Larijani, who served as secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, played a central role in shaping decisions on defence, diplomacy and national security. Though not a military commander, he was widely regarded as one of the Islamic Republic’s most influential policymakers, particularly in managing tensions with the United States and Israel.

Get today's headlines by email

His death follows the reported killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in late February, compounding a growing leadership crisis. In recent weeks, multiple senior officials and commanders have been killed, suggesting a sustained effort to weaken Iran’s governing structure during wartime.

Leadership vacuum amid ongoing conflict
State media confirmed Larijani’s death as Israel intensified strikes targeting key figures. His loss leaves a significant gap in decision-making at a time when Iran faces overlapping internal and external pressures.

Despite his reputation as a hardliner, Larijani was often described domestically as a pragmatic figure, combining ideological commitment with a measured, technocratic approach. He was involved in diplomatic efforts, including engagement linked to Iran’s long-term co-operation agreement with China, while maintaining scepticism toward Western powers.

Three major crises left unresolved
At the time of his death, Larijani was overseeing several critical challenges. Chief among them was the ongoing war, where he had advocated for a prolonged conflict and potential expansion across the region, including threats to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.

He was also managing a wave of domestic unrest that had escalated from economic discontent into broader anti-government protests. Authorities responded with a crackdown that reportedly resulted in thousands of deaths.

In addition, Larijani was involved in navigating Iran’s nuclear programme and stalled indirect negotiations with Washington, both of which have been disrupted by recent hostilities.

Shift towards military influence
His removal raises questions about how these crises will now be handled. Analysts suggest power could shift further toward the armed forces, particularly as the government struggles to maintain continuity.

Iran’s president, Masoud Pezeshkian, has indicated that military units may be granted broader authority to act if senior leadership is incapacitated. This could lead to faster decision-making but potentially with less central coordination.

Meanwhile, signs of uncertainty over succession persist. Public appearances by the new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, have been limited, and official announcements have been delayed, fuelling speculation over internal stability.

Risk of further escalation
In the immediate aftermath, Iran’s military leadership has signalled a strong response. Army chief Amir Hatami warned of “decisive” retaliation, raising the prospect of further escalation in the conflict.

While Iran has demonstrated resilience, including through disruptions to global energy markets, continued strikes and leadership losses could undermine its ability to respond effectively over time.

The death of Larijani is therefore seen as more than the loss of a single official. It highlights mounting pressure on Iran’s leadership and increases the risk of instability, both in the conduct of the war and within the country itself.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 37 comments
• 322 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Scottish Parliament Rejects Assisted Dying Bill After Divisive Debate

UK-Politics

Scottish Parliament Rejects Assisted Dying Bill After Divisive Debate

Members of the Scottish Parliament have voted against legalising assisted dying, rejecting proposals that would have made Scotland the first part of the UK to allow the practice. The bill, introduced by Liam McArthur of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, was defeated by 69 votes to 57 following an emotional and closely watched debate at Holyrood.

Get today's headlines by email

The proposed legislation would have allowed terminally ill, mentally competent adults to seek medical assistance to end their lives. It included provisions requiring patients to make two formal declarations and undergo medical assessments to ensure they were not being coerced.

Concerns over coercion and safeguards
However, opponents repeatedly raised concerns that vulnerable individuals could feel pressured into choosing assisted death. Jeremy Balfour warned that the bill risked opening a “pandora’s box” and argued there could be no adequate protection against coercion.

Other critics highlighted the need to prioritise improvements in palliative care, with some questioning whether patients could truly make a free choice without access to high-quality end-of-life support.

Ruth Maguire, who has been diagnosed with cancer, said the decision could not be considered voluntary if proper care options were lacking, while Pam Duncan-Glancy urged lawmakers to focus on making it “easier to live than to die”.

Supporters argue for choice and dignity
Backers of the bill argued it would provide compassionate options for those experiencing severe suffering at the end of life. McArthur pointed to cases of patients enduring extreme pain and said the legislation offered a carefully regulated framework.

Supporters also stressed that assisted dying and improved palliative care were not mutually exclusive, with Alex Cole-Hamilton describing the proposal as containing strong safeguards.

Some MSPs shared personal experiences during the debate. George Adam spoke about his wife’s condition, saying individuals facing unbearable suffering should have the option to choose how they die.

Political divisions and outcome
MSPs were given a free vote, meaning they were not required to follow party lines. Although the bill had passed an earlier stage by a narrow margin, several lawmakers who had initially supported further debate ultimately voted against it in the final decision.

John Swinney, Scotland’s First Minister, had already indicated his opposition and later said he was relieved by the outcome.

The vote marks the third attempt to legalise assisted dying in Scotland since devolution, but the first to reach such an advanced stage in the legislative process.

Debate set to continue
Despite the defeat, campaigners on both sides said the issue would remain part of public debate. McArthur described himself as “devastated” and suggested some MSPs might later regret their decision.

Advocacy group Dignity in Dying said the result was a setback for those seeking greater choice at the end of life. In contrast, Care Not Killing welcomed the outcome, arguing the bill posed risks to vulnerable people.

The result leaves assisted dying illegal across Scotland, while separate proposals continue to be considered elsewhere in the UK.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 2 comments
• 118 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Deadly Israeli Strikes Hit Central Beirut as Conflict Escalates

Middle East

Deadly Israeli Strikes Hit Central Beirut as Conflict Escalates

Israeli airstrikes in Beirut have killed at least six people and wounded more than 20 others, according to Lebanese authorities, as Israel intensifies its campaign against the Iran-backed group Hezbollah. Lebanon’s health ministry said the casualties resulted from strikes in central districts of the capital early on Wednesday, marking a further expansion of Israeli operations beyond the city’s southern suburbs.

Get today's headlines by email

The attacks struck multiple areas across Beirut in the early hours. An airstrike at around 1:30 a.m. hit the Zuqaq al-Blat district, destroying several floors of a residential building. A separate strike in the nearby Basta area caused heavy damage to at least two floors of another building.

Central districts targeted overnight
No advance warning was reported for either of these attacks, which together accounted for the six fatalities and 24 injuries cited by officials.
Later, at approximately 5:30 a.m., a more powerful strike levelled an entire building in the Bachoura neighbourhood, close to the city centre. The Israeli military had issued a warning ahead of that attack, identifying the site as a Hezbollah-linked facility. No immediate casualties were reported from that strike.
Expanding scope of strikes
While Israeli operations in Beirut have largely focused on the southern suburbs, which are considered a stronghold of Hezbollah, there have been a growing number of strikes in central areas since the conflict widened earlier this month.

Explosions were also reported overnight in the southern outskirts of the capital, where heavy bombardment lit up the skyline.

The escalation follows the broader regional conflict that intensified on 2 March, when Hezbollah entered the war in support of Iran.

Rising toll across Lebanon
Lebanese authorities say more than 900 people have been killed nationwide since the start of the latest hostilities, with over one million residents displaced.

Further strikes were reported outside the capital. In the eastern city of Baalbek, four people were killed, while additional attacks in southern Lebanon left 10 dead across three locations, according to state media citing the health ministry.

Israel has also reported casualties among its forces, stating that two soldiers were killed during operations in southern Lebanon. However, there have been no confirmed civilian deaths in Israel linked to Hezbollah’s rocket and drone attacks.

Ongoing regional tensions
The continued exchanges highlight the intensifying confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah, raising concerns about further escalation across the region.

As strikes extend deeper into Beirut, the risk to civilians and infrastructure in densely populated areas remains a growing concern.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 1 comment
• 222 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

US Chief Justice Roberts Warns Against Personal Attacks on Judges

USA

US Chief Justice Roberts Warns Against Personal Attacks on Judges

John Roberts has warned that personal hostility directed at judges poses a serious risk to the judicial system, calling for an end to such attacks. Speaking at an event in Houston, the head of the US Supreme Court said criticism of court rulings was both expected and healthy but warned that remarks targeting judges personally could have dangerous consequences. “The problem sometimes is that the criticism can move from a focus on legal analysis to personalities,” Roberts said. “That, frankly, can be quite dangerous.”


Get today's headlines by email

Although Roberts did not name individuals, his comments come shortly after renewed criticism from Donald Trump, who has repeatedly attacked judges over rulings affecting his administration.

Concerns over rising rhetoric
The president recently criticised James Boasberg, who blocked subpoenas tied to an investigation involving Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell. Trump called for disciplinary action against the judge and questioned the integrity of others involved in similar cases.

Roberts stressed that while judges’ decisions should be open to scrutiny, personal attacks undermine the role of the judiciary. “Judges around the country work very hard to get it right,” he said, adding that their rulings remain subject to public and legal challenge.

Tensions between courts and executive
The remarks highlight ongoing tensions between the judiciary and the executive branch. Since returning to office, Trump and allies have criticised several court decisions that have slowed or blocked elements of his policy agenda.

In previous instances, Trump has even called for the impeachment of judges whose rulings he opposed. Roberts has publicly pushed back on such suggestions, stating that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement over legal decisions.

Recent rulings and criticism
Despite ideological alignment in some cases, the Supreme Court has not consistently ruled in Trump’s favour. In a recent decision, the court struck down his administration’s global tariff measures, finding them unlawful.

Following that ruling, Trump criticised several justices, including Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett, both of whom he had appointed during his first term.

Roberts’ comments underline concerns about the tone of political discourse surrounding the courts, as debates over judicial independence and accountability continue in the United States.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 0 comments
• 127 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

US Counterterrorism Chief Joe Kent Resigns Over Iran War, Citing Disagreement with Policy

Iranian Conflict

US Counterterrorism Chief Joe Kent Resigns Over Iran War, Citing Disagreement with Policy

Joe Kent, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, has resigned from his post in protest over the ongoing conflict with Iran, arguing the country did not pose an immediate threat to the United States. In a resignation letter published on social media, Kent said he could not support the war, claiming it had been driven by external pressure rather than clear national security concerns. “I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran,” he wrote, adding that he believed the threat from Tehran had been overstated.

Get today's headlines by email

Kent, who served under Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, argued that the decision to engage militarily had been influenced by pro-war messaging and lobbying efforts linked to Israel. He described what he called a “misinformation campaign” that he said contributed to shaping US policy.
He warned that the situation risked repeating past conflicts, drawing comparisons with the Iraq war and cautioning against prolonged military engagement.

Kent also praised aspects of Donald Trump’s earlier foreign policy, including targeted operations against militant leaders and efforts to avoid extended conflicts. However, he accused the current administration of departing from that approach.

Background and political profile
A former special forces warrant officer, Kent has extensive military experience. His wife, Shannon Kent, a US Navy cryptologic technician, was killed in a bombing in Syria in 2019.

Following her death, Kent entered politics and ran twice for Congress in Washington state, though he was unsuccessful in both attempts.

His political career drew controversy due to links with far-right figures and his support for disputed claims about the 2020 US election and the January 6 Capitol attack.

Reaction from the White House
President Trump responded to the resignation during a White House event, saying he had reviewed Kent’s statement and disagreed with his assessment of Iran.

Trump said he considered Iran a significant threat and suggested Kent’s views demonstrated poor judgement on national security. He added that it was “a good thing” Kent had stepped down, describing him as weak on security.

The resignation comes amid heightened tensions surrounding the Iran conflict, which has increasingly dominated US foreign policy and sparked debate within political and security circles.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 18 March 2026

• 10 comments
• 127 views

webfact

March 18Mar 18

Zelensky to Meet Starmer in UK for New Defence Pact on Drone Warfare

Ukraine Conflict

Zelensky to Meet Starmer in UK for New Defence Pact on Drone Warfare

Volodymyr Zelensky is due to visit the United Kingdom on Tuesday for talks with Prime Minister Keir Starmer, where the two leaders are expected to sign a new defence agreement focused on countering drone threats. According to Downing Street, the partnership will combine Ukraine’s battlefield experience with the UK’s industrial capabilities to develop and produce drones and related technologies.

Get today's headlines by email

The planned agreement reflects the growing importance of drones and electronic warfare in modern conflicts. Officials say the collaboration will aim to strengthen Ukraine’s defences against Russia while also enhancing the UK’s own preparedness for future security challenges.

Focus on evolving battlefield threats
As part of the initiative, Britain will contribute £500,000 towards the creation of an artificial intelligence centre of excellence in Kyiv. UK Defence Secretary John Healey said it was increasingly vital to draw on Ukraine’s experience in adapting to rapidly changing battlefield conditions.

Starmer also highlighted the broader implications of the conflict, stating that drone warfare and technological innovation had become central to both national security and economic resilience.

Continued support for Ukraine
During the visit, the two leaders are also expected to discuss ongoing military and political support for Ukraine as it continues to resist Russia’s full-scale invasion, now entering its fourth year.

Zelensky has been touring European capitals in recent weeks, seeking to maintain international backing at a time when global attention has been partly diverted by the ongoing conflict involving the United States, Israel and Iran.

In a recent address, the Ukrainian president said strengthening air defences remained a priority and emphasised the need for sustained pressure on Russia to move towards peace.

Expanding international cooperation
The UK-Ukraine partnership is also expected to involve cooperation with third countries, as part of wider efforts to improve global security and counter emerging threats.

Ukraine has increasingly positioned itself as a leader in countering low-cost drone attacks, having developed tactics using mass-produced interceptor drones to defend its airspace.

Ukrainian military specialists have recently been deployed to countries including Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia to share expertise on defending against drone strikes, particularly those linked to Iran.

The agreement to be signed in London is seen as part of a broader push to formalise that expertise into long-term defence cooperation.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 17 March 2026

• 4 comments
• 135 views

webfact

March 17Mar 17

Farage Outlines Radical Agenda as Reform UK Targets Power

UK-Politics

Farage Outlines Radical Agenda as Reform UK Targets Power

Nigel Farage has set out an ambitious and controversial vision for Britain, positioning his Reform UK party as a challenger to the country’s political establishment ahead of the next general election. Speaking as the party begins to develop a fuller policy platform, Farage said shifting global dynamics had created an opportunity for what he described as a break from the existing political order.

Get today's headlines by email

“The world is changing,” he said, arguing that traditional approaches to governance were no longer fit for purpose.

Reform UK’s policy direction
Reform UK has outlined a wide-ranging agenda that includes stricter immigration controls, potential withdrawal from international human rights agreements, and significant reductions in overseas aid.

Other proposals under discussion include scaling back diversity initiatives, abandoning net-zero climate targets, boosting domestic oil and gas production, and reducing the size of the civil service. The party has also expressed interest in positioning the UK as a centre for cryptocurrency activity.

Farage framed these policies as rooted in what he called “simple values” centred on family, community and national identity.

Rising support and political challenges
Recent opinion polls have shown Reform gaining ground, strengthening Farage’s claim that the party could compete for power at the next election, due by 2029. However, Reform currently holds only a small number of seats in the UK parliament, raising questions about its readiness to govern.

Farage has also drawn comparisons between his political approach and that of figures such as Donald Trump, Viktor Orban and Javier Milei, whom he credits with driving major political change globally.

Despite this, critics argue that Reform’s proposals lack detail and coherence. The governing Labour Party has dismissed the platform as unclear, while the opposition Conservatives have questioned whether the party has a credible long-term vision.

Divisions and criticism
Farage remains a polarising figure in British politics. Supporters view him as a skilled campaigner capable of connecting with voters, while opponents accuse him of using divisive rhetoric, particularly on immigration.

Concerns have also been raised over controversies within the party, including allegations of racism involving some members and a case in which a former regional leader was jailed for accepting bribes linked to pro-Russian statements.

Political analysts suggest Farage’s strong personal appeal is both an asset and a liability, attracting committed supporters while alienating others.

International ties and outlook
Reform figures have highlighted their connections with political figures in Washington, arguing these relationships could benefit Britain’s global standing. Farage said he shared positions with Trump on issues such as border control, energy policy and international security.

At the same time, he rejected suggestions that Reform was simply replicating the US “Make America Great Again” movement, instead portraying his approach as part of a broader shift that predates it.

As Reform continues to develop its policy platform, party officials say they aim to present a more detailed programme by the end of the year, seeking to convince voters they are prepared to move from protest movement to governing force.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 17 March 2026

• 17 comments
• 161 views

webfact

March 17Mar 17

Israel Claims Killing of Iran’s Security Chief in Overnight Strike

Iranian Conflict

Israel Claims Killing of Iran’s Security Chief in Overnight Strike

Israel has said it killed a senior Iranian security figure, Ali Larijani, during overnight strikes, though Tehran has not confirmed his death.

Get today's headlines by email

In a statement issued on Tuesday, the Israeli military said Larijani was among those targeted. It also reported the killing of Gholam Reza Soleimani, described as the head of Iran’s Basij volunteer force, which operates under the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Iranian authorities have not publicly verified the claims, leaving uncertainty over the fate of Larijani.

Unconfirmed reports amid ongoing conflict
The reported strike comes amid escalating tensions between Israel, the United States and Iran. If confirmed, Larijani’s death would mark another significant loss for Iran’s leadership following a series of high-profile attacks.

Late last month, coordinated US and Israeli strikes reportedly killed Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, a development that significantly altered the country’s political landscape.

Despite the claims, Iranian officials have yet to respond directly to Israel’s latest announcement regarding Larijani.

Role within Iran’s leadership
Larijani was a prominent figure within Iran’s political and security establishment. He served as secretary of the Supreme National Security Council and was regarded as a close ally of Khamenei.

He had also previously held the position of speaker of Iran’s parliament, placing him among the country’s most influential political figures.

Following Khamenei’s reported death, Larijani had sought to reassure the public, stating that Iran’s system of governance would continue without disruption.

Recent public appearance
Larijani was last seen in public just days before the reported strike, attending a Quds Day rally on 14 March. The annual event is marked by demonstrations in support of Palestinians and is widely observed in Iran.

The Israeli military’s statement did not provide further details about the location or circumstances of the operation.

With no confirmation from Tehran, questions remain over the accuracy of Israel’s claims and the potential implications for the region.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 17 March 2026

• 8 comments
• 171 views

webfact

March 17Mar 17

Russia to Halt Recruitment of Kenyans for Ukraine War, Nairobi Says

Ukraine Conflict

Russia to Halt Recruitment of Kenyans for Ukraine War, Nairobi Says

Musalia Mudavadi has said Russia has agreed to stop recruiting Kenyan nationals to fight in the war in Ukraine, following talks held in Moscow with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov.

Get today's headlines by email

Speaking alongside Lavrov, Kenya’s foreign minister stated that both sides had reached an understanding that Kenyan citizens would no longer be enlisted through Russia’s defence ministry. “They will no longer be eligible to be enlisted,” Mudavadi said.

Lavrov did not directly confirm the agreement but maintained that all foreign fighters serving with Russian forces had joined voluntarily and in accordance with Russian law.

Concerns over recruitment practices
The announcement follows mounting concern in Kenya over reports that large numbers of its citizens had been recruited to fight in the conflict. A Kenyan intelligence assessment in February suggested that more than 1,000 nationals had been enlisted.

Some individuals have claimed they were misled, having travelled to Russia for what they believed were civilian job opportunities, only to be drawn into military service in Ukraine.

Kenyan authorities have responded by targeting suspected recruitment networks. Mudavadi previously said that more than 600 agencies had been shut down after being accused of deceiving job seekers with false promises of employment abroad.

Lawmakers in Nairobi have also raised concerns about possible links between recruitment efforts and human trafficking networks, with allegations that rogue officials may have facilitated the process.

Efforts to bring citizens home
The Kenyan government is now seeking the return of nationals currently involved in the conflict. Mudavadi said 27 Kenyans had already been repatriated, with support provided to help them recover from trauma and undergo rehabilitation.

However, the total number of Kenyans still in Russia or Ukraine remains unclear, and there is limited information on casualties. Families searching for missing relatives have reported difficulties obtaining answers from Russian authorities.

Public concern has intensified in recent months. In February, relatives of those believed to be fighting in Ukraine staged a protest outside parliament in Nairobi, calling for government intervention and the safe return of their loved ones.

Broader diplomatic ties
During his visit to Moscow, Mudavadi is also expected to pursue discussions on expanding employment opportunities for Kenyans in Russia, separate from military involvement.

He emphasised that relations between Kenya and Russia should not be defined solely by the conflict in Ukraine, describing the partnership as broader in scope.

According to Ukrainian intelligence estimates, more than 1,700 individuals from 36 African countries have been recruited to fight for Russia. Other nations have also taken action: South Africa recently repatriated 17 citizens who said they had been misled into joining the conflict.

Ukraine has faced criticism as well over efforts to recruit foreign fighters, including from African countries, to support its own war effort.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 17 March 2026

• 1 comment
• 139 views

webfact

March 17Mar 17

UK Rail Plans Aim to Simplify Compensation Claims and Tackle Ticket Fraud

UK

UK Rail Plans Aim to Simplify Compensation Claims and Tackle Ticket Fraud

Rail passengers in the UK could soon find it easier to claim compensation for delays, while new measures are introduced to reduce ticket fraud linked to discounted fares.

Get today's headlines by email

Under proposals outlined by the Department for Transport, travellers using railcards will face additional verification checks as part of a trial set to begin in April. Officials say the move is designed to prevent misuse of discounted tickets while also reducing the risk of passengers being wrongly penalised.

New checks for discounted tickets
The trial will require railcard users to complete a simple verification step when purchasing tickets, whether online, via machines or at ticket offices. Once verified, customers will automatically receive the correct discount.

The government says the system could save up to £20 million annually by limiting fraudulent use of railcards. It also aims to protect passengers who may unintentionally select the wrong ticket, an issue that has previously led to enforcement action.

The initiative follows a review by the Office of Rail and Road, which found that while operators had strengthened efforts to combat fare evasion, safeguards for passengers had not kept pace. The regulator highlighted that complex ticketing rules often left travellers confused, sometimes resulting in penalties for honest mistakes.

Trials of the new verification process are expected to take place on selected networks, including services run by Greater Anglia and c2c Rail.

Easier compensation claims
Separately, the government is planning reforms to the Delay Repay system, which compensates passengers for late or cancelled trains. Currently, travellers must submit claims directly to the train operator responsible for their journey.

Under the proposed changes, passengers will instead be able to claim compensation from the retailer that sold them the ticket. This would include third-party platforms such as Trainline.

Officials say the existing system can be confusing, particularly when journeys involve multiple operators. Allowing claims through the original ticket seller is intended to simplify the process and improve access to compensation.

The changes are expected to be implemented once the new state-backed body, Great British Railways, becomes operational.

Balancing enforcement and passenger protection
The reforms come amid broader concerns about fare evasion and how it is handled. The ORR review noted that stricter enforcement had not always been matched by clear communication, leaving some passengers unaware of ticket conditions.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said the measures would both streamline compensation claims and ensure public funds are better protected.

She added that reducing fraud would allow more investment in keeping fares stable and improving rail infrastructure, rather than losing revenue through misuse of the system.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 17 March 2026

• 0 comments
• 123 views

webfact

March 17Mar 17

Gerry Adams to Give Evidence in London Court Over IRA Bombing Claims

UK

Gerry Adams to Give Evidence in London Court Over IRA Bombing Claims

Former Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams is set to testify in a London court as a civil case alleging his involvement in Irish Republican Army (IRA) bombing decisions approaches its conclusion.

Get today's headlines by email

The case, being heard at the High Court, has been brought by three men seeking a ruling that Adams bears personal responsibility for injuries they sustained in attacks in the 1970s and 1990s.

Allegations over IRA leadership role
The claimants argue that Adams was a long-standing member of the IRA’s ruling army council and effectively its leader for decades. They allege he played a role in authorising major bombings, including the 1973 Old Bailey attack and explosions in London Docklands and Manchester in 1996.

Adams, 77, has firmly denied the allegations, insisting he was never a member of the IRA and had no involvement in the attacks. He is the sole witness for his defence and is expected to face questioning from Sir Max Hill KC, a lawyer representing the claimants.

Civil case brought decades later
The legal action has been filed by individuals injured in the bombings: John Clark, who was hurt in the Old Bailey attack, and Jonathan Ganesh and Barry Laycock, who were injured in the 1996 incidents.

They are seeking symbolic damages of £1 each, described as “vindicatory”, aimed at establishing legal responsibility rather than financial compensation.

Adams’ legal team has challenged the case, arguing it relies heavily on hearsay evidence and has been brought too long after the events in question. They contend the claims fall outside the legal time limits set by legislation, which could result in the case being dismissed without a ruling on liability.

Testimony from former officials
During the trial, several former police officers and military personnel have testified for the claimants, stating that intelligence material linked Adams to the IRA’s leadership over a prolonged period.

One witness, retired colonel Richard Kemp, told the court it would have been “inconceivable” for Adams not to have been involved in authorising the 1996 bombings, which ended a ceasefire at the time.

The claimants argue that Adams should be held as accountable as those who physically carried out the attacks.

Broader context and previous cases
Adams has previously faced allegations regarding IRA membership but has consistently denied them. A charge brought against him in 1978 was dropped due to insufficient evidence.

More recently, convictions related to attempted prison escapes during the 1970s were overturned in 2020.

He has also been questioned about his alleged role in the IRA in other legal proceedings, including a 2019 inquest in Belfast and a libel case in Dublin in 2025.

The outcome of the current case will depend in part on whether the court accepts the claims as being within the legal time limits, as well as the weight of the evidence presented.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?


Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 17 March 2026

• 1 comment
• 123 views

webfact

March 17Mar 17