Latest in Politics
Reuters
17 minutes ago
- Business
- Reuters
Thailand's economy teeters as political turmoil threatens recovery efforts
BANGKOK, June 20 (Reuters) - Thailand's economy is already on the ropes. Consumption has remained tepid despite a government stimulus programme, few of its economic engines are firing, and uncertainty wrought by U.S. President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs means that the Thai economy could grow just over 1% this year. Now, Southeast Asia's second-largest economy faces a fresh challenge: a new round of political chaos that can bring down Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra or her ruling Pheu Thai party. "We are currently in a period of economic downturn, with many issues affecting us," Visit Limlurcha, vice chairman of the Thai Chamber of Commerce, told Reuters. "This could make things even more complicated." The most significant short-term concern is the passage of a 3.78 trillion baht ($115 billion) budget for the 2026 fiscal year, which starts on October 1, that must pass through parliament over the next few months. That process could get stalled if Paetongtarn, who is under siege for her handling of a festering border row with neighbouring Cambodia, dissolves parliament and triggers fresh elections. "If parliament is dissolved before the budget is passed, the process will be delayed significantly," said Prakit Siriwattanaket, managing director of Merchant Partners Asset Management. Thailand's economy has lagged regional peers as it struggles under high household debt and borrowing costs, and sluggish demand from China, which is also a key tourism market. It expanded 2.5% last year, and growth could be further halved this year due to U.S. tariffs, Finance Minister Pichai Chunhavajira said last month. Thailand's stock market (.SETI), opens new tab has been the worst performing bourse in Asia so far this year, down 23.4%. Industrial sentiment also hit its lowest in eight months in May, even as consumer confidence dropped to a 27-month low. There is a clear need to press ahead with government spending, which has dropped by over 38% annually during April-May 2025, OCBC economists Lavanya Venkateswaran and Jonathan Ng said in a report on Thursday, warning of a "double whammy" for the economy if both government expenditure and exports weaken. Amid the ongoing tumult, Paetongtarn may be able to hang on to her premiership and a coalition led by her Pheu Thai party could retain its majority, albeit in a weaker position compared to its previous grip on the parliament. Such an arrangement will prolong political instability and raise the spectre of street protests, which have been part of previous crises and could hit one of Thailand's key remaining economic engines: tourism. "I'm worried. I don't want the situation to cause people to take to the streets," Thienprasit Chaiyapatranun, President of Thai Hotels Association, which represents around 1,000 hospitality establishments, told Reuters. "If they take to the streets, it will hit tourism." Activists - including those who have in the past agitated against Paetongtarn's father, the divisive former premier Thaksin Shinawatra - met on Friday to plan a major protest next week, and demanded the prime minister's resignation. A government lacking full authority may also struggle in ongoing trade negotiations with the United States, which has threatened to impose a 36% tariff rate on imports from Thailand, said Natapon Khamthakrue, an analyst at Yuanta Securities. "The United States certainly would not want to talk to a government without full power or with few votes," he said. Some business chambers and analysts are, nonetheless, holding out hope that a political resolution can be found quickly, minimising damage to the Thai economy, which has been rattled by multiple coups in the last eight decades, including two against governments led by the Shinawatra family. "Although the economy is no stranger to political uncertainty," OCBC's economists said, "the timing could not be more inconvenient considering external headwinds." ($1 = 32.7800 baht)
Wall Street Journal
17 minutes ago
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
EU to Restrict China's Participation in Medical Devices Procurement
The European Union said it plans to exclude Chinese companies from the bloc's government purchases of medical devices after concluding that EU manufacturers don't have equal access in China, widening trade tensions between Brussels and Beijing. The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, said Friday that the measure will apply to purchases exceeding 5 million euros ($5.7 million). The decision follows the conclusions of the first investigation under the International Procurement Instrument, or IPI.
Al Jazeera
17 minutes ago
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
Are Israel's attacks against Iran legal?
United States President Donald Trump is considering joining Israel in what it claims are its efforts to destroy Iran's nuclear programme, based on its stated belief that Iran is 'very close' to developing a nuclear weapon. Israel argues that it has carried out attacks on Iran's military and nuclear sites over the past week in anticipation of an Iranian nuclear attack. But is this a valid justification? The United Nations Charter, which is the founding document for states' rights since World War II, outlaws aggressive war, allowing military action only as self-defence. Only the UN Security Council is empowered to decide if military action is justified, once countries have tried and failed to resolve their differences peacefully. If a country is attacked while the UNSC deliberates, that country still has the 'inherent right of individual or collective self-defence', however. The question of the legality of Israel's strikes on Iran, therefore, revolves around whether Israel – and any allies coming to its aid – can justify its attacks on Iran as 'anticipatory' self-defence. Many experts say they are not. 'This is not a situation in which Israel is allegedly responding to an Iranian attack occurring now, whether directly or through proxies such as the Houthis,' wrote Marko Milanovic, a professor of public international law at Reading University who has served on the International Criminal Court (ICC), in the European Journal of International Law, which he edits. Israel cannot make the case that an attack is imminent, argued Milanovic. 'There is little evidence that Iran has irrevocably committed itself to attacking Israel with a nuclear weapon, once it develops this capability,' wrote Milanovic. 'And even if such an intention was assumed – again, it would be for Israel to provide any further evidence of such intention – I don't see how it could plausibly be argued that using force today was the only option available.' 'Even if the broadest possible [legally plausible] understanding of anticipatory self-defence was taken as correct, Israel's use of force against Iran would be illegal,' he concluded. The United Kingdom's chief legal counsel, Richard Hermer, advised Prime Minister Keir Starmer against getting involved in any attack on Iran, 'unless our personnel are targeted', according to Sky News. 'The possibility of acting in self-defence in view of an attack that might be coming is illegal in international law and we're all very, very clear about that,' agreed Maria Gavouneli, a professor of international law at Athens University. She said nuclear weapons have been discussed in international legal circles as a special case. 'There might be a chance for anticipatory self-defence, in other words, an exception to the rule, when we have clear evidence that there is a nuclear weapon being built,' Gavouneli told Al Jazeera. Israel might try to make the case that its 'continued existence was at stake and they had to act', she said. To make this case, Israel would need 'warranties, some kind of evidence offered by the International Atomic Energy Agency', the UN's nuclear IAEA has said that it cannot verify what Iran is doing. But it has not clearly suggested that Iran may be building a bomb. Iran stopped cooperating with the IAEA in February 2021 after Trump annulled a key agreement during his first term that obliged it to do so. That agreement – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – had been negotiated by Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama, in 2015. On June 9, IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi said Iran's failures to comply with reporting obligations had 'led to a significant reduction in the agency's ability to verify whether Iran's nuclear programme is entirely peaceful'. He said Iran had 'repeatedly either not answered, or not provided technically credible answers to, the agency's questions' regarding the presence of man-made uranium particles at three locations – Varamin, Marivan and Turquzabad – and had 'sought to sanitise the locations'. Grossi also described Iran's 'rapid accumulation of highly-enriched uranium' as a 'serious concern'. He was referring to 60 percent pure uranium enrichment facilities at Fordow and Natanz, and the IAEA's discovery of 83.7 percent pure uranium particles at Fordow in 2023. Weapons-grade uranium is at least 90 percent pure. Under the JCPOA, Iran was to have uranium at no higher than 5 percent purity. On June 12, just before Israel launched its assault on Iran's military and nuclear sites, the IAEA approved a resolution declaring that Tehran was not complying with its commitment to international nuclear safeguards. However, this week, Grossi emphasised that the IAEA had found no evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons production. 'We did not have any proof of a systematic effort to move into a nuclear weapon,' he said. Iran has responded that it is a signatory of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), under which it has agreed not to develop or acquire nuclear weapons, and the discovery of highly enriched particles at its sites may be the result of sabotage or malicious acts. On Monday, Iran's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced that lawmakers were preparing a bill to withdraw Tehran from the NPT, in light of the Israeli attacks. In 1981, Israel attacked and destroyed Iraq's unfinished Osirak nuclear reactor, which was being built by French commercial interests, invoking anticipatory self-defence. But the UNSC Resolution 487 (PDF) strongly condemned the attack as a violation of the UN Charter and the 'inalienable and sovereign right of Iraq and all other States, especially the developing countries, to establish programmes of technological and nuclear development to develop their economy and industry for peaceful purposes'. It also noted that Israel is not a signatory to the NPT. Israel is currently believed to possess 90 nuclear bombs. Then-President George W Bush also invoked the argument of preemptive self-defence when justifying the 2003 US war against Iraq. He suggested Iraq might one day 'cooperate with terrorists' to deliver a weapon of mass destruction on US soil, even though UN weapons inspectors said there was no hard evidence Iraq was developing such a weapon. The UNSC refused to endorse Bush's war, but he went ahead anyway with a 'coalition of the willing'. Once in control of Iraq, foreign troops discovered no weapons of mass destruction. In 2018, Israel revealed it had bombed a Syrian reactor 11 years before, apparently only just before it became operational, believing it to be part of a plan of the then-government of Bashar al-Assad to acquire nuclear weapons. Under Operation Outside the Box, it destroyed the North Korean-built plutonium reactor in Deir Az Zor in September 2007. Israel's justification was, again, that it was anticipating a Syrian nuclear attack. Israel killed several top Iranian physicists working on Iran's nuclear programme on June 13. It is suspected of having been involved in several more assassinations of Iranian physicists and engineers since 2010. Milanovic said scientists who were enlisted in the armed forces of Iran could be considered fighters and targeted. However, he said, 'scientists who are civilians – and most probably are – cannot lawfully be made the object of an attack. Simply working on a weapons programme as a researcher does not entail direct participation in hostilities that could remove civilian immunity from an attack'. Both countries have been criticised for carrying out attacks on each other's hospitals. About 70 people were injured when Iranian missiles hit the Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba in southern Israel on Thursday. Israel accused Iran of a 'war crime', but Iran said the hospital was close to a military site, which was the real target. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi claimed the missile attack hit an Israeli military and intelligence centre located near Soroka hospital, causing only 'superficial damage to a small section' of the health facility. Meanwhile, Israel itself has damaged or destroyed the vast majority of hospitals and medical centres in the Gaza Strip since its war on the Palestinian territory began on October 7, 2023. In many cases, it has argued that Hamas was using those sites as cover for its operations. But it is not permitted to strike hospitals and medical facilities under international law. The International Committee of the Red Cross, referring to international humanitarian law, states: 'Under IHL, hospitals and other medical facilities – whether civilian or military – enjoy specific protection that goes beyond the general protection afforded to other civilian objects. This elevated protection ensures that they remain functional when they are needed most. These protections were put in place by the Geneva Conventions for the Protection of War Victims in 1949.' Israel also struck the Iranian state broadcaster IRIB, interrupting a live broadcast on Monday. TV anchor Sahar Emami denounced the 'aggression against the homeland' and the 'truth' as a blast went off and smoke and debris filled the screen. The footage then showed her fleeing the studio as a voice is heard calling, 'God is greatest'. Israel has also targeted and killed more than 200 journalists and media workers in Gaza since October 2023. In 2021, a building housing the offices of Al Jazeera and The Associated Press news agency in Gaza was destroyed in an Israeli strike. Media professionals do not have special protections under the Geneva Conventions, but they are protected under the same clauses that protect all civilians in armed conflict, according to the British Institute of Comparative and International Law.
BBC News
17 minutes ago
- Health
- BBC News
Assisted dying bill due for final Commons debate ahead of crunch vote
Update: Date: 08:55 BST Title: What changes have been made to the assisted dying bill? Content: Oscar BentleyPolitical reporter MPs have made various changes to the assisted dying bill since they first voted on it in November. The main one has been the replacement of the role of a High Court judge in signing off an application for an assisted death with a panel of experts. The panel would contain a senior lawyer, a psychiatrist, and a social worker. Supporters of the bill argue it makes the process stronger by adding 'extra expertise'. The change was made after MPs heard evidence there was a lack of court capacity to deal with assisted death applications. MPs have also passed amendments that would ban healthcare professionals from raising assisted dying with under 18s (under 18s were already unable to access an assisted death in the original bill), banning the advertising of assisted dying, and preventing the automatic investigation of an assisted death to a coroner. The original bill said doctors wouldn't be obligated to take part in an assisted death. But another change made to the bill has expanded this to all healthcare professionals, for example social care workers or pharmacists. It is normal for bills to undergo some change during the legislative process. This is part of the scrutiny given to draft laws by MPs. Update: Date: 08:48 BST Title: A make or break moment for MPs voting on assisted dying Content: Helen CattPolitical correspondent It's been seven months since MPs last voted on this bill as a whole. Then they backed the principle of changing the law. Since then, MPs have been working on the detail of how it would be done. The bill has gone through more than 100 hours of scrutiny in Parliament with plenty of impassioned debate on both sides. Expect more of that today. MPs have been carefully considering their positions and, in some cases, changing them. The vote in a few hours' time will be a make or break moment – as it decides if this attempt to change the law will continue on to the House of Lords, or if it will come to an end. Update: Date: 08:45 BST Title: Get in touch Content: How are you being affected by the issues in this story? You can contact us in the following ways: Update: Date: 08:40 BST Title: Badenoch: I will be voting no Content: Alex PartridgeBBC Westminster Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the assisted dying bill, due to be voted on in its final stage by MPs, is a 'bad bill' and has 'not been done properly'. On Thursday, Badenoch said she had previously been supportive of the idea but 'this is not how we should do legislation like this' and doesn't believe the 'NHS and other services are ready'. While emphasising that her party has made it a free vote - when MPs can vote according to their conscience, rather than along party line - she says 'I will be voting no and I hope as many Conservative MPs as possible will be supporting me in that'. Update: Date: 08:35 BST Title: Bill now in 'stronger place' after changes, Labour MP says Content: We've just heard from Labour MP Jack Abbott, who says he'll now be voting for the assisted dying bill after originally voting against it back in November. Abbott tells BBC Radio 4's Today programme he joined a committee scrutinising the proposal following the vote last year and he now feels the bill is in a "stronger place" after it underwent a series of changes. Originally, a High Court judge would have to approve each request to end a life but this requirement has now been switched to a three-person panel - whose members, Abbott says, would need to receive training on coercion to ensure applicants are not pushed to undergo the process. The Ipswich MP says the changes are helping widen "the safety net" to ensure Parliament delivers on a "safe and compassionate" bill helping terminally ill people end their life. He adds the vote is likely to be "close". Update: Date: 08:28 BST Title: Labour MP opposing bill over 'lack of safeguards' Content: Josh Fenton-Glynn, the Labour MP for Calder Valley, is planning on voting against the bill and tells the BBC he supports assisted dying in principle, but thinks the bill lacks safeguards to protect against both family and medical coercion. "I'd like to see a good assisted dying bill, but unfortunately this isn't one," he tells BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Asked what concerns him, Fenton-Glynn says his background in social care and local council work means his is aware of the financial pressures caring for people exerts on both relatives and organisations. "I've seen what happens when families are tired and desperate at the end," he says, adding that it often leads them to make poor decisions over paying for care. He also cites concerns from disability rights organisations, who say people with disabilities often "feel pushed into these decisions" they would not already do. Update: Date: 08:24 BST Title: 'The dignity of choice': Why some are backing the bill Content: Dame Esther Rantzen, who has stage four lung cancer, has joined Dignitas in Switzerland Supporters of assisted dying have set out several reasons why they want the bill to be legalised. The Labour MP, Kim Leadbeater, who brought forward the bill said the legislation "would give dying people, under very stringent criteria, choice, autonomy and dignity, at the end of their lives". The Dignity in Dying campaign group said her bill provides the "most detailed, robust proposals" on the issue that "Westminster has ever considered". Chief executive Sarah Wootton said that the fact that every year "up to 650 terminally ill people end their own lives, often in lonely and traumatic ways," proves the need for reform. Broadcaster Dame Esther Rantzen, who has stage-four lung cancer, is another long-standing campaigner for change. "All I'm asking for is that we be given the dignity of choice," she said. Update: Date: 08:21 BST Title: Growing number of MPs changing their mind on assisted dying Content: Labour's Markus Campbell-Savours is among those opposing it The assisted dying bill was supported by 330 MPs last year, passing its first major vote in the House of Commons with a majority of 55 MPs from a wide range of political parties. Since last year, at least a dozen MPs who backed or abstained on the bill had said they were likely to oppose it. On Thursday, a further four Labour MPs said they were switching sides to oppose the bill. Markus Campbell-Savours, Kanishka Narayan, Paul Foster and Jonathan Hinder said the bill had been "drastically weakened" since last year's vote. In a letter to colleagues, they warned that safeguards in the bill were "insufficient" and would "put vulnerable people in harm's way". Read more about the growing number of MPs changing their mind of assisted dying. Update: Date: 08:13 BST Title: Who is Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill? Content: Kim Leadbeater became the Labour MP for Batley and Spen in 2021, after winning a by-election in the constituency by just 323 votes. She is the sister of the constituency's former MP Jo Cox, who was murdered by a right-wing extremist in 2016. She campaigned on issues such as increasing the safety of MPs and tackling online abuse. However, the cause she is now most known for is leading the campaign for assisted dying. Opening the debate on the bill in November, Leadbeater said the legislation "would give dying people, under very stringent criteria, choice, autonomy and dignity, at the end of their lives". She said the current law "is failing people" and MPs have a "duty to do what is right to fix it". "Most people believe, as I do, that we should all have the right to make the choices and decisions we want about our own bodies," she said. Update: Date: 08:04 BST Title: What is the assisted dying bill? Content: The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill,, external was introduced by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater. It proposes letting terminally ill people end their life if they: Once an application has been approved, the patient would have to wait 14 days before proceeding. A doctor would prepare the substance being used to end the patient's life, but the person would take it themselves. The bill defines the co-ordinating doctor as a registered medical practitioner with "training, qualifications and experience" at a level to be specified by the health secretary. It does not say which drug would be used. It would be illegal to coerce someone into declaring they want to end their life, with a possible 14-year prison sentence. Update: Date: 07:57 BST Title: MPs set to vote on assisted dying bill Content: The bill was put forward by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater Welcome to our live coverage, as the assisted dying bill returns to the Commons for its third reading, and a vote which could either see it fail or move to its next stage in the House of Lords. The assisted dying bill is a proposed law that would allow some terminally-ill adults expected to die within six months to seek help to end their own life in England and Wales. In November, MPs voted in favour of the bill, meaning it had moved a step closer to becoming law. Since then, the bill has been making its way through the House of Commons to be scrutinised, discussed and amended. If passed in the Commons, the bill will go through five stages in the House of Lords and further rounds of voting. If it is not approved, the bill will not go on to become law, making today a decisive moment for this landmark legislation. Some amendments are expected to be voted on first this morning, before a debate on the bill as a whole begins. We'll bring you the key developments from the debate in the Commons, so stay with us.
Al Jazeera
17 minutes ago
- Business
- Al Jazeera
Russia-Ukraine war: List of key events, day 1,212
This is how things stand on Friday, June 20: At least 14 people were injured when Russian drones attacked the Ukrainian Black Sea city of Odesa overnight, damaging high-rise buildings and railway infrastructure, Ukrainian authorities said. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy appointed Hennadiy Shapovalov as commander of Ukraine's land forces, replacing Mykhailo Drapatyi, who resigned over a deadly attack on a training area carried out by Russia. Drapatyi was reassigned to the post of commander of the joint forces as part of a military shake-up. Major-General Christian Freuding, who is in charge of coordinating German military aid to Kyiv, dismissed as 'nonsense' repeated warnings by Russian President Vladimir Putin that delivering Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine might make Berlin party to the war. Ukraine and Russia exchanged more prisoners of war, officials from both countries said, the latest round of swaps under an agreement struck in Istanbul. Zelenskyy said Russia's defence of Iranian authorities amid the Israel-Iran conflict had underscored the need for intensified sanctions against Moscow. Zelenskyy added that Russia's deployment of Iranian-designed Shahed drones and North Korean munitions showed that Kyiv's allies were applying insufficient pressure against Moscow. The International Atomic Energy Agency said the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine cannot resume operations until challenges related to the availability of cooling water and off-site power are fully resolved. Foreign direct investment into Russia has fallen sharply, the latest United Nations data showed, and Russia's premier economic forum in Saint Petersburg this week is offering scant hope of a revival, with Western investors largely absent. Soaring defence spending has propped up Russia's $2 trillion economy since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
