Feed aggregator

washington — Chinese artists walk a tightrope when trying to create content acceptable to Beijing’s standards while attempting to seek success among Western audiences. More than one artist who has gained recognition in the West has been punished by Chinese censors, with Chinese filmmaker Lou Ye being the most recent case. The 2024 Cannes Film Festival featured Lou’s pseudodocumentary "An Unfinished Film" as an Official Selection, and it drew positive reviews. However, the film hardly has any chance to be publicly screened in China. “An Unfinished Film” is about a film crew’s 2020 experience at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Wuhan. The fictional plot follows the members of a film crew as they attempt to reshoot a movie, then are forced indoors as the city goes on lockdown. During this time, the wife of an actor, a member of the film crew, was about to give birth. She tried to rush out of the hotel but was beaten by the security guard. In the movie version, the wife of Jiang Cheng, the main character, was about to give birth. Desperate to be at the hospital with his wife, Jiang tried to break through the blockade but ended up in a huge scuffle with the security guards. Jiang was beaten up and forced to stay in his hotel room until the lockdown ended in Wuhan. In the end, the actor, the director and other members of the fictional crew had to stay in the Wuhan hotel and could contact each other only by mobile phone. The film included many real-life video clips that went viral during the lockdown, including a child crying and chasing his mother who was put on a bus to a makeshift hospital, and residents singing in a locked-down community in Wuhan at night. Reaction to the film The film stirred strong emotions among some viewers at the Cannes Film Festival. After the film's screening, someone in the audience shouted, "Lou Ye, you are the greatest director in China!" Another person who watched the film posted on the Chinese social media site Weibo under the name Wu Ke Feng Gao, "In the second half, sobbing was heard everywhere in the theater. The audience in the back row said that everyone was crying for themselves. ... To me, this is the greatest Chinese film in the past decade." But Zhao Liang, a former Chinese film critic living in the United States who requested to use a pseudonym to avoid retaliation from the Chinese government, had a different reaction to Lou’s film. "This is a suicidal movie,” he told VOA. "Lou Ye can't [work in China anymore]; he has killed himself in front of the Chinese government," Zhao added. He said, "He filmed the pandemic, which is very sensitive to the Chinese government and is a subject that cannot be touched. The Chinese government has destroyed all the files related to the pandemic in the hospitals, as if COVID-19 never happened. All the files on the lockdown and all the records at the time, whether in the government, hospitals or neighborhood committees, have been destroyed.” Lou Ye, the West and Chinese censors Over the course of Lou’s more than 20-year career, Chinese officials have banned and censored much of his work. Only four of his twelve films have made it to big screens in China. In 2000, his film "Suzhou River" won the Golden Tiger Award at the Rotterdam Film Festival in the Netherlands. However, because Lou participated in the foreign film festival without official approval, the Chinese government banned the film in China and punished Lou with a two-year prohibition on filming. In 2006, the Chinese government placed a five-year filming ban on Lou for entering the film "Summer Palace" in the Cannes Film Festival without approval.  The film was set during the taboo Tiananmen Square pro-democracy demonstrations and included explicit sexual content. In 2019, Lou said in an interview about making the banned film, “A Cloud Made of Rain in the Wind,” “Directors should be able to make movies without being threatened by censorship and express themselves freely. This is a right granted by the Constitution. … The censorship system has made the Chinese domestic audience a second-tier audience, a second-rate audience, because they simply cannot see what they should see, what they have the right to see." The plight of Chinese artists Kong Ming, a former Chinese art critic living in the United States who requested to use a pseudonym to avoid retaliation from the Chinese government, told VOA that in an already competitive industry, Chinese artists have very few options to exercise their creativity. "Chinese artists actually have nowhere to escape," Kong said. "Even if you give up the Chinese market, you will no longer have the soil for your creations." Other artists who have faced Chinese censors include internationally renowned Chinese artist Ai Weiwei, known for his often provocative art. He experienced detention and violence at the hands of Chinese police when living in China. In 2019, music by contemporary Chinese folk singer Li Zhi disappeared from all music streaming platforms in China. His personal Weibo and other social media accounts were also shut down. An official reason was never given for the disappearance of Li’s music.  Many of his works touched on the taboos of the Chinese government, including the suppression of the 1989 student movement at Tiananmen Square. During the COVID-19 White Paper Movement, he also posted photos of himself holding white paper. In April, although Li toured major cities in Japan, attracting tens of thousands of Chinese fans, Kong said the tour in Japan was just a one-time phenomenon. "China has tightened up its grip in all aspects. Li's case has definitely alerted the government. In the future, any musician who wants to hold a concert abroad will need a permit," said Kong. It is tough for Chinese artists to find success both in China and the West, analysts said. One rare exception is Liu Cixin, the award-winning science fiction writer of The Three-Body Problem. The popularity of the trilogy has led to television adaptions in China and on Netflix about an alien race’s invasion. "Some individuals may be able to break through the ban, but it is very rare. How many Chinese artists are there in New York? Whose career is actually growing? Almost none,” Zhao said. In addition to the threat of censors in China, Chinese artists face challenges if they try to expand their careers overseas, Zhao said. "First of all, the cultural gap is still severe," he said. "Lou Ye can only shoot Chinese themes, which are also very limited. Overseas audiences care little about Chinese themes, and it is difficult to integrate. It is very difficult for Chinese artists to be truly recognized in the West." He said the creative soil overseas is extremely barren for individual Chinese artists, there is no support structure, and they lack funding. "There are a few capable people, but they are all very depressed when they arrive in the United States. When they live in the U.S. they don't interact with each other, and it's impossible for them to come together," he said. Adrianna Zhang contributed to this report. 

BRUSSELS — Around 400 million European Union citizens go to the polls next month to elect members of the European Parliament, or MEPs, in one of the biggest global democratic events. Far-right parties are seeking to gain more power amid a rise in the cost of living and farmers' discontent, while the wars in Gaza and Ukraine are on the minds of voters. One of the biggest questions is whether European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen will remain in charge as the most visible face of the EU. Here is a look at the upcoming election and the biggest issues at stake: When is the vote? EU elections are held every five years across the 27-member bloc. This year marks the 10th parliamentary election since the first polls in 1979, and the first after Brexit. The vote takes place from June 6-9. First results can only be revealed on the evening of June 9, once polling stations have closed in all member states. How does voting work? The elections start on a Thursday in the Netherlands and finish on a Sunday, when most countries hold their election. The voting is done by direct universal suffrage in a single ballot. The number of members elected in each country depends on the size of the population. It ranges from six for Malta, Luxembourg and Cyprus to 96 for Germany. In 2019, Europeans elected 751 lawmakers. Following the United Kingdom's departure from the EU in 2020, the number of MEPs fell to 705. Some of the 73 seats previously held by British MEPs had been redistributed to other member states. After the election, the European Parliament will have 15 additional members, bringing the total to 720. Twelve countries will get extra MEPs. Elections are contested by national political parties, but once they are elected, most of the lawmakers then join transnational political groups. Who is voting? People under 18 are allowed to vote in some countries. In Belgium, a law adopted in 2022 lowered the minimum voting age to 16. Germany, Malta and Austria are also permitting 16-year-olds to vote. In Greece, the youngest voting age is 17. In all other member states, it's 18. A minimum age is also required to stand for election — from 18 in most countries to 25 in Italy and Greece. What about turnout? European Union elections usually don't bring a huge turnout, but there was a clear upturn in public interest in the 2019 election. At 50.7%, the turnout was eight points higher than in 2014 after steadily falling since 1979, when it reached 62%. In April, the latest edition of the European Parliament's Eurobarometer highlighted a surge of interest in the upcoming election. Around 71% of Europeans said they are likely to cast a ballot. What are the main issues? Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine is at the forefront of citizens' minds, with defense and security seen as key campaign issues. At national level, the EU's defense and security was mentioned first in nine countries. The economy, jobs, poverty and social exclusion, public health, climate change and the future of Europe are also featuring prominently as issues. What do EU lawmakers do? The European Parliament is the only EU institution to be elected by European citizens. It's a real counterpower to the powerful EU's executive arm, the European Commission. The parliament doesn't have the initiative of proposing legislation. But its powers are getting bigger. It is now competent on a wide range of topics, voting on laws relating to climate, banking rules, agriculture, fisheries, security or justice. The legislature also votes on the EU budget, which is crucial to the implementation of European policies, including, for instance, the aid delivered to Ukraine. Lawmakers are also a key element of the check and balances system since they need to approve the nomination of all EU commissioners, who are the equivalent of ministers. And it can also force the whole commission to resign with a vote by a two-third majority. What's the current makeup of the parliament? With 176 seats out of 705 as of the end of the last plenary session in April, the center-right European People's Party is the largest political group in the European Parliament. Von der Leyen belongs to the EPP and hopes to remain at the helm of the EU's executive arm after the election. The second-largest group is the S&D, the political group of the center-left Party of European Socialists, which currently holds 139 seats. The liberal and pro-European Renew group holds 102 seats ahead of an alliance made up of green and regionalist political parties that holds 72 seats. Far right looks to make gains Two groups with far-right parties, the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) and Identity and Democracy (ID), could be headed to becoming the third- and fourth-largest political groups at the European Parliament. The two groups have many divergences and it's unclear to what extent they could team up and affect the EU's agenda, especially the EU's efforts to support Ukraine against Russia in the war. The EPP and S&D are expected to remain stable. Liberals and greens could both take a hit after they made big gains at the previous election. What happens after the election? Once the weight of each political force is determined, MEPs will elect their president at the first plenary session, from July 16-19. Then, most likely in September after weeks of negotiations, they will nominate the president of the European Commission, following a proposal made by the member states. In 2019, von der Leyen won a narrow majority (383 votes in favor, 327 against, 22 abstentions) to become the first woman to head the institution. Parliamentarians will also hear from the European commissioners before approving them in a single vote. Von der Leyen has good chances to be appointed for another team, but she needs to secure the support of enough leaders. She has also antagonized many lawmakers by suggesting she could work with the hard right depending on the outcome of the elections.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

UNITED NATIONS — The United States and allies South Korea and Japan clashed with China and Russia Friday over North Korea’s latest satellite and ballistic missile launches and threats to use nuclear weapons that have escalated tensions in northeast Asia. The scene was an emergency open meeting of the U.N. Security Council called after North Korea’s failed launch of a military reconnaissance satellite on May 27 and other launches using ballistic missile technology in violation of U.N. sanctions. Since the beginning of 2022, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea – the North’s official name – has launched over 100 missiles using this banned technology as it has advanced its nuclear weapons program. In response, the U.S. and its allies have carried out an increasing number of military exercises. U.N. Assistant Secretary-General Khaled Khiari briefed the council meeting saying sovereign states have the right to benefit from peaceful space activities – but the DPRK is expressly prohibited from conducting launches using ballistic missile technology and its continuing violations undermine global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation treaties. "We remain deeply concerned about growing tensions on the Korean Peninsula," Khiari said. "There is a need for practical measures to reduce tensions, reverse the dangerous dynamic, and create space to explore diplomatic avenues." North Korea’s U.N. Ambassador Kim Song insisted that its satellite launches – and it had a successful one last November – are "the legitimate and universal right of a sovereign state" under international law and the Outer Space Treaty. He stressed that reconnaissance satellites are not only needed to strengthen its self-defense capabilities but to defend its sovereignty. Kim told the Security Council that the "massive deployment of strategic assets and aggressive war exercises" by the United States on the Korean Peninsula and in the region have broken all records and destroyed the military balance. This has turned the Korean Peninsula "into the most fragile zone in the world, fraught with the danger of outbreak of war," he said, claiming that joint military exercises since the beginning of the year are "a U.S.-led nuclear war rehearsal." The DPRK ambassador said the Security Council shouldn’t waste time debating the legitimate rights of a sovereign state, but should direct its attention to putting an immediate end to the killing of civilians in Gaza, "which continues unabated under U.S. patronage." South Korea’s U.N. Ambassador Joonkook Hwang said it should be his country – not the DPRK – that should claim the right to self-defense. He said the DPRK’s nuclear policy and its rhetoric "are getting increasing aggressive and hostile, and Pyongyang no longer views its nuclear arsenal as just a deterrent against the United States, "but instead as a means to attack my country." He quoted DPRK leader Kim Jong Un’s sister, Kim Yo-jong, saying two weeks ago that the only purpose of their tactical nuclear weapons "is to teach a lesson to Seoul." U.S. deputy ambassador Robert Wood urged the Security Council to condemn the DPRK’s launches and hold it accountable for violating U.N. sanctions. "But two council members, China and Russia, continuously block the Security Council from speaking against the DPRK’s behavior with one voice and makes us all less safe," he said. Wood also accused the DPRK of unlawfully transferring dozens of ballistic missiles and over 11,000 containers of munitions to Russia to aid its war against Ukraine, "prolonging the suffering of the Ukrainian people." He rejected as "groundless" and disingenuous" claims by the DPRK and its supporters on the council that its missile launches are a response to U.S.-led military exercises. Russia’s U.N. Ambassador Anna Evstigneeva countered that "one of the key catalysts for the growing tensions in the region has been and remains the build-up of military activity by the U.S. and its allies." U.S.-led military drills against the DPRK and numerous other hostile acts with a threatening military component "are provoking countermeasures from North Korea, which is forced to take action to strengthen its national defense capacity," she said. Evstogneeva claimed "the unstable situation around the Korean Peninsula is of benefit to Washington, which continues to confidently and deliberately pursue the path of confrontation instead of dialogue." She also dismissed claims that Russia is engaging in illegal military and technical cooperation with the DPRK as "absolutely unfounded." China’s U.N. Ambassador Fu Cong called the situation on the Korean Peninsula "highly tense, with antagonism and confrontation escalating," and called on all parties to exercise restraint and avoid any actions or rhetoric that might increase tension. He warned that a planned large-scale joint military exercise on the peninsula in August "practicing a scenario involving a nuclear war" will only increase tensions. U.S. envoy Wood retorted that "the United States is in no way a threat to the DPRK," stressing that the U.S. offer to reach out "an open hand" and hold talks with the DPRK without preconditions over the past few years "has been met with a clenched fist." 

MULLAITIVU, Sri Lanka — At the site of a bloody battlefield that marked the end of Sri Lanka's civil war, Singaram Soosaimuthu fishes every day with his son, casting nets and reeling them in. It is a skill he has known for much of his life — and one that he had to relearn after a devastating injury. The former Tamil fighter lost both legs in 2009 as the nation's generation-long civil war drew to a close and the Tamils retreated in defeat. Making something of himself despite his injuries brought Soosaimuthu success — an achievement in which he finds profound meaning. He sees his fellow ethnic Tamils in the same light: To regain their voice, they must thrive. But defeat — bloody, protracted and decisive — has brought Sri Lanka's minority Tamil community to a point of despair. Some parents have given up hope of ever learning the fate of the thousands of missing children. Parts of the Tamil lands are decimated, with poor infrastructure and fewer economic opportunities. Survivors have lived under surveillance for years, and many now feel that members of the rising generation have grown too fearful and apathetic toward speaking up for their rights. "There is a clear agenda underway to degenerate a defeated community," says Selvin Ireneus, a social activist based in Jaffna, the Tamils' northern cultural heartland. The government, he says, doesn't want today's Tamils to be politically evolved. After fighting ended, he asserts, narcotics and other vices have been systematically introduced into the region. "They only want them to eat, drink and enjoy and not have a political ideology," Ireneus said. "This has happened with all defeated communities in the world." The island nation of 20 million is overwhelmingly ethnically Sinhalese, with the Tamil community making up about 11% of the population. The separatist civil war broke out in 1983 after years of failed attempts to share power within a unified country, with Tamil fighters — known as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, or simply the Tamil Tigers — eventually creating a de facto independent homeland in the country's north. The group was crushed in a 2009 government offensive. The war killed at least 100,000 on both sides, and left many more missing. Though not all Tamils were part of or supported the Tamil Tiger rebel group, their defeat has effectively become a political defeat to the community. They have lost their bargaining power. "What is remaining now is a very small community, and they don't have the courage ... to show dissent," says K.T. Ganeshalingam, head of political science at the University of Jaffna. Sri Lanka's government had promised the United Nations and countries like India and the United States that they would share power with the Tamil-majority areas to resolve the causes that led to the civil war. However, successive governments have not followed up. Fifteen years on, some in Tamil areas are still in denial that the armed campaign has been defeated and that the rebel leader Velupillai Prabhakaran, who was seen as invincible, has been killed. Sections of the expatriate Tamils in Europe have been claiming that Prabhakaran would return soon to take on the campaign to the next stage, including a woman who claims to be his daughter and is said to be collecting donations in his name. Prabhakaran's nephew in Denmark, Karthic Manoharan, says the time has come to put a stop to the rumors and state, emphatically, that the leader is dead. "We don't have any doubt regarding (his death) because he loved his country so much. And he's not a coward to run from the country and live in another country, in a different country to save himself, his wife and his daughter," Manoharan says. Such beliefs are more than simply inaccurate, says Ganeshalingam; they're genuinely harmful to any possible future that the Tamil people are trying to chart. He wonders: "If I have not grasped the fact that I am defeated, how can I rise from that?" Discussing the Tamil Tigers' defeat, their past mistakes and even Prabhakaran's death is discouraged in Tamil society, especially in the diaspora. Ganeshalingam says such attitudes have created a stagnation in Tamil politics. Political leaders are divided and are in disarray. A political alliance that the Tamil Tigers formed is fragmented with many leaders breaking away to form their own parties. Civil activists are now working to unify them and strengthen their bargaining position ahead of the presidential election later this year. In the villages of Mullaitivu district, where the final battle between government forces and the Tamil Tigers unfolded, many men are addicted to narcotics and alcohol, forcing women to be the family's main breadwinners, says Yogeswari Dharmabaskaran, a social worker in the Udaiyarkattu area of Mullaitivu district. School dropouts soar in the villages, she says, as boys find easy money through selling narcotics, illegal tree-felling and the mining of river sand. In Jaffna, local politician Thiyagaraja Nirosh says family elders discourage young people from discussing political rights. Because of that, it is difficult to find younger candidates to run in local elections. "There is fear that talking politics is dangerous. Many family elders do not encourage talking politics," Nirosh says "The reason is that there has been no justice for the past killings. They see no guarantee that such incidents won't recur." Thayalan Kalaipriya, a former rebel, wonders about the future often. She says her many losses have made her deeply desire unity among all Sri Lankans; at the same time, she says it is painful to realize their efforts to win political rights have been wasted. Former rebels often do not receive adequate support and at times ex-fighters, like those who conscripted children at the height of the war, are treated with resentment, although she says some respect their commitment and sacrifice. She finds solace by working with her young children, educating them and helping to give them a good life in a land she hopes is free of civil war and the sad echoes it has caused. "We teach our children about what happened," she says, "but never to seek revenge."

SAMASTIPUR, India — Narendra Modi swept to power a decade ago on promises to transform India's economy, and it would be hard to argue he hasn't made strides. As he seeks a third term as prime minister, the country's economic growth is the envy of the world, its stock markets are booming, and new buildings and highways are popping up everywhere. There are cracks in the facade, though, that his political challengers hope to benefit from, including high unemployment, persistent poverty and the sense that only a small portion of India's 1.4 billion people has been able to cash in on the good fortune. "You have a booming economy for people higher up on the socioeconomic ladder, but people lower down are really struggling," said Milan Vaishnav, director of the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Modi and his Bharatiya Janata Party have remained popular since he was first elected prime minister in 2014 on a strident Hindu-first platform and pledges to succeed where past governments had failed by finally transforming the economy from rural to industrial. He promised to clamp down on deeply rooted corruption and to leverage the country's manpower advantage to turn it into a manufacturing powerhouse. While campaigning this spring — the six-week-long election concludes Saturday — Modi has vowed to make India's economy the world's third-largest, trailing only those of the U.S. and China. Votes will be counted Tuesday. Modi has had successes. The economy is growing by 7% and more than 500 million Indians have opened bank accounts during his tenure — a big step toward formalizing an economy where many jobs are still off the books and untaxed. His administration has also poured billions of dollars into the country's creaky infrastructure to lure investment, and notably streamlined its vast welfare program, which serves around 60% of the population and which his party is leveraging to try to win over poor and disillusioned voters. Despite these advances, though, Modi's economic policies have failed to generate employment that moves people from low-paying, precarious work to secure, salaried jobs. With inequality, joblessness and underemployment soaring, they've become central themes of the election. Even as India's millionaires multiply, nearly 90% of its working-age population earns less than the country's average annual income of around $2,770, according to a World Inequality Lab study. The top 1% own more than 40% of the country's wealth, while the bottom 50% own just above 6%, the study found. To stem economic discontent, Modi and the BJP are hoping to win over poor and disgruntled voters with more than $400 billion in welfare subsidies and cash transfers. At the heart of their welfare agenda is a free ration program, which serves 800 million people. It existed under the previous government and is a right under India's National Food Security Act. But it was greatly expanded during the pandemic to provide grain for free, instead of just cheap, and then extended for another five years beginning in January. Through roughly 300 programs, hundreds of millions have received household goods ranging from cooking gas cylinders to free toilets. Millions of homes have been built for the poor, who now have greater access to piped water, Wi-Fi and electricity. And the government has ramped up cash transfers to farmers and other key voting blocs. When Rajesh Prajapati lost his job at a chemical factory in Prayagraj, a city in India's largest state, Uttar Pradesh, his family of five survived on government grain. "For almost a year, the free ration was our only solace," he said, adding that it was the reason they voted for Modi again. Indian parties have always used welfare to win elections. But experts say the BJP has done it better. Benefits such as subsidies, pensions and loans are now delivered through cash transfers directly to bank accounts linked to each individual's biometric identity card, which the government says has helped eliminate leakages and corruption by cutting out intermediaries. These large-scale handouts provide relief, but some say they are only a temporary fix and a sign of rising economic distress. To reduce inequality, they should be accompanied by investment in health and education, which have stagnated in recent years, said Ashoka Mody, an economist at Princeton University. Subsidies are helpful, "but they do not create the ability of people to put themselves on a trajectory where they and their children can look forward to a better future," he said. Tuntun Sada, a farmworker from Samastipur, a city in the eastern state of Bihar, said the 18 kilograms of free grain that helps feed his family of six each month has only marginally improved their lives. He still earns less than $100 a month after working the fields of wealthier landowners. "People like us don't get very much," Sada said. "Modi should walk the talk. If we don't earn enough, how will we raise our children?" The free rations don't last through the month, piped water has yet to reach his community and there are no nearby schools for his four kids to attend. What he really needs, he said, is a better job. Modi's opposition, led by the Congress party, are betting on the jobs crisis to dent the BJP's chances of securing a majority. Before the election, a survey by the Center for Study of Developing Societies found that more than 60% of voters were worried about unemployment and believed finding a job had become tougher. Only 12% felt like economic opportunities had increased. Official government data, which many economists question, shows the unemployment rate declining. But a recent report from the International Labor Organization found that youth unemployment in India is higher than the global average, that more than 40% of Indians still work in agriculture, and that 90% of workers are in informal employment. The liberalizing of India's economy in the 1990s laid the foundation for the remarkable growth since, with millions escaping poverty and spawning a middle class. But it has also allowed for the growing disparity between rich and poor, economists say. Rahul Gandhi, the main face of the opposition, has sought to tap into the growing resentment felt by the country's many have-nots by promising to take on the issue of wealth distribution if his alliance gains power. Modi, who says his government has lifted 250 million Indians out of poverty, is unapologetic. In a TV interview this month, he said wealth distribution is a gradual process and dismissed criticism of the growing inequality by asking, "Should everyone be poor?" Both the BJP and the Congress party say they will create more employment through various sectors including construction, manufacturing and government jobs. Experts say this is crucial for reducing economic disparities, but it's also hard to do. Mass unemployment and underemployment have always been intractable problems in India, so parties inevitably fall back on the promises of handouts, said Mody, the Princeton economist. Case in point: The Congress party has pledged to double people's free rations if voted into power. "It's completely the wrong focus… what we need is job creation," Mody said. "And there is no one today who has an idea of how to solve that problem."

BOGOTA, Colombia — Colombia's congress voted Tuesday to ban bullfights in the South American nation, delivering a serious blow to a centuries-old tradition that has inspired famous songs and novels but has become increasingly controversial in the countries where it is still practiced. The bill calls for the banning of bullfights in a three-year span, making the tradition illegal by the start of 2028. The new law now needs to be signed by President Gustavo Petro, who has been a longtime opponent of these events. Bullfighting originated in the Iberian Peninsula and is still legal in a handful of countries, including Spain, France, Portugal, Peru, Ecuador and Mexico. It was once a popular event, broadcast live by multiple television networks. But the tradition has come under increased scrutiny as views change about animal welfare, and many find it unacceptable to see an animal suffer for entertainment's sake. "This ban is a huge victory for organizations that have worked to transform society and reject violence against animals," said Terry Hurtado, an animal rights activist and city council member in Cali, who has been leading protests against bullfights since the 1990s. "I feel relieved that bulls and horses (which also participate in some bullfights) in Colombia will no longer be tortured, and that children will no longer be exposed to this spectacle." In bullfights, a matador faces bulls that are bred to be aggressive. The matador taunts the bull with a red cape and kills the animal with the blow of a sword after it has been injured with lances and daggers, and is tired of charging at the matador in a circular arena. In Colombia, where bullfights have been held since colonial times, less than two dozen municipalities continue to hold these events, although the annual bullfights in the city of Manizales still draw tens of thousands of spectators. Bullfighting aficionados described the ban as an assault on the freedoms of minorities as well as a problem for cities where these events draw thousands of visitors.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

As Israeli forces advanced deeper into the southern Gaza city of Rafah, US President Joe Biden declared Hamas had lost its ability to carry out a major terrorist attack on Israel, and he endorsed what he said was the latest Israeli offer of a cease-fire deal. VOA's White House Bureau Chief Patsy Widakuswara has the story.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

Bangkok — Thailand's government appears set to complete a deal for a Chinese-built diesel-electric attack submarine — a one-off purchase first negotiated under its previous military government — but experts say at this point, motivation for the deal may more political than military. Under Thailand’s previous government led by Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-Cha, the original deal to purchase three submarines was made in 2017. But only one of the submarine deals materialized and faced many snags along the way. It was projected to cost Thailand about 13.5 billion baht — or $367 million — for China’s construction of the S26T Yuan-class submarine and was put on hold amid the outbreak of COVID-19. Hesitant to resume the deal, Thailand’s Defense Ministry under a new civilian-led government in October 2023 said it would no longer acquire the submarine because of Beijing’s inability to integrate a German-made diesel engine, a result of EU sanctions on China. Benjamin Zawacki, author of Thailand: Shifting Ground Between the U.S and Rising China, said the events unfolded during a time of political uncertainty in Thailand. "There were legitimate concerns about the engines. But the timing of that controversy coincided with a lot of controversy about the then-military government, whether or not it should be spending so much money in the midst of COVID-19 and the midst of post-COVID-19 economic recovery," he told VOA. "It was trying to realize this submarine deal didn't place it in a very good light politically." With Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin’s September 2023 rise to power, the submarine deal looked dead in the water — until Thai Defense Minister Sutin Klungsang’s May 21 announcement that Thailand’s Royal Navy had dropped demands for the German hardware, opting instead from Chinese-made CHD620 diesel engine, bringing the submarine deal back to life. Not all about defense Chinese tourism is key to Thailand’s tourist economy. China was Thailand’s largest trading partner in 2023, when it exchanged an estimated $135 billion in revenue. Following the 2014 military coup, the U.S., which had worked closely with Thailand in the past, quickly denounced the seizure of power, withdrawing millions in military aid to Bangkok. Since then, Bangkok and Beijing have tightened security ties. Thailand purchased more arms equipment in terms of value from China than the U.S. between 2016 and 2022, according to a report published in the Lowy Institute. But Zawacki says questions remain about the necessity of a Thai attack submarine. "Thailand doesn't need it, and China doesn't need Thailand to have it," he told VOA. "Speaking purely from a security standpoint, it doesn't make a great deal of sense for either China or Thailand, especially given the political controversy it's caused." But, Zawacki added, the deal is "emblematic of the [Sino-Thai] military-to-military relationship" that has evolved since the 2014 coup. He also believes Beijing has persisted in finalizing the deal, which has since been modified to accommodate trade requirements on Thai military hardware procurement announced under Srettha’s new government. "It's been brought back I think primarily because it's important to the Chinese," Zawacki said. "I'm sure they were persistent. It's a deal they want to get done for their own reasons." Greg Raymond, a senior lecturer at the Strategic & Defence Studies Center at Australia National University, echoes that opinion, saying it seems like Chinese pressure pushed the deal over the line. "I don't think [this is] what the current Srettha government was looking for," he said, adding that Srettha’s administration in October 2023 briefly discussed the possibility of converting the deal into a procurement of Chinese-made naval frigates. "They were looking for that trade to frigates or some other alternative, [but] they wanted to stand their ground," he said of the new administration. "They've been rolled," he added, alluding to China pushing through the deal. "I think that's pretty significant that whatever pressure or leverage the Chinese have applied has been successful." VOA has contacted governments of Thailand and China seeking comment on the submarine deal. Beijing’s push for greater power in Southeast Asia, including the submarine deal with Thailand and docking its warships in Cambodia, won’t go down well in Washington, Raymond added. "This ... is something which I'm not sure the Thais have thought through in terms of how that's going to be read by the U.S.," he said. "I think it's an increasingly tenuous posture of hoping to somehow achieve a balance and equidistance between China and the U.S." Zawacki says Washington’s main concern will be about where the Chinese-made submarine will dock. "Will it be at Satthip Heap [Thailand Naval Base in Chonburi] which is where U.S. assets are also docked? And would that pose a potential [for] espionage and information gathering? In terms of the proximity of having Chinese or Chinese-built vessel and U.S. vessels in the same in the same port, that's been their primary concern." Unveiling the newly modified deal to acquire the submarine last week, Thai Defense Minister Sutin Klungsang asked opposition leaders to wait until further details of the transaction were locked in place before asking questions about it. According to the Bangkok Post, Sutin also said he could not share precisely when the finalized deal would be ready for review by Cabinet officials, adding that a trade component of the deal was still being negotiated.  

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

THE WHITE HOUSE — Less than a day after U.S. President Joe Biden granted Ukraine authorization to strike inside Russia with American weaponry, Michael Carpenter, senior director for Europe at the National Security Council, spoke with VOA's Iuliia Iarmolenko to discuss details of the new policy and explain what prompted the president’s reversal of a longstanding ban. Carpenter, former U.S. ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, emphasized that U.S. policies barring Ukraine from using American-provided ATACMS, or long-range missiles, and other munitions to strike offensively inside Russia have not changed. The following interview has been edited for length and clarity. VOA: Could you provide details about this shift in policy? What is allowed and what are the limitations? MICHAEL CARPENTER, SENIOR DIRECTOR FOR EUROPE AT NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL: This is in the context of the Russian offensive in the Kharkiv region against Ukraine. Russians were striking targets in Ukraine from just across the border. And at that point, the Ukrainians came to us with a request to use U.S.-provided weapons to be able to hit back at the Russian weapons that were targeting Ukrainian villages and Ukrainian people and their homes. And so the president directed his national security team to look into this and directed them to change the guidance and to allow for the employment of U.S. provided weapons to be able to strike back. That guidance has now gone into effect. VOA: Does it apply only to the Kharkiv region? CARPENTER: This applies to counter-fire capabilities that are deployed just across the border. It does not apply to ATACMS or long-range strikes. This is meant to enable Ukrainians to defend themselves against what would otherwise be a Russian sanctuary across the border. VOA: But in the Sumy region, would it be possible to do so there? CARPENTER: As I said, this applies to enable Ukrainians to defend themselves. Yes, across the border for Russian attacks that are coming across, where otherwise Russians would enjoy a relative sanctuary on their side of the border. VOA: What is the hope of the administration on how this policy shift might influence Ukraine's position on the battlefield? CARPENTER: Well, we have all long wanted to give Ukraine the capabilities that it needs defensively to push back on this aggressive onslaught on their territory. And we will continue to do that. VOA: Do you expect, though, that this change in policy might influence the situation on a battlefield, such that Ukraine might have an upper hand in coming months? CARPENTER: We endeavor to give Ukraine the capabilities over time to enable Ukraine to be able to defend its sovereignty against this aggression. And, yes, the types of weapons systems and the capabilities that we have provided, yes those have changed over time. The battlefield has changed over time. And we have reacted to what Russia has done. Don't forget that Russia has also benefited from its partners. Principally Iran and North Korea. And we have therefore stepped up the contributions that we have made together with our allies and partners. And we continue to do so. VOA: A couple weeks ago, Defense Secretary Austin said the United States is talking to allies in Europe about trying to get at least one more Patriot air-defense battery in place. Should we expect another battery directly from the United States as well? CARPENTER: We are looking very carefully at what we could contribute to Ukraine's air defense needs, which are very acute at this point in time. We're talking with allies and partners. We're talking around the world with various countries that we engage in. And I don't have any announcements to make today, but I can assure you that this is an ongoing process where we are doing everything possible to unlock air defense capabilities for Ukraine. VOA: I'd like to talk about the upcoming July NATO summit in Washington. Secretary of State Antony Blinken this week said that we’ll see “very strong deliverables for Ukraine” at the summit. Is there a consensus among allies about what those deliverables might look like? And should Ukraine expect the invitation to start accession talks? CARPENTER: Secretary Blinken is in Prague right now to talk about the nature of the deliverable for Ukraine, the nature of the support that will be provided in the aftermath of the Washington summit. We think it's going to be very robust. This will be essentially a bridge to [NATO] membership, so that when Ukraine does in the future receive an invitation — now, there is no consensus for an invitation now, at the Washington summit — but when conditions permit and when there is that consensus and Ukraine does gain entry to the NATO alliance, we want to make sure that Ukraine is fully capable on day one of being able to deter and defend and also is fully interoperable with NATO and is able to essentially participate in all the benefits but also undertake the responsibilities of being a member of the alliance from day one. So, we're looking out to build out those capabilities and that support through this package of measures that is currently under discussion among NATO allies in Prague as we speak right now. VOA: President Biden is meeting today with Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo at the White House. What role does President Biden hope Belgium can play in using Russian frozen assets to Ukraine's benefit? CARPENTER: Belgium is a great NATO ally. They're a member of the EU. They've had the presidency of the European Union. They play a very important role. And President Biden, as he does with every single European leader, will underscore our partnership in support of Ukraine. Now, Belgium plays a particular role in terms of Russian sovereign assets, and we will be discussing how we can use the proceeds from those immobilized Russian sovereign assets to support Ukraine. VOA: It appears President Biden is likely to skip the Ukraine peace summit that's going to be happening in Switzerland. Is it a sign that the administration doesn’t believe that this summit can produce some important results? CARPENTER: So, first of all, I don't have an announcement for you today on who will participate for the United States. We will have senior-level participation there, no doubt. ... But we will look to use the opportunity of this Swiss peace summit to underscore support for Ukraine, for its sovereignty, for its territorial integrity, for the principles of the U.N. Charter. And as wide a participation as possible that will underscore worldwide support for Ukraine and its effort to defend itself.   

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.

little washington, virginia — The United States, Japan and South Korea “strongly oppose” any unilateral attempts to change the status quo in the Indo-Pacific waters and “strongly condemned” North Korea's recent launches using ballistic missile technology. This joint statement followed a meeting of senior officials in historic Little Washington, Virginia, on Friday. U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell hosted Japan’s Vice Foreign Minister Masataka Okano and South Korea's Vice Foreign Minister Kim Hong Kyun at his farmhouse, nestled in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains near Washington. The three allies recognized the importance of “opposing unlawful maritime claims in the South China Sea” and reaffirmed the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. “There is no change in our basic positions on Taiwan, and we call for the peaceful resolution of cross-strait issues,” the joint statement said. On Friday, the three countries, along with several others, voiced their "resolute opposition" to the continued transfer of arms from North Korea to Russia and vowed to impose costs on those involved in the “unlawful transfer of arms” for use in attacking Ukraine. Last week, the three countries announced unilateral sanctions against Russian ships and North Korean personnel to counter their illicit transactions. The State Department’s second-highest-ranking diplomat told reporters he thought China, which still maintains close ties with North Korea, also has concerns. "I think they, too, have some anxieties about the steps North Korea has taken with respect to providing dangerous military equipment to Russia," Campbell said during a joint news conference at his farmhouse. The trilateral dialogue, a key deliverable from the historic 2023 Camp David summit involving the leaders of the three countries, reaffirmed cooperation on economic security, critical and emerging technologies, and maritime security. When asked if the leaders of the three countries would meet on the margins of the NATO summit in Washington July 9-11, Campbell said that convening a second leaders summit was "among the highest priorities" for the remainder of this year. The high-level talks unfolded against the backdrop of North Korea’s provocations, Russia’s war on Ukraine, the imperative of maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, and the need to provide humanitarian aid to civilians in Gaza. “We have more shared interests, and we have more shared agendas. So, if we work together, we can produce more relevant and efficient result[s],” Japan’s Okano said. The latest trilateral talks followed North Korea's launch of suspected ballistic missiles toward its eastern sea on Thursday, reported by South Korea's military. The launches occurred shortly after the country's unsuccessful attempt to launch a military reconnaissance satellite and after North Korean dropped balloons containing feces and garbage on South Korea's busy streets and public areas. “These actions will only solidify our resolve to strengthen security cooperation,” said South Korea's Kim. "All of us know North Korea continues to violate multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions and threatened the region with its nuclear and missile program,” he added.     “Any kind of aerial object, certainly, we would find destabilizing and provocative, and we continue to consult closely with the Republic of Korea and Japan against these kinds of malign and destabilizing behaviors,” State Department deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel said during a briefing Thursday. “We condemn the DPRK’s May 29th ballistic missile launch,” he noted, referring to North Korea by its official name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The high-level talks also took place amid other regional and global challenges, including recent large-scale military drills by China following the inauguration of Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te, as well as the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Friday's talks followed the recent revival of a high-level dialogue among China, Japan and South Korea after almost five years. South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and Chinese Premier Li Qiang attended a summit Monday in Seoul. “We welcome renewed diplomacy between China, Japan and South Korea,” Campbell told VOA after receiving a “deep and sincere” debrief from his Japanese and South Korean counterparts.   “We welcome the steps towards increasing dialogue and discussion on the critical matters of Northeast Asia,” he added. Former U.S. intelligence officials and analysts said the alliance among Washington, Tokyo and Seoul was especially crucial amid rising military threats from the People’s Republic of China. James Fanell, a retired U.S. Navy captain and former director of intelligence and information operations for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said, “Given the current military threats from the PRC, as exemplified by last week’s large-scale drills near Taiwan, and the ongoing rapid military buildup, all three nations should break free from incremental changes and adopt a much more assertive approach to regional security.” Others told VOA that countries in the region are not only worried about the economic fallout from any type of war, citing the importance of maintaining the status quo of the Taiwan Strait as an international waterway, but they also are very concerned about immediate Chinese threats following a potential forcible takeover of Taiwan.      "If China were to take Taiwan by force, then Chinese forces would be that much closer to their outlying territories. Especially in Japan, there's a fear that this would be the first step toward Chinese seizure of some of the southwestern islands,” said Jennifer Kavanagh, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. On Friday morning, Campbell met with South Korea’s Kim for a bilateral discussion. The previous day, Campbell held an inaugural vice ministerial meeting with his Japanese counterpart, Okano, to focus on infrastructure development cooperation in other countries. That initiative is widely viewed as a key part of the two allies' strategy to counter China's influence in Southeast Asia and beyond. The next trilateral vice foreign minister-level dialogue will be held in Seoul in the second half of this year.

WASHINGTON — Relatives of the passengers who died in two jetliner crashes pushed federal officials Friday to prosecute Boeing on criminal charges related to the accidents no later than this fall but said they got no commitment from the Justice Department. The Justice Department determined two weeks ago that Boeing violated terms of a settlement that let the company avoid prosecution for deceiving regulators who approved the Boeing 737 Max. Prosecutors have said they will announce by July 7 whether the company will face sanctions. Boeing agreed in 2021 to pay $2.5 billion — mostly compensation to airlines — to avoid prosecution on a fraud charge. Relatives of some of the 346 people who died in the 2018 and 2019 crashes have tried ever since to scuttle the settlement. It appeared that the fraud case would be dismissed permanently. But in January, a door plug blew off a Max during an Alaska Airlines flight, leading to new investigations of Boeing. "They claimed the Max is completely safe, it's the most-scrutinized plane ever, even as the doors blow off on the Alaska Air (Max), and they can't blame the pilots anymore," said Michael Stumo, whose daughter, Samya, died in the second crash. The Justice Department declined to comment Friday but has said that Boeing violated terms of the 2021 settlement by failing to make promised changes to detect and prevent violations of federal anti-fraud laws. Prosecutors have not publicly disclosed instances of potential fraud. In early May, Boeing disclosed that workers at a South Carolina plant falsified inspection reports on some 787 Dreamliner jets. "We believe that we have honored the terms of the agreement and look forward to the opportunity to respond to the Justice Department on this issue," a Boeing spokesperson said. They added that the company is acting "with the utmost transparency" to answer the department's questions, including those surrounding the Alaska Airlines incident.

united nations — The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Friday to end the U.N. political mission in Iraq.  The mission was established in 2003 following the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein. Its task was to coordinate post-conflict humanitarian and reconstruction efforts, and to help restore a representative government in the country.  The Iraqi government asked the council in a May 8 letter to wrap up the mission by the end of 2025, and that's what the resolution does: It extends the mandate of the U.N. Assistance Mission in Iraq, known as UNAMI, for a final 19 months until Dec. 31, 2025, when all its work will cease.  The U.S.-sponsored resolution asks Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to prepare "a transition and liquidation plan" in consultation with the Iraqi government by December 31, 2024, so UNAMI can start transferring its tasks and withdrawing staff and assets.  The council said it supports Iraq's continuing stabilization efforts, including its ongoing fight against the Islamic State group and al-Qaida extremists and their affiliates.  In 2014, the Islamic State group declared a caliphate in large parts of Iraq and Syria and attracted tens of thousands of supporters from around the world. The extremists were defeated by a U.S.-led military coalition in Iraq in 2017 and in Syria in 2019, but its sleeper cells remain in both countries.  The council's action came as Iraq is also seeking to wind down the military coalition formed to fight IS. The roughly 2,500 U.S. troops are scattered around the country, largely in military installations in Baghdad and in the north. Iraqi Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani has contended that the Iraqi security forces are capable of dealing with the remaining IS cells in the country and the coalition's presence is no longer needed.  The resolution adopted Friday to close the UNAMI mission expresses support for Iraq's reform efforts aimed at fighting corruption, respecting and protecting human rights, delivering essential services to its people, creating jobs and diversifying the economy.  It asks the secretary-general to streamline UNAMI's tasks ahead of the mission's closure to focus on providing advice, support and technical assistance to the government to strengthen preparations for free elections, including for the federal Parliament and for the Parliament in the Kurdistan region.  It also authorizes UNAMI to facilitate progress toward finally resolving outstanding issues between Iraq and Kuwait, stemming from Saddam's invasion of its smaller neighbor in August 1990.  In addition, the resolution says UNAMI should help with the return of internally displaced Iraqis and those in Syria, with providing health care and other services, and with economic development. And it also authorizes the mission to "promote accountability and the protection of human rights, and judicial and legal reform."  U.S. Deputy Ambassador Robert Wood welcomed the resolution's unanimous adoption and plans for an orderly wind down of UNAMI.  "We all recognize that Iraq has changed dramatically in recent years and UNAMI's mission needed to be realigned as part of our commitment to fostering a secure, stable and sovereign Iraq," he told the council.

President Joe Biden reveals details of a three-phase ceasefire plan in Gaza he said was proposed by Israel as its military pushed deeper into central Rafah. Will international pressure and last week’s ruling by the World Court have influence on ending what has become a humanitarian catastrophe? Amanda Ghahremani, criminal law attorney and research fellow at the Human Rights Center at the University of California Berkeley weighs in. Former President Donald Trump remains defiant after being found guilty of 34 felony charges. Criminal defense attorney Jack Rice describes the historic nature of the verdict. Environmental extremes reach new levels as the world struggles to cope with the impacts of climate change. A look at how the ‘Doomsday Seed Vault’ is helping protect the world’s food supply deep in a frozen cave in Norway.

Give us 5 minutes, and we'll give you the world. Around the clock, Voice of America keeps you in touch with the latest news. We bring you reports from our correspondents and interviews with newsmakers from across the world.