CBS News
진보 성향
정치
Colombia's Petro accuses Trump of intervening in his country's election
Colombian President Gustavo Petro argues the U.S. has chosen to align against his government and back forces he identifies as complicit in the drug trade.
"CHOSEN" · 총 53건
필터 보기현재 지수
50.3
0 = 부정 우세
50 = 중립
100 = 긍정 우세
최근 7일 기준 81,850건을 분석한 결과, 뉴스 심리지수는 50.3(균형)입니다. 긍정 4,159건(5.1%)·중립 75,662건(92.4%)·부정 2,029건(2.5%)이며, 중립 비중이 뚜렷하게 높습니다. 성향 지수는 종합 14.8(중도 균형)입니다.
Colombian President Gustavo Petro argues the U.S. has chosen to align against his government and back forces he identifies as complicit in the drug trade.
Thailand said on Friday it will join a UN arbitration process chosen by Cambodia to resolve a festering maritime boundary dispute, but put on hold for now other two-way efforts to settle their contested borders. This week Cambodia launched a compulsory conciliation process under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), after Bangkok decided last month to unilaterally end a 2001 framework pact for talks on a disputed maritime belt. For more than 25 years, both have claimed...
The Coordinating Ministry for Food Affairs has launched a river plastic pollution prevention partnership program aimed ...
Four Senate Republicans joined every single Democrat to kill President Donald Trump’s chosen election integrity legislation for the second time — but Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) fired back with a procedural masterstroke that showed exactly what’s standing between the SAVE America Act and the president’s desk: the filibuster. Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), ...
The Christian Democrats and Sweden Democrats say they want law changes so that MPs can't quit their parties but still keep their seats in parliament. There are currently nine MPs in the Swedish parliament who were elected as MPs for parties but who have since either quit the party or been thrown out and who have chosen to stay in parliament as independents. Any changes to the rules would need alterations to the Swedish constitution.
Compendium recognises Digi Kerala digital literacy project, Universal Palliative Care initiatives and K-SMART digital service delivery applications as best practices from Kerala
NEW DELHI: Pakistan has decided not to send its team for the Asian Senior Fencing Championships to be held in New Delhi from June 19 despite the local organisers sending an invite to the neighbouring country to take part in the continental event, Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency reported on Thursday. India is hosting the championships for the first time. Fencers from more than 30 countries across Asia and Oceania will be seen in action. Nearly 100 delegates and technical officials will oversee the event. “We sent an invite to Pakistan, as well as Afghanistan, to participate in the championships but they chose not to send their fencers. The deadline for sending entries is long over and we are now in the process of procuring visas for the athletes and officials,” the Fencing Association of India (FAI) secretary general Rajeev Mehta told PTI. Last month, the Indian Sports Ministry had reiterated that the blanket ban on bilateral sporting ties with Pakistan that was imposed last year will remain in force, but the athletes from across the border will not be stopped from coming here for multilateral events. Despite that, Pakistan has chosen not to send the entries of their fencers. Published in Dawn, June 5th, 2026
If Congress has already chosen Vijay over Stalin in Tamil Nadu, bringing TVK into the front could prevent the alliance from losing its footprint in a politically significant state
[The Conversation Africa] Uganda's environmental impact assessment system is meant to protect the environment from harmful development projects. For nearly 30 years, the law has required developers applying for approval to consider alternatives to their proposed projects, such as different sites, designs, technologies or even whether the project should go ahead at all. This is intended to make sure that the least environmentally damaging option is chosen. Biodiversity and environmental impact assessment researcher Mulumba M. Agaba
A space for performance, self-expression and chosen family is growing in Toronto — it's all a part of the ballroom scene in the queer community.
FC Barcelona has chosen and opened talks with the manager it wants to replace Hansi Flick according to reports from Catalonia.
For over two decades, Pakistan has been locked in a war, not of its choosing but one that it cannot escape. Long after the withdrawal of Western forces from Afghanistan in August 2021, Pakistan continues to absorb the strategic shockwaves of a conflict whose centre of gravity may have shifted, but not disappeared. The return of the Taliban to power in Kabul has transformed the security landscape of South and Central Asia, with Pakistan bearing the most immediate and severe consequences. This is not merely a bilateral problem between neighbours. It is a global security challenge with implications stretching from West Asia to Europe, amid growing international concern over Afghanistan becoming a renewed militant hub. Pakistan’s role in the post-9/11 international order was clear and costly. As a frontline partner of the United States and Nato, Pakistan provided intelligence cooperation, logistics, and sustained military operations against Al Qaeda and affiliated networks. It was later designated a Major Non-Nato Ally, reflecting its centrality to global counterterrorism efforts. Yet, while international forces eventually exited Afghanistan, Pakistan’s war did not end. Instead, it evolved into a long war of attrition aimed at preventing the spillover of militancy from Afghan territory into the region and beyond. The cost Pakistan has paid is extraordinary. Over the past two decades, approximately 100,000 Pakistanis have lost their lives to terrorism, including civilians, security personnel, and children, most tragically symbolised by the massacre at the Army Public School in Peshawar. The site of a truck bomb attack on the Marriott hotel in Islamabad on September 20, 2008. — Reuters/File The economic toll exceeds $150 billion, encompassing destroyed infrastructure, lost investment, and enduring reputational damage. These figures are not abstractions; they represent one of the highest sacrifices borne by any country in the global war on terror. Over the years, Pakistan has pursued a sustained counterterrorism strategy. It dismantled major terrorist sanctuaries through sequential operations, strengthened its legal framework via the Anti-Terrorism Act and National Action Plan, operationalised dedicated counterterrorism institutions, and imposed financial controls to disrupt terrorist funding. By the late 2010s, violence had dropped sharply, and Pakistan had rebuilt a measure of internal security through institutional resilience rather than episodic force. That progress has been severely undermined by the Taliban’s return to power. Despite commitments under the 2020 Doha framework to prevent Afghan soil from being used against other states, militancy accelerated after the release of thousands of prisoners and the collapse of the Afghan republic. Today, Afghanistan has once again become a permissive environment for transnational jihadist groups, as documented by the United Nations Monitoring teams, contradicting the Doha pledge that Afghan soil would not be used to threaten the security of the United States and its allies. What makes the current situation uniquely dangerous is that the Taliban are no longer an insurgent movement operating from the shadows; they control an entire state. They possess territory, resources, institutions, and an education system that is being systematically redesigned to serve ideological ends. Analysts warn that this form of state capture amounts to long-term societal engineering with consequences that do not remain confined to one country. For Pakistan, the impact is direct and violent. Afghan soil is being used as a launchpad for cross-border terrorism. Pakistani authorities have identified camps, staging areas, and logistics nodes inside Afghanistan operated by the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and other groups. Leaders of the TTP terror outfit operate openly from Afghan cities, enjoying protection and material support. A security personnel stands guard at an imambargah following an explosion, in Islamabad on February 6, 2026. — AFP/File In 2025 alone, Pakistan conducted more than 75,000 intelligence-based operations across the country, dismantling terrorist formations and neutralising militants. A striking proportion of those involved were Afghan nationals, reflecting the depth of Afghan-side involvement in anti-Pakistan terrorism. This has repeatedly surfaced in international reporting as Pakistan confronted a sustained spike in attacks and arrests tied to cross-border militant facilitation. Pakistan’s geographic exposure magnifies the threat. It shares a 2,670-kilometre border — by far the longest of any neighbouring state. The border cuts through rugged terrain and dense kinship networks, which are routinely exploited by militant groups for infiltration, making Pakistan the primary firewall against the westward diffusion of jihadist violence. The notion that Pakistan can be destabilised without broader repercussions is therefore dangerously myopic. Policies that tolerate, enable, or instrumentalise militant proxies against Pakistan may appear tactically convenient to some regional actors, but they undermine collective security. Terrorist ecosystems, once empowered, rarely remain controllable. As global benchmarking shows, Pakistan continues to rank among the states most affected by terrorism, reinforcing the scale of the threat confronting it. Afghanistan’s transformation into a hub for transnational militancy is now acknowledged not only by Pakistan but by Russia, China, Iran, Central Asian states, as well as UN monitoring bodies. The problem is no longer one of competing narratives; it is a documented security reality, as international reporting continues to describe Afghanistan as a post-withdrawal magnet for armed networks. Despite immense pressure, Pakistan has consistently chosen engagement over abandonment. When Kabul fell in 2021, and much of the international community closed its embassies, Pakistan kept its mission open and facilitated evacuations. Defence Minister Khawaja Asif and Afghan Defence Minister Maulvi Sahib Muhammad Yaqub Mujahid shake hands after signing a ceasefire deal between Pakistan and Afghanistan in Doha, Qatar on October 19, 2025. — X/@KhawajaMAsif/File It has advocated for humanitarian support to the Afghan people, called for the unfreezing of Afghan assets to prevent economic collapse, and invested in trade, transit, and border mechanisms to stabilise livelihoods. Pakistan has also hosted millions of Afghan refugees for decades, absorbing a humanitarian burden that few states would tolerate, even though it is not a signatory to the 1951 Refugee Convention. These actions underscore a central truth: Pakistan’s objective is not confrontation with Afghanistan but containment of a threat that endangers the region and the world. Yet engagement without accountability has limits. The Taliban’s failure to take verifiable action against terrorist groups operating from Afghan soil has turned Afghanistan into a net exporter of insecurity. Major reporting has consistently linked Afghanistan’s permissive environment with the rising tempo of attacks in Pakistan. Allowing this trajectory to continue unchecked risks recreating the pre-9/11 environment — this time with more sophisticated networks, advanced weaponry left behind after the Western withdrawal, and digital tools that accelerate recruitment and radicalisation. Evidence of ideological-military institutionalisation is increasingly visible, including reports of new militant training camps in Afghanistan linked to Taliban factions and allied groups. For major powers, the strategic implications are clear. Supporting Pakistan in its efforts to eradicate cross-border terrorism is not a favour; it is a strategic necessity that requires intelligence cooperation, diplomatic backing, and coordinated international pressure on the Taliban to honour their commitments, dismantle terrorist sanctuaries, and end cross-border militancy. The alternative strategic neglect or proxy-driven destabilisation would be far costlier. Pakistan’s war on terror has never been only Pakistan’s war. It has been fought, often quietly and at enormous human cost, on behalf of a global order that depends on preventing ungoverned or ideologically weaponised spaces from becoming incubators of transnational violence. Pakistan’s 2025 operational tempo and threat environment have been extensively documented in international reporting tracking the resurgence of militant violence. If the international community fails to recognise this reality, it risks learning once again, perhaps too late, that terrorism ignored at its source rarely stays there. The warning is no longer theoretical: international reports increasingly describe Afghanistan’s post-2021 environment as a convergence space for armed networks with regional reach, reinforcing the urgency of collective action against the renewed Afghanistan-based militant threat. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dawn.
Republican businessman Zach Lahn defeated Rep. Randy Feenstra in Iowa's GOP gubernatorial primary Tuesday, dealing a rare primary loss to President Trump after his late endorsement failed to push his chosen candidate over the finish line.
The West Bengal speaker has accepted a letter signed by the 58 MLAs. Two other MLAs are also part of the group, but they are currently outside the state.
South Korea has made peaceful coexistence the central objective of its North Korea policy. As outlined in a recent white paper, Seoul has not formally abandoned reunification but has chosen to prioritise the more immediate and achievable objective of establishing a stable framework for coexistence. The document articulates three guiding principles: respect for North Korea’s political system, rejection of unification by absorption, and avoidance of hostile actions. Underscoring the urgency of...
Bill Pulte has no national-security experience, but he does have one qualification that might appeal to the president.
A month after the provisional entry into force of the trade agreement between the European Union (EU) and Mercosur, exchanges have been governed since May 1 by the terms agreed upon, while political and legal attention in Brussels centers on the EU Court of Justice, which must rule on the validity of the mechanism chosen to launch the treaty.
MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell has chosen a former Navy intelligence officer as his running mate in his bid for governor of Minnesota. Lindell, during a Monday appearance on Steve Bannon’s War Room show, announced retired Navy Lt. Cmdr. Phillip Parish as his lieutenant governor pick in a campaign launched in December. Parrish himself was a Republican gubernatorial...
ISLAMABAD: Aleema Khan, sister of incarcerated former premier Imran Khan, on Tuesday said that the only acceptable “deal” would be the restoration of an independent judiciary and the holding of free and fair elections in the country, as authorities once again denied her a meeting with her brother. Speaking to the media outside Adiala Jail, Aleema said it was their constitutional right to meet Imran. She vowed to continue visiting Adiala, saying it was the only way to exert pressure on the “powers that be”. “The family of Imran and party leaders will continue efforts for an independent judiciary and a free media,” she emphasised. Replying to a question regarding rumours of a meeting between the PTI founder and a former military chief, she rejected such claims, terming them politically motivated. “No such meeting has taken place, and such rumours are circulated whenever political temperatures rise.” Aleema said that she had earlier asked PTI Chairman Barrister Gohar Khan about reports of a meeting with Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi. According to her, Barrister Gohar confirmed the meeting and conveyed assurances regarding access to the PTI founder. However, she said those assurances did not materialise, adding that priority should instead be given to ensuring proper medical treatment and care for the former premier. She also said that if any political consultations or meetings were being held on behalf of the party leadership, they should be conducted “transparently and communicated openly to party members”. Commenting on the security arrangements around Adiala jail, the PTI founder’s sister claimed that road closures and restrictions reflected the government’s “fear of public support for Imran Khan”. She further alleged that the authorities were attempting to prevent discussions about Imran’s health. Aleema maintained that the “objective of the current political efforts was the release of Imran Khan”. She added that any elected representative who genuinely worked for his release would be regarded as a hero by the people. Referring to developments in Gilgit-Baltistan, Aleema criticised alleged electoral irregularities, political repression, arrests, travel restrictions and the use of force against political workers and candidates. “Governments resort to oppression when they lack public support, while popular movements draw strength from the backing of the people. Attempts are being made to silence the PTI founder, but he remains committed to his principles and is prepared to make personal sacrifices for his cause,” Aleema claimed. Rejecting speculation about political negotiations for personal gain, she said that the only acceptable “deal” would be the restoration of an independent judiciary and the holding of free and fair elections. She further argued that judicial independence was essential for ensuring transparent democratic processes. Aleema stated that veteran political figures such as Mahmood Khan Achakzai and Allama Raja Nasir Abbas had been chosen by the PTI founder due to their political maturity. She maintained that authorities should grant Imran the rights guaranteed to him under the law and added that pressure tactics would eventually force stakeholders towards dialogue and negotiations. Meanwhile, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Sohail Afridi said that their only demand was that Imran be shifted to Shifa International Hospital for treatment. Replying to a question about why a forward bloc was made against him, he said that no one can remove the chief minister in KP apart from Imran. “They want to do something with Imran Khan and that is why they are not allowing a meeting with him,” he added. “The propaganda surrounding the forward bloc has begun to divert attention from the upcoming budget, under which the masses will once again be made to suffer,” he said. “I would like to request you to keep focusing on the budget and Imran Khan’s health. They have no foreign policy or any agenda for the masses. We have prepared the KP budget, which will be the best budget. However, the entire country will be affected by the federal budget,” Afridi said.
Odisha was chosen as the host state due to its "globally recognised milestones in disaster preparedness, effective cyclone management, and early warning systems