dataDp/3575.jpeg

Futbol

Goalkeeper Andre Onana was at fault for two goals as a last-gasp Lyon equaliser put Manchester United's Europa League quarter-final tie in the balance at the halfway stage. United went behind after 25 minutes when under-pressure Onana failed to get a strong enough hand to Thiago Almada's wide free-kick. In the final seconds of the first half Leny Yoro equalised with his first goal for United by reacting quickly to Manuel Ugarte's volley and diverting the ball into the bottom corner. The visitors thought they had won late on when substitute Joshua Zirkzee headed home Bruno Fernandes' looping cross in the 88th minute. But, with the last play before the final whistle, Onana spilled Georges Mikautadze's shot and Rayan Cherki tapped in on the rebound. United host Lyon in the second leg at Old Trafford next Thursday (20:00 BST). Have your say on Man Utd's performance Attention was always going to be on Onana who was labelled "one of the worst keepers" in Manchester United history by Lyon substitute Nemanja Matic on Wednesday. Ex-United midfielder Matic had been responding to comments by Onana who said his side are "way better" than their French opponents. Onana was booed every time he touched the ball inside Groupama Stadium, even if he had little to do before Lyon's opener. With Lyon's first goal the 29-year-old reacted late to Almada's cross, having to wait to see if a Lyon player would divert the ball, and was caught out when the free-kick kept its line. The ball bounced just before the Cameroonian and then skidded through his hands before hitting the net. For the second Onana was unable to gather a shot which, although was hit with power, was straight at him, and Lyon's Cherki was gifted a late leveller. It means since the start of last season Onana has made eight errors leading to goals in all competitions, the most of any keeper playing for a Premier League club. With the Red Devils 13th in the Premier League table, their only realistic hope of qualifying for European football next season is through the Champions League spot afforded to the Europa League winner. For large periods they looked well-organised, motivated and were probably the better team in Lyon. But, as has often been the case this season, United were hampered by poor finishing. In the first half Rasmus Hojlund skewed a Patrick Dorgu cutback well wide, while Bruno Fernandes had a shot deflected over and Casemiro struck an overhead kick straight at the goalkeeper. In the second period, an Alejandro Garnacho strike from a Dorgu cross was tipped over and Casemiro headed a corner just wide. United forwards Hojlund and Garnacho both appeared to lack confidence. Hojlund has now scored just one goal in his past 25 United appearances in all competitions, while Garnacho has one from his past 28. Ruben Amorim will hope both will be able to turn their form around in time for the second leg. The Portuguese manager was able to bring on Kobbie Mainoo as a late substitute. The English midfielder had been out with a muscle injury since February.

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Harvard Reports Find Students Face Anti-Muslim And Anti-Jewish Bias

Harvard president says students report being pushed ‘to the periphery of campus life’ over their identities and beliefs. Two reports by Harvard University task forces found that students and staff have faced anti-Muslim bias as well as anti-Israeli or anti-Semitic bias. The release of the reports on Tuesday follows the establishment last year of separate task forces on combating “Anti-Muslim, Anti-Arab, and Anti-Palestinian Bias” as well as “Antisemitism and Anti-Israeli Bias” amid campus protests over Israel’s war on Gaza. It also comes as Harvard is embroiled in a legal fight with US President Donald Trump over his administration’s decision to freeze more than $2bn in funding for the university, a move Trump claims was taken in response to rampant anti-Semitism on campus. In a statement announcing the findings, Harvard President Alan Garber said that “Muslim, Arab, Palestinian, and pro-Palestinian community members reported feeling judged, misrepresented, and silenced” and that Jewish, Israeli and Zionist community members reported hiding “overt markers of their identities to avoid confrontation”. “Especially disturbing is the reported willingness of some students to treat each other with disdain rather than sympathy, eager to criticise and ostracize, particularly when afforded the anonymity and distance that social media provides,” Garber said. “Some students reported being pushed by their peers to the periphery of campus life because of who they are or what they believe, eroding our shared sense of community in the process.” The task force on combating anti-Muslim, anti-Arab and anti-Palestinian bias found a similar climate of hostility, describing a “deep-seated sense of fear” among students and a state of “uncertainty, abandonment, threat, and isolation” on campus. “Muslim women who wear hijab and pro-Palestinian students wearing keffiyehs spoke about facing verbal harassment, being called ‘terrorists,’ and even being spat upon,” the task force said. “The issue of doxxing was particularly highlighted as a significant concern that affects not only physical safety and mental well-being, but also future career prospects,” it added, referring to the practice of disclosing a person’s personal or identifying information online. Nearly half of Muslim students and staff surveyed reported feeling physically unsafe on campus, while 92 percent said they believed they would face professional or academic penalties for expressing political views. “As Muslim students we have been living in constant fear,” the taskforce quoted an unnamed student as saying. “There have been trucks driving around campus for months, displaying the faces of Muslim students… my peers who have lost their jobs simply for being in the leadership of Muslim faith organisations have been left out to dry once they had their offers revoked… If there were antisemitic trucks driving around campus and planes flying over with antisemitic slogans, I cannot help but believe Harvard would have done more to stop it.” The task force on combating anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli bias said in its report that bias had been “fomented, practiced, and tolerated” at Harvard and within academia more widely. In an online survey, 26 percent of Jewish students reported feeling physically unsafe, while 39 percent said they did not feel at home at the university, the task force said. Nearly 60 percent of Jewish students reported experiencing “discrimination, stereotyping, or negative bias” due to their opinions, with only 25 percent believing there was no “academic or professional penalty” for expressing their views, the task force said. Among examples of bias in the report, the task force quoted an unnamed Palestinian citizen of Israel studying there as saying that Israelis “get used to social discrimination” from their first day on campus. “People refusing to speak to you. Not even pretending to be nice. Some people pretend to be nice and end conversation in [a] polite manner when they find out [I am] Israeli and then don’t talk to [me] again,” the report quoted the student as saying. Both task forces issued a series of recommendations for combating bias on campus, including expanding access to legal services equipped to combat doxxing and prioritising the admission of students who support open inquiry. Garber said the university would redouble its efforts to ensure it is a place where “ideas are welcomed, entertained, and contested in the spirit of seeking truth” and “mutual respect is the norm”. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Milestone: Russia, North Korea Begin First Road Bridge Construction

Moscow says the project will boost trade and highlight the two countries’ strong alliance. Russia and North Korea have begun construction of their first-ever road bridge on the Tumen River, which forms the natural border between the allied countries, describing it as a symbol of their deepening partnership. Announcing the project on Wednesday, Russia’s Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin said it would reduce transport costs, facilitate trade and promote tourism. “This is truly a milestone for Russian-Korean relations,” Mishustin said during a video meeting with Pak Thae-song, chairman of North Korea’s Supreme People’s Assembly. “The significance goes far beyond just an engineering task … it symbolises our common desire to strengthen friendly, good-neighbourly relations and increase interregional cooperation,” he added. There is already a rusting, Soviet-era rail bridge across the Tumen River. “Another road will allow entrepreneurs to significantly increase the volume of transport [goods] and reduce transport costs – and, of course, open up good prospects for tourism,” said Mishustin. Russia’s Kommersant newspaper said the bridge will be ready by mid-2026. Russian state TV aired footage from the site, showing North Koreans dressed in suits, standing in line during a ceremony marking the start of construction. “It will become an eternal historical memorial structure symbolising the unbreakable Korean-Russian friendly relations,” North Korea’s Pak Thae-song said, according to a Russian translation. The governor of Russia’s Primorye region, Oleg Kozhemyako, who attended the ceremony, said he hoped it would boost contact between the countries. “There are many sportspeople and children going there,” he said, without elaborating.   North Korea and Russia, two of the most sanctioned countries in the world, have leaned into their alliance during Russia’s war in Ukraine. Pyongyang has repeatedly voiced strong support for Russia’s invasion and even sent thousands of its own troops to fight alongside the Russians. About 600 North Korean soldiers have died in the war, South Korean lawmakers said Wednesday, citing intelligence officials. North Korea is also accused by Kyiv of supplying Russia with heavy weapons it has used in battle, including a missile that killed a dozen people in Kyiv last week. Russia’s President Vladimir Putin signed a strategic partnership with Pyongyang last year that committed both countries to providing immediate military assistance to each other using “all means” necessary if either faces “aggression”. Putin has since hailed the North Korean troops fighting Ukraine, with the Kremlin even considering them parading on Red Square during World War II commemorations on May 9. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Tearing Down: What Drives Trumps Foreign Policy?

Motivated by grievances against allies and foes, the US president is ‘tearing down’ the modern global order, analysts say. Washington, DC – Donald Trump’s world view can be difficult to pin down. During the first 100 days of his second term, the United States president started a global trade war, targeting allies and foes alike. He also issued decrees to withdraw the US from the Paris Agreement on climate and the World Health Organization, amongst other international forums. Trump continued to double down on a series of unconventional foreign policy proposals: taking over the Panama Canal, annexing Greenland, making Canada the 51st US state and “owning” Gaza. And despite promising to be a “peace” president, Trump has said he intends to take the US annual Pentagon budget to a record $1 trillion. He has distanced himself from neo-conservative foreign policy and does not position himself as a promoter of human rights or democracy abroad. His “America First” stance and scepticism of NATO align with realist principles, but his impulsiveness and highly personalised diplomacy diverge from traditional realism. At the same time, he has not called for a full military or diplomatic retreat from global affairs, setting him apart from isolationists. So what exactly drives Trump’s foreign policy? Experts say it is primarily fuelled by a dissatisfaction with the current global system, which he sees as unfairly disadvantaging the US with its rules and restrictions. Instead, Trump appears to want Washington to leverage its enormous military and economic power to set the rules to assert global dominance while reducing US contributions and commitments to others. “The Trump doctrine is ‘smash and grab’, take what you want from others and let your allies do the same,” said Josh Ruebner, a lecturer at Georgetown University’s Program on Justice and Peace. Mathew Burrows, programme lead of the Strategic Foresight Hub at the Stimson Center think tank, said Trump wants US primacy without paying the costs that come with that. “He’s withdrawing the US from the rest of the world, particularly economically,” Burrows, a veteran of the US Department of State and CIA, told Al Jazeera. “But at the same time, he somehow believes that the US … will be able to tell other countries to stop fighting, to do whatever the US wants,” he said. “Hegemony just doesn’t work that way.” Trump appears to believe that threatening and imposing tariffs – and occasionally violence – is a way of employing US leverage to get world leaders to acquiesce to his demands. But critics say the US president discounts the power of nationalism in other countries, which prompts them to eventually fight back. Such was the case for Canada. After Trump imposed tariffs and called for Canada to become the 51st state, this led to a wave of nationalist pride in the northern neighbour and an abrupt shift from the Conservative Party to the Liberal Party. From Canada to China, foreign governments have accused Trump of “bullying” and blackmail. Some of Trump’s Democratic rivals have rushed to accuse him of abandoning the US global role, but at the same time, the US president has been projecting American strength to pressure other countries. While not entirely isolationist, his approach marks a significant turn from that of his predecessor. The late Secretary of State Madeleine Albright famously said in 1998: “We are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future.” That purported power and wisdom, as Albright envisioned, put the US in a position to implement Pax Americana – the concept of a peaceful global order led by Washington. Trump does see the US as proverbially taller than other nations, but perhaps not in the way Albright meant. “America does not need other countries as much as other countries need us,” White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told reporters earlier this month. Her statement, however, was to stress that other nations must negotiate with the US to avoid Trump’s tariffs. In this context, Trump is seeking revenues and jobs – not an international system governed by liberal values in the way that Washington defines them. However, Burrows said the chief aim of Trump’s foreign policy is to dismantle the existing global order. “A big part of his world view is really his negative feelings towards the current order, where others appear to be rising,” Burrows said. “And so, a lot of this is just tearing down.” Much of the system that manages relations between different countries was put in place after World War II, with the US leading the way. The United Nations and its agencies, the articles of international law, various treaties on the environment, nuclear proliferation and trade, and formal alliances have governed global affairs for decades. Critics of Washington point out that the US violated and opted out of the system where it saw fit. For example, the US never joined the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court in 1998. It invaded Iraq in 2003 without United Nations Security Council authorisation in an apparent breach of the UN Charter. And it has been providing unconditional support to Israel despite the US ally’s well-documented abuses against Palestinians. “The United States has done a lot to stand up sort of multilateral institutions – the UN and others – that are based around these ideas,” said Matthew Duss, the executive vice president at the Center for International Policy. “But the United States has always found ways to violate these norms and laws when it when it serves our purposes,” he added, pointing to former US President Joe Biden’s support for Israel’s war on Gaza and President George W Bush’s policies after the 9/11 attacks, which included extraordinary rendition, torture, invasion and prolonged occupation. But for Trump and his administration, there are indications that the global order is not just to be worked around; it needs to go. “The post-war global order is not just obsolete, it is now a weapon being used against us,” Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio told senators during his confirmation hearing in January. Trump recently told Time Magazine that the US has been “ripped off” by “almost every country in the world”. His rhetoric on foreign policy appears to echo his statements about promising to look after “America’s forgotten men and women” who have been mistreated by the “elites” domestically. While the modern world order has empowered US companies and left the country with immense wealth and military and diplomatic might, Americans do have major issues to complain about. Globalisation saw the outsourcing of US jobs to countries with less expensive labour. Past interventionist policies – particularly the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan – are largely seen as strategic blunders that produced a generation of veterans with physical and mental injuries. Geoffrey Kabaservice, vice president of political studies at the Niskanen Center, a centre-right think tank in Washington, DC, noted that wages have stagnated for many Americans for decades. “The fact is that the benefits of globalisation were very maldistributed, and some people up at the top made enormous plutocratic sums of money, and very little of that flowed down to the mass of the working class,” Kabaservice told Al Jazeera. For people who saw their factories closed and felt like they were living in “left-behind areas”, electing Trump was “retribution” against the system, Kabaservice said, adding that Trump’s “America First” approach has pitted the US against the rest of the world. “America is turning its back on the world,” Kabaservice said. “Trump believes that America can be self-sufficient in all things, but already the falsity of this doctrine is proving true.” Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute, a think tank that promotes diplomacy, said Trump’s foreign policy, including his approach to allies, comes from “the politics of grievance”. “He does believe that the United States – because of its role as world policeman, which he’s not necessarily in love with – has been shouldering a lot of the security burden of the world without getting proper compensation,” Parsi told Al Jazeera. The US president has been calling on NATO allies to increase their defence spending, while suggesting that Washington should be paid more for stationing troops in allied countries like Germany and South Korea. So how does Trump view the world? “He’s an aggressive unilateralist, and in many ways, he’s just an old-school imperialist,” Duss said of Trump. “He wants to expand American territory. He wants to extract wealth from other parts of the world … This is a kind of foreign policy approach from an earlier era.” He noted that Trump’s foreign policy is to act aggressively and unilaterally to achieve what he sees as US interests. Kabaservice said Trump wants the US to return to an age when it was a manufacturing powerhouse and not too involved in the affairs of the world. “He likes the idea that maybe the United States is a great power, sort of in a 19th-century model, and it lets the other great powers have their own sphere of influence,” he said. Kabaservice added that Trump wants the US to have “its own sphere of influence” and to be “expanding in the way that optimistic forward-moving powers are”. This notion of an America with its own “sphere of influence” appeared to be supported by Rubio when he spoke earlier this year of the inevitability of “multipolar world, multi-great powers in different parts of the planet”. Parsi said that Trump is seeking hemispheric hegemony above all, despite his aversion for regime change – hence his emphasis on acquiring Greenland and the Panama Canal. “You’re shifting not from the politics of domination towards restraint; you’re shifting from the politics of global domination to a more limited form of domination,” Parsi told Al Jazeera. “Focus only on your own hemisphere.” The US may have already experienced what happens when these views of nostalgia and grievance see real-world implications. Trump’s erratic trade policy rocked the US stock market and sparked threats of counter-levies from Canada to the European Union to China. Eventually, Trump postponed many of his tariffs, keeping a baseline of 10 percent levies and additional importing fees on Chinese goods. Asked why he suspended the measures, the US president acknowledged that it was due to how the tariffs were received. “People were jumping a little bit out of line. They were getting yippy,” he said. Ultimately, Trump’s unilateralism and unpredictability have “broken the world’s trust in significant ways” that will outlast his presidency, Kabaservice told Al Jazeera. “In the broad span of history, Trump will be seen as the person who committed terrible unforced errors that led to the end of the American century and the beginning of the Chinese century,” he said. During his inauguration speech earlier this year, the US president said his legacy “will be that of a peacemaker and unifier”. “His actual legacy will be that he has torn down the global system that the US created,” said Burrows, of the Stimson Center. Follow Al Jazeera English:...