Finance

A United States trade court has ruled that President Donald Trump’s global reciprocal tariffs are illegal, finding that the president overstepped his authority by imposing the import levies last month. Wednesday’s ruling could throw Trump’s sweeping trade policies into disarray, experts say.

The Court of International Trade in New York ruled that an emergency law invoked by Trump during his “Liberation Day” announcement in April does not give him unilateral authority to impose certain tariffs. Instead, the court ruled, that power resides with Congress.

It also extended this ruling to previous tariffs levied earlier this year on Canada, Mexico and China over the fentanyl opioid crisis as well as security at the US border.

Trump has consistently promised Americans that his tariffs will draw manufacturing jobs back to the US, and shrink the country’s $1.2 trillion goods trade deficit with the rest of the world.

He has argued that the US’s large trade deficits with other countries amount to a national emergency, particularly regarding China, giving him the right to invoke emergency measures. But the court disputed that, arguing the US has run a trade deficit with the rest of the world for 49 years.

“The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the President’s use of tariffs as leverage,” a three-judge panel said in the decision to issue a permanent injunction on the blanket tariff orders issued by Trump since January.

“That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it.”

On April 9, Trump imposed a 10 percent across-the-board tariff on all imports, plus higher reciprocal rates for countries with which the US has large trade deficits. He later paused or lowered those, but kept the 10 percent baseline tariff in place.

Wednesday’s ruling, if it stands, would blow a hole through Trump’s strategy to use tariffs to wring concessions from trading partners, experts say. It also creates uncertainty around trade negotiations and agreements with the European Union and China, as well as other countries.

But the Trump administration, some experts say, might explore new ways to impose tariffs even if it loses the current case.

What has the court ruled?

The three-judge panel was ruling on a lawsuit filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small businesses which import goods from countries targeted by the duties. To date, at least seven lawsuits have been filed challenging Trump’s trade policies.

On Wednesday, the court invalidated all of Trump’s tariffs since January which were rooted in the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a 1977 law meant to address “unusual and extraordinary” threats during a national emergency.

“The Worldwide and Retaliatory Tariff Orders exceed any authority granted to the President by IEEPA to regulate importation by means of tariffs,” the court ruling stated.

The judgement affects levies imposed on April 2, including the baseline 10 percent tariff and higher, so-called “reciprocal” duties on many countries, but not the sectoral tariffs that Trump had imposed earlier.

The ruling left in place any tariffs that Trump issued using his Section 232 powers from the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, including his 25 percent tax on most imported vehicles and parts, as well as on all foreign-made steel and aluminium.

The judges gave the government 10 days to carry out the necessary administrative moves to remove the affected tariffs.

How has the Trump administration responded to the ruling?

Minutes after the announcement of the ruling, the Trump administration filed a notice of appeal and questioned the authority of the court.

In a statement issued on Wednesday, White House spokesperson Kush Desai said US trade deficits with other countries constituted “a national emergency that has decimated American communities … and weakened our defence industrial base”.

“It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency,” Desai added.

Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff for policy, also hit out at the ruling with a post on X claiming “the judicial coup is out of control”.

The Justice Department, which is headed by US Attorney General Pam Bondi, a Trump appointee, said the lawsuits should be dismissed because only Congress, not private businesses, can challenge a national emergency declared by the president under the IEEPA.

How have world markets responded?

Financial markets responded positively to the ruling, with the US dollar rising in value against the euro, yen and Swiss franc.

In Europe, the German Dax rallied by 0.9 percent at the start of trading on Thursday, while the UK’s FTSE 100 index of shares ticked up by 0.1 percent.

Stocks in Asia also climbed on Thursday, while the price of Brent crude – the global price benchmark for Atlantic basin crude oils – climbed 81 cents, or 1.25 percent, to $65.71 a barrel.

Most economists agree that eliminating Trump’s tariffs would improve prospects for the world’s major economies.

What steps could the Trump administration take now?

The Trump administration has 10 days to complete the process of halting tariffs, although the introduction of most reciprocal tariffs has been shelved until later in the summer anyway.

It’s not yet clear if the White House will respond by suspending its emergency powers after July 9, when the reciprocal tariffs pause is set to end.

For now, the trade court ruling will most likely be appealed at the US Court of Appeals in Washington, DC, and — if needed — after that, the US Supreme Court. It is unclear how long this process could take.

Meanwhile, Trump can still unilaterally launch import taxes of 15 percent for 150 days on nations with which the US runs large trade deficits, in line with Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974.

The White House may also begin to explore other laws to enable it to force through Trump’s trade policies.

According to Mona Paulsen, assistant professor in international economic law at the London School of Economics, “Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930 could be option”.

This would allow Trump to raise duties up to 50 percent above existing charges on imports from countries that “discriminate against US commerce”.

“Rather than wipe out Trump’s trade plans, I think yesterday’s ruling will see the White House use more and more ambiguous trade laws,” Paulsen told Al Jazeera.

How does the ruling affect new trade deals?

The trade deal that Trump reached with the United Kingdom on May 8 has been thrown into doubt following the trade court ruling.

That agreement, which has not yet been finalised, imposed a 10 percent tariff only on all imports from the UK.

“A lot of governments will wait and see what happens now,” said Paulsen, suggesting that trade partners may now have a stronger hand in negotiations with the US.

Ukrainian official urges Moscow to share its plan before any talks, as Turkiye’s Erdogan calls for dialogue.

Russia says it has yet to receive a response from Ukraine over its proposal to hold another round of ceasefire talks in Istanbul next week, as Turkiye’s president urged the warring sides not to “close the door” to dialogue.

Moscow said earlier this week it wanted to hold new talks with Ukraine in the Turkish city to present a memorandum that would outline what it referred to as the key elements for “overcoming the root causes” of the war.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Thursday that so far Moscow has not received a reply from Kyiv.

When asked to comment on Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha’s suggestion that Russia should immediately hand over the memorandum, Peskov dismissed the idea as “non-constructive”.

“Here, you have to either confirm your readiness to continue negotiations or do the opposite,” Peskov said.

Ukrainian Defence Minister Rustem Umerov said on Wednesday that Kyiv had already submitted its memorandum on a potential settlement and called on Russia to produce its version immediately, rather than waiting until next week.

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, Heorhii Tykhyi, said on X on Thursday that Russia’s hesitancy to share its plan suggests that it was “likely filled with unrealistic ultimatums”.

“They are afraid of revealing that they are stalling the peace process,” Tykhyi said.

Officials from both sides met in Istanbul on May 16, their first direct talks in more than three years, but the encounter failed to yield a breakthrough.

But Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said the recent momentum for talks was an opportunity to reach lasting peace.

“The road to a resolution goes through more dialogue, more diplomacy. We are using all our diplomatic power and potential for peace,” he told reporters on Thursady, according to his office.

“During the course of each of our meetings, we have reminded our interlocutors that they should not pass up this opportunity,” Erdogan said, adding that “extinguishing this huge fire in our region … is a humanitarian duty.”

In Ukraine, local authorities said at least five people were killed across the country after Russia fired 90 drones overnight.

Russia’s Ministry of Defence said its air defences had intercepted 48 Ukrainian drones overnight, including 30 over the Belgorod region.

The ministry added in separate comments that its army had captured the village of Stroivka in Ukraine’s northeastern Kharkiv region as well as Gnativka and Shevchenko Pershe in the Donetsk region.

Aref Shamtan, 73, chose to erect a tent near his decimated home in northwest Syria instead of remaining in a displacement camp following the overthrow of longtime ruler Bashar al-Assad.

“I feel good here, even among the rubble,” Shamtan said, sipping tea at the tent near his field.

Upon returning with his son after al-Assad was toppled in December, Shamtan discovered his village of al-Hawash, situated amid farmland in central Hama province, severely damaged.

His house had lost its roof and suffered cracked walls. Nevertheless, “living in the rubble is better than living in the camps” near the Turkish border, where he had resided since fleeing the conflict in 2011, Shamtan explained.

Since al-Assad’s downfall after nearly 14 years of war, the United Nations’ International Organization for Migration reports that 1.87 million Syrians who were refugees abroad or internally displaced have returned to their places of origin.

The IOM identifies the “lack of economic opportunities and essential services” as the greatest challenge facing returnees.

Unable to afford rebuilding, Shamtan decided approximately two months ago to leave the camp with his family and young grandchildren, and has begun planting wheat on his land.

Al-Hawash had been under al-Assad’s control and bordered front lines with neighbouring Idlib province, which became a stronghold for opposition groups, particularly Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, the opposition fighters that spearheaded the offensive that toppled the former president.

“We cannot stay in the camps,” Shamtan maintained, even though “the village is all destroyed … and life is non-existent,” lacking fundamental services and infrastructure.

“We decided … to live here until things improve. We are waiting for organisations and the state to help us,” he added. “Life is tough.”

Local official Abdel Ghafour al-Khatib, 72, has also returned after escaping in 2019 with his wife and children to a camp near the border.

“I just wanted to get home. I was overjoyed … I returned and pitched a worn-out tent. Living in my village is the important thing,” he stated.

“Everyone wants to return,” he noted. However, many cannot afford transportation in a country where 90 percent of the population lives in poverty.

“There is nothing here – no schools, no health clinics, no water and no electricity,” al-Khatib said while sitting on the ground in his tent near what remains of his home.

The conflict, which erupted in 2011 following al-Assad’s brutal suppression of antigovernment protests, killed more than 500,000 people and displaced half of Syria’s pre-war population either internally or abroad, with many seeking refuge in Idlib province.

According to the International Organization for Migration, more than six million people remain internally displaced.

United States President Donald Trump commuted the federal drugs-and-extortion sentence of former Chicago gang leader, Larry Hoover, on Wednesday. Hoover has been serving multiple life sentences following both state and federal convictions over the past five decades.

For his federal conviction, Hoover is currently being held at the ADX Florence prison, a federal prison formally known as the United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum Facility, in Florence, Colorado.

Commuting a sentence means reducing its length or severity, or ending it entirely. The US president has the power to commute federal sentences, but not state sentences.

Here is what we know.

Who is Larry Hoover and why was his sentence commuted?

Hoover, 74, is the cofounder of Gangster Disciples, one of Chicago’s most powerful gangs.

In a two-page order issued on Wednesday, the Trump administration commuted his federal sentence, considering it served “with no further fines, restitution, probation or other conditions” and ordering his immediate release, according to a copy of the document from Hoover’s legal team seen by The Chicago Tribune.

Hoover’s lawyers said the order was a vindication of their attempts to have their client’s sentence reduced.

Lawyers Jennifer Bonjean and Justin Moore said in a statement: “The Courts have demonstrated a complete unwillingness to consider Mr Hoover’s considerable growth and complete rehabilitation. Despite the Court’s unwillingness to do the right thing, Mr Hoover has been able to keep his voice alive through the incredible work of many advocates and supporters. Thankfully, Mr Hoover’s pleas were heard by President Trump who took action to deliver justice for Mr Hoover.”

Lobbying for Hoover’s pardon has mounted since Trump appointed Alice Johnson as his “pardon tsar” in February this year. Johnson was a non-violent drug offender and was sentenced to life in prison in a drug conspiracy case, but was pardoned by Trump in 2020.

What was Hoover convicted of?

Hoover has been convicted on both state charges and federal charges. A federal crime is a violation of the US Constitution, possibly spanning multiple states, while a state crime is one that breaks a state law.

He was convicted in 1973 on state charges in Illinois for the murder of 19-year-old drug dealer William “Pooky” Young and sentenced to 200 years in prison.

Online state prison records show that Hoover was an inmate at Dixon Correctional Center in western Illinois from 1974. He was accused of continuing to direct the Gangster Disciples from behind bars.

In 1997, Hoover was convicted on federal charges of extortion, federal drug conspiracy and continuing to engage in a criminal enterprise. Hoover has spent nearly three decades in solitary confinement at ADX Florence, a maximum security prison in Colorado, according to his lawyers.

What crimes has the Gangster Disciples gang been involved in?

According to court documents, Hoover was one of the leaders of the gang between 1970 and 1995. The documents state that under Hoover, the Gangster Disciples sold “great quantities of cocaine, heroin, and other drugs in Chicago”.

As of 1995, the gang was believed to have 30,000 members in Chicago and had spread to at least 35 other states, according to an article published by the US Department of Justice that year.

However, little is publicly known about the activities of the Gangster Disciples in recent years.

What are the conditions in the ADX Florence prison?

ADX Florence in Colorado is a super-max prison, or an administrative maximum (ADX) prison, a control unit prison with the highest level of security.

The prison opened in 1994. Prisoners are held in solitary confinement in 12-by-7ft (3.6-by-2 metre) cells with thick concrete walls, and cannot see each other. Inmates sleep on a thin mattress atop a concrete slab. The cells also have a sink, toilet and automated shower.

Prisoners may have access to televisions, books or arts-and-crafts materials. Human interaction is very limited in ADX prisons.

Is Larry Hoover free to leave prison now?

No, Hoover is still serving his 200-year state sentence following the 1973 Illinois murder conviction.

It is not known if or when Hoover might be moved to another prison – such as the Dixon Correctional Center, a medium-security prison in Illinois that opened in 1983 – now that his federal conviction has been commuted, to serve out his state convictions. In the past, Illinois Department of Corrections officials have suggested that Hoover complete his state sentence in federal prison, citing security concerns.

Is Hoover eligible for parole?

The online records at Dixon Correctional Center say that Hoover will not be eligible for parole until October 2062, when he will be 111 years old. It is not clear whether his parole date can be advanced.

Presidential clemency is reserved for federal crimes, and not state crimes, according to the US Congress website, so Trump cannot intervene. The power to commute state crimes rests in the hands of the governor of the state. The governor of Illinois is Democrat JB Pritzker, who has so far not spoken about Hoover, nor of any plans to grant him clemency.

What role have public figures played in this case?

Performer Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, has long advocated for the pardon of Hoover. In 2018, during Trump’s first term, Ye requested Trump pardon Hoover. On Ye’s 2021 album, Donda, a track called “Jesus Lord” features a vocal snippet from Hoover’s son, Larry Hoover Jr, thanking Ye for bringing up his father’s case in the Oval Office. “Free my father, Mr Larry Hoover Sr,” the junior Hoover is heard saying.

Rapper Drake also advocated for Hoover’s freedom. In 2021, Ye and Drake set personal tensions aside and collaborated on a “Free Hoover” concert in Los Angeles.

“WORDS CAN’T EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE FOR OUR DEVOTED ENDURING PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP FOR FREEING LARRY HOOVER,” Ye posted on X after the commutation order.

WORDS CAN’T EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE FOR OUR DEVOTED ENDURING PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP FOR FREEING LARRY HOOVER

— ye (@kanyewest) May 28, 2025

Why is Trump pardoning people now?

The exact reasoning for Hoover’s commutation is unclear. However, it comes amid a spree of commutations and pardons granted by Trump.

On Wednesday, Trump issued a pardon for former Republican Congressman Michael Grimm, who was convicted of tax fraud in 2015 and sentenced to several months in prison.

On Tuesday, the president pardoned reality television couple Todd and Julie Chrisley, who were convicted of tax evasion and defrauding banks of at least $30m in 2022. Todd Chrisley received a 12-year prison sentence, while his wife was sentenced to seven years.

Oklahoma City Thunder closed out the Minnesota Timberwolves in Game 5 and advanced to their first NBA Finals since 2012.

Even before the basket went in, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander spread his arms wide in celebration.

Cason Wallace left his right arm high in the air, waiting for the ball to drop through the basket.

Soon enough, inevitably, it did.

Wallace’s corner 3-pointer at the buzzer was the exclamation point on a dominant first quarter for Gilgeous-Alexander and the Oklahoma City Thunder, who rode the hot start to a 124-94 home win that ended the Western Conference finals in Game 5 on Wednesday.

Gilgeous-Alexander finished with 34 points, eight assists and seven rebounds as the Thunder closed out the best-of-seven series.

“I didn’t want to go back to Minnesota travel-wise and I wanted the fans to enjoy the moment with us,” Gilgeous-Alexander said.

The Thunder are headed to the NBA Finals for the first time since 2012 and the fifth time in franchise history. The first three appearances came when the club was based in Seattle.

Oklahoma City will host Game 1 of the finals against either the Indiana Pacers or the New York Knicks on June 5.

“Happy for this moment, but this isn’t our goal,” Gilgeous-Alexander said. “This isn’t the end of our road.”

Wednesday’s outcome was evident early, as the Thunder buried the Timberwolves under the weight of a stifling defence and playmaking by Gilgeous-Alexander, Jalen Williams and Chet Holmgren.

Oklahoma City put the game away quickly, leading by 17 after the first quarter and 33 at halftime.

The Timberwolves saw their season end in the Western Conference finals for the second consecutive year.

“I’m going to work my butt off this summer,” Timberwolves star Anthony Edwards said. “Nobody’s going to work harder than me this summer, I’ll tell you that much.”

Gilgeous-Alexander dished out five of his assists in the opening quarter as he again showed why he was selected as the NBA’s Most Valuable Player (MVP).

After the Timberwolves scored the game’s first hoop, Gilgeous-Alexander had a hand in all five Oklahoma City baskets during an 11-0 run that started the Thunder’s march towards the blowout.

In that stretch, Gilgeous-Alexander had four assists – three on Holmgren buckets – and drained a finger roll to start the separation.

On Monday, the Timberwolves started Game 4 red hot from the field but ultimately fell 128-126.

On Wednesday, Minnesota struggled on offence from the start, going just 1-for-11 from the field over the first five minutes.

Gilgeous-Alexander outscored Minnesota in the first quarter 12-9 and scored or assisted on 24 of the Thunder’s 26 first-quarter points.

Minnesota had more turnovers in the first half (14) than it did field goals (12). The Timberwolves finished with 21 turnovers.

Holmgren amassed 22 points and seven rebounds while Williams had 19 points, eight rebounds and five assists.

“These guys really make me feel like I’m a kid playing AAU basketball, like I’m 15 years old again,” Gilgeous-Alexander said. “It’s just fun. That’s what makes us really good. We have so much fun being out there together.”

Julius Randle led the Timberwolves with 24 points while Edwards scored 19 on 7-of-18 shooting.

“They dominated the game from the tip,” Edwards said. “Can’t do nothing but tip my hat to those guys. They came ready.”

Panel of judges finds the president overstepped his authority by imposing across-the-board duties on imports from trading partners.

A United States trade court has ruled that President Donald Trump exceeded his authority when he imposed blanket tariffs on imports from US trading partners, issuing a permanent injunction that immediately halts the tariffs and demands a government response within 10 days.

The Court of International Trade, based in New York, said the US Constitution grants Congress exclusive authority to regulate commerce with other countries that is not overridden by the president’s emergency powers to safeguard the US economy.

“The court does not pass upon the wisdom or likely effectiveness of the President’s use of tariffs as leverage,” a three-judge panel wrote on Wednesday. “That use is impermissible not because it is unwise or ineffective, but because [federal law] does not allow it.”

The ruling, if it stands, could derail Trump’s global trade strategy to use steep tariffs to wring concessions from trading partners. It creates deep uncertainty around multiple simultaneous negotiations with the European Union, China and many other countries.

The court struck down Trump’s tariff orders issued since January under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), a statute meant for addressing rare and extraordinary national emergencies. Tariffs introduced under other laws, such as those targeting specific industries like steel, autos and aluminium, were not addressed in this ruling.

The Trump administration swiftly filed an appeal, disputing the court’s jurisdiction. A White House spokesperson insisted trade imbalances posed a national crisis. “It is not for unelected judges to decide how to properly address a national emergency,” said Kush Desai, the White House deputy press secretary, defending Trump’s executive actions as necessary to protect US industry and security.

Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna, reporting from Washington, noted the court’s impartiality. “This particular court cannot be accused of being an activist one, as Trump and his followers have accused other courts that have ruled against him,” Hanna said. “One of the judges was appointed by Trump himself, another by former President Barack Obama and the third by the former Republican President Ronald Reagan.”

The Court of International Trade handles matters relating to customs and trade law. Its rulings can be challenged in the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and eventually taken to the Supreme Court.

Financial analyst Robert Scott told Al Jazeera the tariffs failed to deliver tangible results even in Trump’s first term. “Most of those tariffs did not see the US trade position improve,” he said. “US trade deficits continued to grow and China’s exports to the world kept rising. They simply rerouted goods through other countries.”

The ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small US businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties, and the other by 12 US states.

The companies, which range from a New York wine and spirits importer to a Virginia-based maker of educational kits and musical instruments, have said the tariffs will hurt their ability to do business.

“There is no question here of narrowly tailored relief; if the challenged Tariff Orders are unlawful as to Plaintiffs they are unlawful as to all,” the judges wrote in their decision.

At least five other legal challenges to the tariffs are pending.

Ngugi’s work critiqued both British colonialism in Kenya and postcolonial Kenyan society.

Renowned Kenyan writer Ngugi wa Thiong’o has died at age 87, his family members have announced.

“It is with a heavy heart that we announce the passing of our dad, Ngugi wa Thiong’o,” his daughter Wanjiku Wa Ngugi wrote on Facebook on Wednesday.

“He lived a full life, fought a good fight,” she said.

At the time of his death, Ngugi was reportedly receiving kidney dialysis treatments, but his immediate cause of death is still unknown.

Born in Kenya in 1938, Ngugi will be remembered as one of Africa’s most important postcolonial writers. Formative events in Ngugi’s early life included the brutal Mau Mau war that swept British-ruled Kenya in the 1950s.

Ngugi’s work was equally critical of the British colonial era and the postcolonial society that followed Kenya’s independence in 1963. Other topics in his work covered the intersection between language, culture, history, and identity.

Ngugi made a mark for himself in the 1970s when he decided to switch from writing in English to the Kikuyu and Swahili languages – a controversial decision at the time.

“We all thought he was mad… and brave at the same time,” Kenyan writer David Maillu told the AFP news agency.

“We asked ourselves who would buy the books.”

One of his most famous works, “Decolonising the Mind”, was published in 1986 while living abroad. The book argues that it is “impossible to liberate oneself while using the language of oppressors”, AFP reports.

Besides holding the position of acclaimed writer, Ngugi was a prisoner of conscience. In 1977, he was jailed in Kenya for staging a play deemed critical of contemporary society.

He once described the country’s new elite class as “the death of hopes, the death of dreams and the death of beauty”.

In 1982, Ngugi went into self-imposed exile in the UK following a ban on theatre groups and performances in his home country. He later moved to the US, where he worked as a professor of comparative literature at the University of California, Irvine. He also continued writing a range of works, including essays, memoirs and novels about Kenya.

Following news of Ngugi’s death, praise for his life and work quickly appeared online.

“My condolences to the family and friends of Professor Ngugi wa Thiong’o, a renowned literary giant and scholar, a son of the soil and great patriot whose footprints are indelible,” Kenya’s opposition leader Martha Karua wrote on X.

“Thank you Mwalimu [teacher] for your freedom writing,” wrote Amnesty International’s Kenya branch on X. “Having already earned his place in Kenyan history, he transitions from mortality to immortality.”

Margaretta wa Gacheru, a sociologist and former student of Ngugi, said the author was a national icon.

“To me, he’s like a Kenyan Tolstoy, in the sense of being a storyteller, in the sense of his love of the language and panoramic view of society, his description of the landscape of social relations, of class and class struggles,” she said.

By Tina Teng

Published on
29/05/2025 – 7:25 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Nvidia reported first-quarter earnings for fiscal year 2026 that exceeded market expectations and provided an upbeat outlook for the current quarter. This comes despite an estimated $8 billion (€7.1 billion) loss due to US chip export restrictions affecting sales to China.

Nvidia’s share price jumped nearly 5% in after-hours trading, placing it just 8% below its all-time high in January. Year-to-date, the stock is set to return to a positive return amid the price surge. Nvidia is now the world’s biggest company, surpassing Microsoft and Apple in market capitalisation.

“Investors entered this quarter looking for signs that Nvidia could alleviate short-term concerns. What they received was a clear message that demand remains robust,” said Josh Gilbert, a market analyst at eToro Australia.

Upbeat earnings results

Sales revenue from Nvidia’s core business, data centres, increased by 73% year-on-year to $39.1 billion (€34.7 billion), reaching a new record. However, this represented a deceleration from 93% growth in the previous quarter. Despite the slower pace, the result aligned with market expectations, as some analysts had anticipated weaker figures due to regulatory headwinds.

Overall revenue rose 69% to $44.1 billion (€39.2 billion), while earnings per share came in at $0.96 (€0.85), both ahead of expectations. CEO Jensen Huang attributed the sustained growth to strong global demand for artificial intelligence (AI), particularly from major cloud service providers. Nvidia’s most advanced AI chip, Blackwell, “is now in full-scale production across system makers and cloud service providers,” said Huang.

“Global demand for Nvidia’s AI infrastructure is incredibly strong. AI inference token generation has surged tenfold in just one year, and as AI agents become mainstream, the demand for AI computing will accelerate. Countries around the world are recognising AI as essential infrastructure—just like electricity and the internet—and Nvidia stands at the centre of this profound transformation,” he added.

Impact of China-related restrictions

The company expects revenue of $45 billion (€40 billion), plus or minus 2%, for the current quarter. “This outlook reflects a loss in H20 revenue of approximately $8.0 billion due to the recent export control limitations,” it stated.

The US government required Nvidia to obtain export licences for its H20 GPUs destined for China during the first quarter. Although the H20 chips had previously been approved, the new rules led to $4.5 billion (€4 billion) in write-downs due to excess inventory. Without this, the company would have generated an additional $2.5 billion (€2.2 billion) in sales.

As a result, Nvidia’s gross margin for the first quarter stood at 61%. It would have been 71.3% had the charges not occurred. “The $50 billion China market is effectively closed to

the US industry,” Huang said. “As a result, we are taking a multibillion-dollar write-off on inventory that cannot be sold or repurposed.”

Nvidia expects a non-GAAP gross margin of 72.0%, plus or minus 50 basis points, for the current quarter. For context, the margin was 73.5% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 79% during the same quarter of the previous fiscal year.

In an interview with Bloomberg TV, Huang noted that Nvidia is exploring alternatives to the H20 chip. However, the company must obtain approval from the US government for any such measures.

US factory and Middle East venture

Nvidia is among the tech giants supporting President Donald Trump’s ambitious AI initiatives in the United States, announced in January. The company also unveiled a partnership with Saudi Arabia’s HUMAIN to build AI factories in the kingdom during a recent visit to the region that coincided with Trump’s trip. These developments were highlighted in the earnings report in the section for data centre.

“While sales in China are clouded by export restrictions, the Middle East looks set to become the new launchpad for Nvidia’s next phase of growth,” Gilbert added.

UN Office on Drugs and Crime says ‘explosive growth’ in synthetic drug trade led to record seizures of methamphetamine in East and Southeast Asia in 2024.

Drug production and trafficking has surged in the infamous “Golden Triangle“, where the borders of Myanmar, Laos and Thailand meet, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) has warned in a new report on the scale of the regional trade in synthetic drugs.

The UNODC said a record 236 tonnes of methamphetamine were seized last year in the East and Southeast Asia regions, marking a 24 percent increase in the amount of the narcotic seized compared with the previous year.

While Thailand became the first country in the region to seize more than 100 tonnes of methamphetamine in a single year last year – interdicting a total of 130 tonnes – trafficking of the drug from Myanmar’s lawless Shan State is rapidly expanding in Laos and Cambodia, the UNODC said.

“The 236 tons represent only the amount seized; much more methamphetamine is actually reaching the market,” the UNODC’s acting regional representative for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, Benedikt Hofmann, said in a statement.

“While these seizures reflect, in part, successful law enforcement efforts, we are clearly seeing unprecedented levels of methamphetamine production and trafficking from the Golden Triangle, in particular Shan State,” Hofmann said.

Transnational drug gangs operating in East and Southeast Asia are also showing “remarkable agility” in countering attempts by regional law enforcement to crack down on the booming trade in synthetic drugs.

Myanmar’s grinding civil war, which erupted in mid-2021, has also provided favourable conditions for an expansion of the drug trade.

“Since the military takeover in Myanmar in February 2021, flows of drugs from the country have surged across not only East and Southeast Asia, but also increasingly into South Asia, in particular Northeast India,” the report states.

The UNODC’s Inshik Sim, the lead analyst for Southeast Asia and the Pacific, said countries neighbouring Myanmar are becoming key trafficking routes for drugs produced in the Golden Triangle.

“The trafficking route connecting Cambodia with Myanmar, primarily through Laos PDR, has been rapidly expanding,” Sim said, using the acronym that is part of Laos’s official name, the People’s Democratic Republic.

“Another increasingly significant corridor involves maritime trafficking routes linking Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines, with Sabah in Malaysia serving as a key transit hub,” he said.

Evolving, cell-based transnational organized crime groups based in East and #SoutheastAsia are increasingly adopting technologies across the entire drug supply chain while converging with other organized crime activities.

Read more in our latest report: https://t.co/oL416cuZJ3 pic.twitter.com/pqUfX5FmnF

— UNODC Southeast Asia-Pacific (@UNODC_SEAP) May 28, 2025

The UNODC report also notes that while most countries in the region have reported an overall increase in the use of methamphetamine and ketamine – a powerful sedative – the number of drug users in the older age group has grown in some nations.

“Some countries in the region, such as Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand, have reported consecutive increases in the number of older drug users, while the number of younger users has declined,” the UNODC report states, adding that the age trend needed to be studied further.

The UNODC’s Hofmann said the decline in the number of younger drug users admitted for treatment may be due to targeted drug use prevention campaigns.

“It will be key for the region to increase investment in both prevention and supply reduction strategies,” he added.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Musk announced the news on X, where he declared his controversial government cost-cutting measures a victory.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk has announced that he is leaving the administration of United States President Donald Trump, where he led a months-long project to cut costs in the federal government.

“As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending,” he wrote on the social media platform on Wednesday evening.

“The @DOGE mission will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government,” Musk said, referring to the Department of Government Efficiency, which he was a top figure in.

An unnamed White House official confirmed the news with the Associated Press.

Musk’s departure comes just days after he publicly expressed concerns about Trump’s flagship “big, beautiful bill”– a 1,000-page piece of legislation that extends the president’s 2017 tax cuts while adding work requirements for food assistance and Medicaid.

The bill also allocates spending for some of Trump’s signature projects, like building a wall between the US and Mexico and raising funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

The “big, beautiful bill” passed in the House of Representatives last week and will next be discussed by the Senate.

As my scheduled time as a Special Government Employee comes to an end, I would like to thank President @realDonaldTrump for the opportunity to reduce wasteful spending.

The @DOGE mission will only strengthen over time as it becomes a way of life throughout the government.

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 29, 2025

“I was disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not just decreases it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,” Musk told the news programme CBS Sunday Morning, using an acronym for the “Department of Government Efficiency.”

The billionaire joined the Trump Administration in January with the promise of slashing at least $1tril from the US federal budget, although the DOGE website shows that it has only achieved around $175bn in savings, or $1,088.96 per US taxpayer.

If passed in its current format, Trump’s spending bill would cancel out DOGE’s work because it is expected to raise the US deficit by $3.9tril by 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

“I think a bill can be big, or it can be beautiful, but I don’t know if it can be both. My personal opinion,” Musk told CBS.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

The US will also ‘enhance scrutiny of all future visa applications’ from China and Hong Kong, the State Department said.

The United States will “aggressively revoke” the visas of Chinese students studying in the US, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced, as the Trump administration continues its crackdown on foreign students enrolled at higher education institutions in the country.

Rubio announced the shock move both in a post on X, as well as a statement published late on Wednesday titled “New Visa Policies Put America First, Not China”.

“Under President Trump’s leadership, the US State Department will work with the Department of Homeland Security to aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, including those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields,” the statement said.

“We will also revise visa criteria to enhance scrutiny of all future visa applications from the People’s Republic of China and Hong Kong,” it added.

Rubio’s announcement added to the uncertainty for international students in the US, who have faced intensifying scrutiny over recent months amid the administration’s wider assault on higher education institutions.

On Tuesday, the White House also temporarily suspended the processing of visas for foreign students, ordering embassies and consulates not to allow any additional student or exchange visas “until further guidance is issued”.

The State Department also said it plans to “issue guidance on expanded social media vetting for all such applications”.

US electronic design automation software makers were told via letters to stop supplies to China, the FT reported.

United States President Donald Trump’s administration has ordered US firms that offer software used to design semiconductors to stop selling their services to Chinese groups, the Financial Times has reported, citing people familiar with the move.

Electronic design automation software makers, which include Cadence, Synopsys and Siemens EDA, were told via letters from the US Commerce Department to stop supplying their tech, the report, which was published on Wednesday, said.

A spokesperson for the Commerce Department declined to comment on the letters but said it is reviewing exports of strategic significance to China, while noting that, “in some cases, Commerce has suspended existing export licenses or imposed additional license requirements while the review is pending”.

Shares of Cadence, which declined to comment, closed down by 10.7 percent, while shares of Synopsys fell by 9.6 percent.

Synopsys CEO Sassine Ghazi said in a call with analysts that the company had not received a letter, nor had it heard from the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry (BIS) and Security, which enforces export controls.

“We are aware of the reporting and speculations, but Synopsys has not received a notice from BIS. So, our guidance that we are reiterating for the full year, reflects our current understanding of BIS export restrictions as well as our expectations for year-over-year decline in China. We have not received a letter,” Ghazi said.

After the market closed, Synopsys reaffirmed its revenue forecast for 2025. Its shares and those of Cadence bounced back 3.5 percent in trading after the close.

Siemens EDA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The software of these firms is used to design both high-end processors as well as simpler products.

While the scope of the policy change described in the report was not immediately clear, any move to strip the software makers of their Chinese customers could deal a blow to their bottom line and to their Chinese chip design customers, which heavily rely on top-of-the-line US software.

“They are the true choke point,” said a former Commerce Department official, who added that rules restricting the export of EDA tools to China have been under consideration since the first Trump administration, but were ruled out as too aggressive.

Synopsys relies on China for about 16 percent of its annual revenue, while China accounts for about 12 percent of annual revenue for Cadence.

Synopsys, which partners with chip companies such as Nvidia, Qualcomm and Intel, provides software and hardware used for designing advanced processors.

At least 10 Palestinians desperately seeking aid from a contentious and heavily criticised United States-backed organisation have been killed by Israeli forces in Gaza over the last 48 hours, according to the besieged enclave’s Government Media Office.

The updated toll on Wednesday comes a day after a harrowing video showed thousands of starving Palestinians rushing to get aid, with many of them herded into cage-like lines, from the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) distribution point in Rafah in southern Gaza.

In a statement, the Government Media Office said Israeli forces “opened direct fire on hungry Palestinian civilians who had gathered to receive aid” at the distribution site, wounding at least 62 people.

It was not immediately clear exactly how many incidents of gunfire occurred or on which days the 10 Palestinians were fatally shot, but there were deaths on both days.

“These locations were transformed into death traps under the occupation’s gunfire,” the media office said, decrying the killings as a “heinous crime”.

For its part, the GHF said it had opened a second of a planned four aid distribution sites in Gaza on Wednesday.

The centres are part of an aid delivery scheme that has been roundly condemned by United Nations officials and the humanitarian community, who have repeatedly said that life-saving aid could be adequately and safely scaled up in Gaza if Israel would allow access to aid and let those organisations that have decades of experience handle the flow.

Speaking earlier in the day, the head of the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA, decried the US-backed delivery model as a “distraction from atrocities” and called on Israel to allow the UN-backed humanitarian system to “do its life-saving work now”.

The message was echoed by several members of the UN Security Council during a meeting in New York discussing the conflict, with Algeria, France and the United Kingdom among those appealing for Israel to allow unfettered aid deliveries.

Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian ambassador to the UN, said Israel was using “aid as a weapon of war”.

Reporting from UN headquarters, Al Jazeera’s Kristen Saloomey said that Sigrid Kaag, the UN’s special coordinator for Middle East peace, and Feroze Sidhwa, a surgeon who recently went on a humanitarian mission to Gaza, were among those who addressed the council.

“The message from both of these experts was again calling for a ceasefire and the full resumption of aid into the Gaza Strip,” she said.

Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, criticised the UN for what he said were “attempts to block access to aid” and demanded a retraction from Tom Fletcher, the UN’s humanitarian chief, for accusing Israel of committing genocide.

Al Jazeera’s senior political analyst Marwan Bishara said the attacks levied by Danon should come as no surprise.

“They are on the defensive, knowing all too well that they lost their public relations campaign and that their reputation around the world is in the mud,” he said, referring to Israel’s near-daily bombardment and siege of Gaza.

The alternate US representative at the UN, John Kelley, said that the UN should “work with the GHF and Israel to reach an agreement on how to operationalise this system in a way that works for all”.

He maintained that the GHF was “independent” and developed to “provide a secure mechanism for the delivery of aid to those in need”.

Relentless Israeli attacks

As the debate over aid access raged, Israel’s punishing attacks continued across Gaza, with rights observers warning of an even worsening humanitarian situation.

At least 63 people were killed in Israeli attacks since the early hours of Wednesday, according to medical sources speaking to Al Jazeera Arabic, bringing the death toll since October 7, 2023, to at least 54,084 Palestinians, with more than 123,308 wounded.

The ministry added that only 17 hospitals in Gaza remained partially functioning, with critical shortages of essential medicines and oxygen supplies.

Separately, the Red Cross reported that its field hospital in southern Gaza’s al-Mawasi area came under Israeli fire early on Wednesday, causing panic and injuries among patients there.

In an open letter, Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP), Oxfam and other nonprofit groups called for “full, independent and international investigations into the attacks on healthcare in Gaza as violations of international humanitarian law”.

The UN’s World Food Programme, meanwhile, reported that its warehouse in central Gaza’s Deir el-Balah had been broken into by hungry people “in search of food supplies”. Preliminary reports indicate that at least four people were killed amid the stampede and gunfire, though the cause of the latter was not immediately clear.

The agency said that increasing aid was “the only way to reassure people that they will not starve”.

Al Jazeera’s Hani Mahmoud reported from Gaza City that the search for food has proven deadly, even away from crowded distribution areas.

“For example, in the past couple of hours, two people were reported killed in the Shujayea neighbourhood [of Gaza City]. They were killed trying to get to their homes,” he said.

“They were forced to evacuate in the past few weeks. They left everything behind. All of their belongings, all of their food supplies that they managed to get … [were] inside the house.”

Ceasefire remains elusive

As the attacks have continued, a breakthrough for a more lasting agreement to end the fighting has remained elusive.

Still, US President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, on Wednesday said he had “very good feelings” about soon reaching a long-term solution.

That came shortly after Hamas said it had reached an agreement with Witkoff on a general framework for a permanent ceasefire, a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza and the unhindered entry of humanitarian aid.

The framework appears at odds with the position of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has said the Israeli military would remain in Gaza indefinitely, continuing to control aid access and pursuing the complete defeat of Hamas.

Speaking to Israel’s parliament on Wednesday, Netanyahu listed top Hamas officials killed throughout the war. The list included Mohammed Sinwar, the brother and successor of killed Hamas military leader Yahya Sinwar.

Hamas has not yet confirmed Mohammed Sinwar’s death.

United States President Donald Trump has brushed aside criticism of his wide-ranging budget bill — known as the One Big Beautiful Bill — from a high-profile source, government adviser Elon Musk.

On Wednesday, at a swearing-in ceremony in the Oval Office, Trump faced questions about Musk’s comments, which suggested the bill would balloon the national debt.

The Republican leader responded with a degree of ambivalence, though he staunchly defended the bill’s tax cuts.

“We will be negotiating that bill, and I’m not happy about certain aspects of it, but I’m thrilled by other aspects of it,” Trump said. “That’s the way they go.”

The budget bill clocks in at over a thousand pages, and it contains a range of domestic policy priorities for the Trump administration.

That includes legislation cementing some of the tax cuts Trump championed during his first term as president, in 2017. It would also increase the funds available for Trump’s “mass deportation” effort and heightened security along the US-Mexico border.

Some $46.5bn, for instance, would be earmarked to renew construction of the southern border wall and other barriers, another hallmark of Trump’s first term in office.

But to pay for those tax cuts and policy priorities, the bill proposes measures that remain controversial on both sides of the political spectrum.

One provision, for instance, would increase the federal debt limit by $4 trillion. Others would impose strict work requirements on programmes like Medicaid — a government health insurance for low-income Americans — and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), sometimes known as food stamps.

Those work requirements are expected to bar thousands of people from accessing those safety-net programmes, allowing for cost savings. But critics fear those barriers will drive some families deeper into poverty.

In a preview of an interview with the TV show CBS Sunday Morning, Musk expressed frustration with the sheer cost of the bill, echoing criticism from fiscal conservatives.

He also accused the “Big Beautiful Bill” of setting back the progress he made as leader of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a task force Trump established to pare back “wasteful” spending.

“I was, like, disappointed to see the massive spending bill, frankly, which increases the budget deficit, not decrease it, and undermines the work that the DOGE team is doing,” Musk told CBS, dressed in an “Occupy Mars” T-shirt.

“I think a bill can be big or it can be beautiful,” he added. “I don’t know if it could be both. My personal opinion.”

This is not the first time that Musk has spoken out against a US budget bill. In December, under former President Joe Biden, Musk rallied public outrage against another piece of budget legislation that weighed in at over a thousand pages, calling on Congress to “kill the bill“.

Musk’s latest comments, however, signal a potentially widening fracture between himself and the Trump White House.

Up until recently, Musk, a billionaire thought to be the world’s richest man, has played a prominent role in Trump’s government. He even helped him secure a second term as president.

In 2024, Musk endorsed Trump’s re-election effort, joined him on the campaign trail and donated hundreds of millions of dollars to the Republican leader and his political allies.

For his part, Trump returned Musk’s warm embrace. Days after he won a second term as president, Trump announced that Musk would join his incoming administration as head of DOGE.

But Musk’s role in the White House has remained ambiguous, and highly controversial. Though Musk is a regular presence at presidential cabinet meetings, he has not had to undergo a Senate confirmation hearing.

The White House has described him as a “special government employee”, a temporary role given to consultants from business fields. Normally, those employees can only work with the government for 130 days per year, and they are barred from using their government roles for financial gain.

But critics have argued that the length of Musk’s tenure at the White House has not been clearly established and that he has indeed leveraged his position for personal profit. In March, for instance, Trump held a news conference to show off models from Musk’s car company Tesla.

Musk’s other business ventures, including the rocket company SpaceX and the satellite communications firm Starlink, have also raised conflict-of-interest questions, given that they are competitors for government contracts.

Media reports have indicated that there have been behind-the-scenes clashes between Musk and other members of the Trump White House that may have cooled relations between the president and his billionaire backer. But Trump has so far avoided criticising Musk publicly.

On Wednesday, for instance, Trump pivoted from the question about Musk’s comments to attacking Democratic members of Congress, who refuse to back his signature budget bill.

“ Remember, we have zero Democrat votes because they’re bad people,” Trump said. “There’s something wrong with them.”

A version of the budget bill narrowly passed the House of Representatives last week. Currently, it is being considered by the Senate. But with a 53-seat majority in the 100-person chamber, Senate Republicans can only afford to lose three votes if they hope to pass the bill.

Trump renewed his call for party unity on Wednesday, despite concerns from his fellow Republicans.

“We have to get a lot of votes,” Trump said. “We need to get a lot of support, and we have a lot of support.”

Some Republicans have voiced opposition to the increase in the national debt. Others fear the effects that Medicaid restrictions might have on their constituents.

Trump himself has said he opposes any cuts to Medicaid. But he has tried to frame the bill’s tax cuts as a boon to lower-income people, though critics point out those cuts are poised to deliver the biggest savings to the wealthy.

“We’ll have the lowest tax rate we’ve ever had in the history of our country,” Trump said. “Tremendous amounts of benefits are going to the middle-income people of our country, low- and middle-income people of our country.”

On World Hunger Day, Palestinians continue to starve in Gaza, a day after a chaotic rush on an Israeli- and US-backed distribution point delivering the first aid since Israel’s March blockade. Some Israelis oppose even this minimal relief. Here’s what they’ve been saying.

Aid workers and activists are fearful that new regulations announced by Sudan’s army-backed government will lead to a crackdown on local relief volunteers, exacerbating the catastrophic hunger crisis affecting 25 million people across the country.

A directive announced by Khartoum state on its official Facebook page this month said all relief initiatives in the state must register with the Humanitarian Aid Commission (HAC), a government body that oversees humanitarian operations in Sudan.

The HAC was given expanded powers to register, monitor and – critics argue – crack down on local and Western aid groups by former leader Omar al-Bashir in 2006, according to aid groups, local relief volunteers and experts.

“HAC is trying to monitor and restrict the work of ERRs by forcing us to register, … and I fear they will arrest volunteers if we keep working but don’t register,” Ahmed*, a local volunteer in Khartoum, said, referring to the Emergency Response Rooms, grassroots committees that are spearheading the humanitarian response in Sudan.

Khaled Abdelraheem Ahmed, the HAC commissioner for the state of Khartoum, confirmed the new directive to Al Jazeera.

He said registration requires paying a fee of roughly $800 and submitting a list of names of the employees or volunteers in each relief initiative.

“[Nobody] is allowed to carry out humanitarian activities without registering,” Abdelraheem said.

Indispensable relief

The new directive is raising concern among ERRs. They have been instrumental in feeding, protecting and rescuing civilians from attacks since the civil war erupted between Sudan’s regular army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in April 2023.

The ERRs maintain a public stance of neutrality in an effort to preserve humanitarian access irrespective of who controls the areas they operate in at any given time.

Still, they have been attacked by both sides throughout the war.

Local activists, foreign aid workers and experts now suspect that the HAC is trying to register ERRs in Khartoum to try to monitor and coopt their activities and profit from their already meagre budgets.

Any constraints or impediments to their work could have devastating consequences for civilians in Khartoum, said Kholood Khair, a Sudan expert and the founder of the Confluence Advisory think tank.

“In Khartoum, it’s one meal a day for a lot of people in a lot of areas,” she told Al Jazeera.

“If people start missing that one meal because [ERR] volunteers are not turning up because they don’t feel safe enough to [show up and feed them], then obviously that means that famine levels will go through the roof,” Khair added.

Experts and aid workers previously told Al Jazeera that they consider the HAC an outfit for military intelligence.

Al Jazeera contacted army spokesperson Nabil Abdullah to comment on the accusations against the HAC.

He did not respond before publication.

The head of the HAC, Najm al-din Musa, previously denied allegations that the commission was involved in aid diversion, telling Al Jazeera that they were “lies”.

Politicising aid

The HAC has long been accused of imposing bureaucratic impediments to prevent international aid groups from reaching regions outside the army’s control.

It often forces aid agencies to apply for multiple – seemingly endless – permissions from various ministries and security branches as a way to significantly delay or outright block access to regions outside the army’s control and in urgent need, aid workers previously told Al Jazeera.

This practice has led experts, global relief workers and human rights groups to accuse the army of using food and aid as a weapon of war.

Yet Hamid Khalafallah, an expert on Sudan’s grassroots movements and a PhD candidate at Manchester University in the United Kingdom, believes the HAC is further politicising aid by forcing ERRs to register.

“[The HAC] wants to control the programming of [the ERRs] and make sure that it matches their priorities, … which are obviously politicised and follow the guidelines of the de facto [army] government,” he told Al Jazeera.

In addition, local relief workers and experts fear that if ERR members in Khartoum register with the HAC, then their names could be handed over to intelligence branches, exposing them to unwanted harassment or arrest.

Shortly after the army recaptured most of Khartoum in March, a number of “hit lists” circulated over social media, Khalafallah said.

The lists accused hundreds of civilians who did not have the resources to flee from the RSF while it controlled Khartoum of cooperating with the group.

The names of some ERR members were on the lists.

Competition and autonomy

The army has created some of its own humanitarian committees called “Karama” (Dignity), which have been providing some services to civilians in Khartoum, four local relief workers told Al Jazeera without providing details.

The relief workers did say that the Karama committees have not tried to obstruct the work of the ERRs.

Local volunteers still worry that the Karama committees were designed to help the army build a loyal constituency through aid provision.

“The [army] wants the services to go through the people they appoint. They will handle distribution of food, medicare and whatever else,” said Noon*, a local volunteer from one of the ERRs.

“It’s a type of propaganda,” she told Al Jazeera.

ERR volunteers worry that if they register with the HAC, then they will be prohibited from aiding their communities if they ever come back under RSF control.

This could significantly harm the trust that ERR volunteers have built with their communities since the start of the war, they said.

Others worry that the HAC will try to restrict and impede the work of ERRs once they register as part of a broader ploy to empower Karama committees at their expense.

However, experts and international aid workers both said the army is not doing enough to repair basic services in a city that has been destroyed by the RSF.

In contrast, the ERRs have been effective in acting quickly to mitigate the humanitarian catastrophe in Sudan because volunteers do not need approval from a state authority before making life-saving decisions, Khalafallah said.

“This requirement [to register] with HAC is absolutely damaging for ERRs because the work they do is based on being totally independent and … [on having a model] where accountability looks downwards to the beneficiaries,” he said.

Profiteering off aid?

The ERRs are struggling to raise enough money to support their communities.

They now worry they will be forced to cough up money to the HAC if they have to register with it.

“We know that HAC will take a cut from our budgets. … This is the main problem [with registering] really,” Noon said.

The HAC has a long history of shaking down aid agencies for money. Even before the war, they forced aid groups to hire HAC staff to deliver aid and sit in on job interviews.

One foreign relief worker who did not wish to be named said international aid agencies who have supported ERRs since the start of the war will likely continue to do so quietly whether they register or not. However, the source warned that United Nations agencies may make concessions to the HAC.

“What the UN agrees to [with the HAC] will have an impact on everybody else, and it will undermine the position of everybody else,” the source said.

Daniel Tengo, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) spokesperson for Sudan, told Al Jazeera that the UN has not decided whether it will maintain or cease support to ERRs that do not register with the HAC.

He added that OCHA is in touch with ERRs and waiting for them to make a decision.

“OCHA is aware of the recent communication from Khartoum HAC and has reached out to the coordination body of the Emergency Response Rooms to better understand the implications,” he said.

“ERRs confirmed awareness of [HAC’s directive] and indicated that internal discussions are ongoing on how best to respond,” Tengo told Al Jazeera.

Local relief workers in Khartoum explained that each ERR in Khartoum will deliberate among its own members and then share their opinion with other ERRs.

In the end, they will reach a unanimous decision.

“Maybe we will find another creative solution,” said Salma*, a local volunteer.

“We are just trying to find a way to keep working without creating more fights and problems,” she told Al Jazeera.

*The names of local aid workers have been changed due to safety concerns.

Many of the world’s poorest countries are due to make record debt repayments to China in 2025 on loans extended a decade ago, at the peak of Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative, a report by the Sydney-based Lowy Institute think tank has found.

Under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a state-backed infrastructure investment programme launched in 2013, Beijing lent billions of dollars to build ports, highways and railroads to connect Asia, Africa and the Americas.

But new lending is drying up. In 2025, debt repayments owed to China by developing countries will amount to $35bn. Of that, $22bn is set to be paid by 75 of the world’s poorest countries, putting health and education spending at risk, Lowy concluded.

“For the rest of this decade, China will be more debt collector than banker to the developing world,” said Riley Duke, the report’s author.

“Developing countries are grappling with a tidal wave of debt repayments and interest costs to China,” Duke said.

What did the report say?

China’s BRI, the biggest multilateral development programme ever undertaken by a single country, is one of President Xi Jinping’s hallmark foreign policy initiatives.

It focuses primarily on developing country infrastructure projects like power plants, roads and ports, which struggle to receive financial backing from Western financial institutions.

The BRI has turned China into the largest global supplier of bilateral loans, peaking at about $50bn in 2016 – more than all Western creditors combined.

According to the Lowy report, however, paying off these debts is now jeopardising public spending.

“Pressure from Chinese state lending, along with surging repayments to a range of international private creditors, is putting enormous financial strain on developing economies.”

High debt servicing costs can suffocate spending on public services like education and healthcare, and limit their ability to respond to economic and climate shocks.

The 46 least developed countries (LDCs) spent a significant share – about 20 percent – of their tax revenues on external public debt in 2023. Lowy’s report implies this will increase even more this year.

For context, Germany used 8.4 percent of its budget to repay debt in 2023.

Lowy also raised questions about whether China will use these debts for “geopolitical leverage” in the Global South, especially with Washington slashing foreign aid under President Donald Trump.

“As Beijing shifts into the role of debt collector, Western governments remain internally focused, with aid declining and multilateral support waning,” the report said.

While Chinese lending is also beginning to slow down across the developing world, the report said there were two areas that seemed to be bucking the trend.

The first was in nations such as Honduras, Burkina Faso and Solomon Islands, which received massive new loans after switching diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China.

The other was in countries such as Indonesia and Brazil, where China has signed new loan deals to secure critical minerals and metals for electric batteries.

How has China responded?

Beijing’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it was “not aware of the specifics” of the report but that “China’s investment and financing cooperation with developing countries abides by international conventions”.

Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said “a small number of countries” sought to blame Beijing for miring developing nations in debt but that “falsehoods cannot cover up the truth”.

For years, the BRI has been criticised by Western commentators as a way for Beijing to entrap countries with unserviceable debt.

An often-cited example is the Hambantota port – located along vital east-west international shipping routes – in southern Sri Lanka.

Unable to repay a $1.4bn loan for the port’s construction, Colombo was forced to lease the facility to a Chinese firm for 99 years in 2017.

China’s government has denied accusations it deliberately creates debt traps, and recipient nations have also pushed back, saying China was often a more reliable partner than the West and offered crucial loans when others refused.

Still, China publishes little data on its BRI scheme, and the Lowy Institute said its estimates, based on World Bank data, may underestimate the full scale of China’s lending.

In 2021, AidData – a US-based international development research lab – estimated that China was owed a “hidden debt” of about $385bn.

Does the Lowy report lack ‘context’?

Challenging the “debt-trap” narrative, the Rhodium consulting group looked at 38 Chinese debt renegotiations with 24 developing countries in 2019 and concluded that Beijing’s leverage was limited, with many of the renegotiations resolved in favour of the borrower.

According to Rhodium, developing countries had restructured roughly $50bn of Chinese loans in the decade before its 2019 study was published, with loan extensions, cheaper financing and debt forgiveness the most frequent outcomes.

Elsewhere, a 2020 study by the China Africa Research Initiative at Johns Hopkins University found that, between 2000 and 2019, China cancelled $3.4bn of debt in Africa and a further $15bn was refinanced. No assets were seized.

Meanwhile, many developing countries remain in hock to Western institutions.

In 2022, the Debt Justice Group estimated that African governments owed three times more to private financial groups than to China, charging double the interest in the process.

“Developing country debt to China is less than what is owed to both private bondholders and multilateral development banks (MDBs),” says Kevin Gallagher, director of the Boston University Global Development Policy Center.

“So, Lowy’s focus on China lacks context. The truth is, even if you remove China from the creditor picture, lots of poor countries would still be in debt distress,” Gallagher told Al Jazeera.

Following the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, inflation prompted the United States Federal Reserve, as well as other leading central banks, to hike interest rates.

Attracted to higher yields in the US, investors withdrew their funds from developing country financial assets, raising yield costs and depreciating currencies. Debt repayment costs soared.

Global interest rates have since come down slightly. But according to the UN, developing country borrowing costs are, on average, two to four times higher than in the US and six to 12 times higher than in Germany.

“A crucial aspect about Chinese lending,” said Gallagher, “is that it tends to be long-term and growth enhancing. That’s precisely why a lot of it is focused on infrastructure investment. Western lenders tend to get in and out faster and charge higher rates.”

When Luis Enrique leads his Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) team out to play Inter Milan in Saturday’s UEFA Champions League final, the coach will be seeking to win the European continent’s top prize for the first time for the French side and reverse years of fan frustration at the Parc des Princes.

This is the club which, until recently, boasted superstar players the caliber of Kylian Mbappe, Lionel Messi and Neymar Jr, but failed to win any European silverware since the third-tier UEFA Intertoto Cup way back in 2001.

Since his arrival in 2023, Enrique has changed PSG radically, overseeing the high-profile exits of Messi, Neymar and Mbappe, and transitioning from a team of ageing galacticos into one of the most exciting attacking sides in Europe.

Whether Enrique’s method is the best may ultimately be judged by what happens in the Champions League final in Munich.

Enrique the player

Away from events on the pitch, who is the real Luis Enrique who has presided over this radical transformation at PSG?

The 55-year-old began his football career in 1988, playing in the midfield for his local side, Sporting Gijon, a team in the Spanish Segunda Division.

In 1991 he was signed by mega club Real Madrid where he helped Los Blancos win La Liga, the Copa del Rey and the Super Cup. On an individual level, Enrique did not perform up to expectations, which was mostly attributed to playing out of position on the wing and in more defensive roles.

Bitter rivals FC Barcelona snapped up an out-of-form Enrique in 1996, where he reverted to his favoured central midfield role.  It paid dividends for the Catalan giants and Enrique went on to win La Liga, the Copa del Rey and Spanish Super Cup trophies with Barca.

After retiring as a player in 2004, he went into management, reportedly at the invitation of current Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola.

Enrique started his coaching career at FC Barcelona “B”,  before moving to AS Roma in Italy’s Serie A for the 2011-2012 season. The Spaniard was sacked at the end of the season, with a year still remaining on his contract, after Roma finished a disappointing seventh in the premier domestic competition.

Managing expectations

His next move was to Spanish La Liga side Celta Vigo – but he also departed from that club after just one year. It was then that Enrique received his career-altering managerial opportunity, returning to Barcelona as manager of the first team.

His four-year reign at the Nou Camp was crowned by Barca’s victory in the Champions League final in 2015 against Juventus, with the “Big-3” of Messi, Luis Suarez and Neymar leading the attacking line, completing a rare treble for the club: Spanish League (La Liga), Spanish Cup (Copa del Rey) and European (Champions League) titles.

If PSG win the Champions League final on Saturday, Enrique will make history be becoming the only man to ever achieve a treble on two occasions.

When Enrique was named team coach of Spain in 2018, he entered a new world of international football.

Before the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022, Spain was fancied as possible winners. However, after a crushing round of 16 loss to underdogs Morocco, Enrique announced his resignation from the national side.

Incessant media speculation linked Enrique’s next managerial job with a move to England’s Premier League.

He was interviewed by Tottenham Hotspur and Chelsea – but it was PSG, to the surprise of many, who secured his signature.

Perhaps it was the unique challenge of winning the Champions League with one of only two European super clubs never to have achieved the milestone – Arsenal being the other – which made him head to Paris.

Or perhaps it was a desire to show off his vision of attacking football by rebuilding a club his way.

Take me to Paris

A recent three-part documentary, produced by Zoom Sport Films, provided an intimate portrait of the coach who allowed the cameras into his private life for the first time, despite Enrique’s well-known animosity towards the media.

No Teneis Ni P*** Idea (You Don’t Have Any F****** Idea) reveals a driven man who is as passionate about football as his family – and keeping fit.

Viewers see Enrique arriving at PSG speaking only a few words of French. Nevertheless, he imposes his character on the club from the start.

Known by his nickname, Lucho, Enrique brings a Spanish-speaking coaching staff with him and addresses the players in his own language, with the aid of a French translator.

As relations with his biggest star – Mbappe – appear to worsen, viewers are treated to Enrique giving the star player what former Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson used to call the “hairdryer treatment”, or a huge telling off.

But, as this is France, Enrique calls it “C’est Catastrophique (It’s catastrophic)” on a big presentation screen to the striker. The Spaniard is referring to Mbappe’s apparent refusal to defend at all after PSG were beaten 2-3 at home by Barcelona in the quarterfinal of the Champions League in April last year.

Despite the manager-star player bust-up, PSG would move on to the semifinals, where they were ultimately beaten by Borussia Dortmund. A year on, Enrique’s post-match comments may turn out to be prophetic:

“Now it’s a sad moment but you have to accept sometimes sport is that way. We have to try to create something special next year and win it.”

Behind-the-scenes with Lucho

Curiously for a football manager, he spends much of his day studying his team on a series of computer screens.  This is interspersed with workouts. “You must move every half an hour,” he says.  In the documentary, Enrique is seen, in his plush Parisian house, regularly doing various strenuous exercises or cycling.

At the PSG training camp, he mixes team talks with plunges into his ice pool. It pays off, as the manager is fit. But when he walks around the pitch, it is always barefoot as he believes in “grounding” or getting back in touch with nature.

The documentary mixes moments from Enrique’s illustrious career, from the Real Madrid and Barca days, as well as the Spain role – the good and the bad. Not surprisingly, the lowest point is when Morocco upsets Spain and knocks the bookmaker’s favourite out of the World Cup.

Away from football, we also see a tender side to Lucho when the documentary touches on his close relationship with his youngest daughter, Xana, who died at the age of nine from osteosarcoma, a bone tumour, in 2019.

Enrique set up a foundation in her name with his wife, Elena Cullell, to try to help other families who are stricken by the same condition.

Graham Hunter, a producer on the documentary and a football journalist who is friends with Enrique, described his personality as “demanding and inspirational”.

“As a footballer, he was exceptional. A Spanish Roy Keane. His ability to play everywhere on the pitch slightly cut how good he was because managers used him all over the pitch. He was trophy-laden at Madrid and Barca,” he says.

“He did not want to be a coach originally. [He] Accepted an invitation from Pep [Guardiola] I think to coach Barca B. Although he clashed a little bit with Messi and Luis Suarez but that [2015] Champions League victory, it was unbelievable. They won the treble.”

Hunter believes Enrique changed the playing style of the Spain team during his managerial tenure, introducing young talent like Pedri.

“He built what has become a winning franchise and he carries a huge amount of credit to him,” he said.

Hunter says Enrique did not just go to PSG to win the Champions League.

“He went to PSG to imprint his brand of football and to convince the players, the fans that it was a brilliant, modern way to play football and to do that, you have to win the Champions League. For him, he is as interested in how people see his football as attacking and inspirational as winning trophies.”