Tag: InternationalNews

{ISIL fighters launch counter-offensive in northern province of Raqqa, retaking large areas they recently lost.}

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) has recaptured large areas of territory in the northern Syrian province of Raqqa that it recently lost to forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad, opposition activists have said.

The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said on Tuesday that ISIL forces had pushed government forces some 40km from Tabqa, an area west of Raqqa city that has a dam and an airbase.

Government troops and allied militiamen had reached within 7km of the airport on Sunday, according to the observatory.

Tabqa airbase was the last position held by government forces in Raqqa province before ISIL overran it in August 2014, killing scores of detained soldiers in a massacre they documented on video.

The ISIL-linked Aamaq news agency posted a video showing the armed group in control of Thawra oilfield as warplanes conducted air strikes nearby. Government forces had seized the field on Sunday, only to lose it hours later.

ISIL has been under pressure in Iraq, Syria and Libya in recent weeks, but the gains in Raqqa show it is still able to take on Syrian troops backed by Russian warplanes.

According to defence analysts at think-tank IHS Jane ISIL lost about 14 percent of its territory in 2015, while Syria’s Kurds almost tripled theirs.

More than five years since the conflict started, more than 270,000 Syrians have been killed in the fighting, and almost 11 million Syrians – half the country’s prewar population – have been displaced from their homes.

{Experts weigh in on whether UKIP EU Referendum poster, which was likened to Nazi propaganda, breaks moral code.}

“BREAKING POINT” screams the red lettering on an anti-immigration poster from the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP).

The poster was released days before Thursday’s EU Referendum, when Britons will decide whether to remain in or leave the European Union.

Set over an image of thousands of refugees in Slovenia in 2015 who had just crossed the border with Croatia on their perilous journey, many of whom were fleeing war and persecution, the poster has been likened to anti-Semitic propaganda in the 1930s and been condemned by a number of politicians and observers.

A caption calling on voters to tick “Leave the European Union” on June 23 reads: “We must break free of the EU and take back control of our borders.”

British Prime Minister David Cameron of the ruling Conservative Party, who is leading the Remain campaign, said the poster was “wrong in fact and in motivation”.

Opposition Labour MP Chuka Umunna said UKIP’s poster “stands contrary to the values Britain has fought for”.

Jo Cox, the pro-Remain Labour MP who was stabbed and shot dead in her constituency one week ago by a suspect with links to the anti-immigration far-right Britain First group, would have “responded with outrage” to the poster, said Stephen Kinnock, a Labour MP.

Her husband, political activist Brendan Cox, called the poster “vile”, just a day before she was killed.

UKIP did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment.

Aside from condemnation, the poster raises questions of ethics.

Is it fair to depict vulnerable people in a political campaign without their explicit consent? Can the photographer object to the use of the image? What is the purpose of documenting the refugee crisis? And does it incite hatred?

“It is always uncomfortable when an objective news photograph is used to deliver any political message or subjective agenda, however the image in question has been licensed legitimately,” said Getty Images, but did not comment further.

Al Jazeera asked a few experts to weigh in.

[If it were my photo] at first I would feel terrible, since any decent journalist produces work to present a situation as it happens. In my work, I try to present the viewer with an image of reality and leave it up to them to decide how they perceive the image.

It is something else, to present an image and tell the viewer what they are seeing. By linking cause and effect, migration and your country’s economic hardship, is to misguide the audience because real life is much more complicated than A equals B … It takes the blame off our shoulders, but to use my own photos to misguide the public, no, that would be offensive and counter to everything I stand for as not just a journalist, but as a human being.

In documenting the refugee crisis for English-language media and trying to present what is happening in refugee camps, I find myself constantly countering the toxic rhetoric coming from so many British papers and tabloids, which are full of hateful talking points and easy-to-swallow slices of racism that bit by bit can render a casual news consumer completely insane.

[As for consent], there is a difference between being vulnerable in private and in the public. In general, each photojournalist must set their own ethics in regards to consent and if they feel they are doing something wrong, then they probably are.

Can the photojournalist complain about the use of this photo? Probably not, stock photo agencies have photographers sign lengthy contracts to cover themselves in case of such issues.

Marius Luedicke, professor focused on brands with regards to moralism
When I saw the poster I was not pleased at all. The EU Referendum campaign has been all about limiting immigration to a certain extent; this is inherently unethical but unavoidable in a world divided by nation states. It’s not a humanistic idea.

{{The refugee crisis is one thing – it is massively different from economic migration. Mixing the two is not fair, it’s terrible. We are talking about two immoral issues – the nation state can never be fair to humans.}}

Using that imagery of refugees to refer to gradual immigration that happens over the years as a threat is plain wrong. It’s a provocation, part of a strategy.

The problem we have with the Brexit campaign is that it has a clear image, a very drastic image which appeals to fears such as overcrowded cities, feeling like a foreigner in your own country. The In campaign has nothing to counter, in terms of powerful images. They are working with the economic consequences of leaving the EU – how can a normal person imagine that?

I wasn’t surprised that the rhetoric got more extreme towards the last days. UKIP’s poster wasn’t surprising given the rhetoric they have used before – plain tasteless.

In Austria [and elsewhere across Europe] you see the same rhetoric from the far-right parties. It’s all about immigration – those people born in the country are by birth better. It goes down the nation-state route. This is a difficult moral dilemma we are facing.

Mel Bunce, journalism lecturer and ethics researcher at City University London
UKIP’s use of refugee images in their campaign is extremely unethical. The photo demonizes refugees, a vulnerable group who deserve our compassion and empathy not our blame.

The image suggests that refugees are somehow to blame for financial issues in the United Kingdom and this is simply not the case. Framing the photo in this way turns the image into a piece of political propaganda. It fuels race-based discrimination and hatred.

The UKIP image has important similarities with some Nazi propaganda from the 1930s. Both use images to suggest that foreigners are coming in overwhelming numbers and they threaten our culture, our way of life and our economic prosperity. They are both based on the same core lie. The lie at the heart of much Nazi propaganda was that “Others” – Jewish citizens, foreigners, and minority groups – were to blame for Germany’s problems. The same lie is at the heart of the UKIP [poster].

There are important differences as well. It’s important not to overstate the similarity. Nazi propaganda rarely held back from blatant racial stereotyping and vilification. UKIP images work on a more subtle level to suggest that foreigners should be feared.

Tom van Laer, marketing lecturer at Sir John Cass Business School
Ethics become a great concern when storytelling is adopted for the promotion of political views … It is unlikely that already vulnerable voters will resist the power of stories in general and political, mediates stories in particular. This reinforces the need to restrict voters’ exposure to this type of political advertising, especially in situations in which these vulnerable people are likely to be lost in the story.

[But] political advertising has been exempt from the Advertising Code of the Advertising Standards Authority, the UK’s independent regulator for advertising across all media.

{{The Electoral Commission, which oversees British elections and referenda, has rejected the idea of regulating political ads.
}}

[As for privacy of the refugees depicted], a right to privacy exists in the UK law, ironically as a consequence of the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, it is legal to photograph anyone on any public property. A photographer at Getty Images took the picture. Getty Images has licensed the picture to UKIP legitimately.

Neither side of the debate has really covered itself in much glory. The arguments to remain part of the European Union or to leave have been aggressive, poisonous and based largely on fear-mongering storytelling, rather than facts.

Whether they contributed to the murder of [Jo Cox], an elected Member of Parliament , which in itself is an affront to democracy, as well as a human tragedy, it is too early to speculate. However, sadly, the awful scenes in Birstall, West Yorkshire, seem to sum up a country that has been tearing itself apart, spurred on by negative storytelling.

While these stories were temporarily suspended following Cox’s death, and before the vote on Thursday, there is a strong argument that political storytelling should be stopped for good.

{In defiance of UN sanctions, Pyongyang carries out further tests of its intermediate-range Musudan ballistic missile.}

North Korea has conducted back-to-back tests of a mid-range ballistic missile from its eastern coast, South Korean officials say.

One test of the powerful Musudan intermediate-range missile made considerable improvements in flight distance and altitude over previous failed launches, but still fell well short of the missile’s projected range.

Wednesday’s tests marked Pyongyang’s fifth and sixth attempt since April to successfully launch its Musudan missile.

The first five launches failed, either exploding in midair or crashing, and the sixth only flew about 400km – well short of the missile’s 3,500-km potential and not long enough to be classified as intermediate.

One of the missiles launched on Wednesday reached an altitude of more than 1,000km, displaying marked progress in comparison with previous attempts, Japan’s defence minister said on Wednesday.

“We don’t know whether it counts as a success, but North Korea has shown some capability with IRBMs,” Gen Nakatani told reporters in Tokyo. “The threat to Japan is intensifying.”

The ongoing tests, apparently linked to an order made by North Korean leader Kim Jong-un in March, show the North’s determination to pursue its goal of a nuclear missile programme capable of threatening the United States mainland.

US condemnation

Despite the repeated failures, North Korea’s persistence in testing the Musudan missile has worried Washington and its allies, Tokyo and Seoul. The missile’s range puts a large part of Asia and the Pacific, including US military bases, within reach.

The US State Department condemned the launches on Wednesday, saying that they represented blatant violations of United Nations resolutions banning nuclear-armed North Korea from any use of ballistic missile technology.

“We intend to raise our concerns at the UN to bolster international resolve in holding [North Korea] accountable for the provocative actions,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said in a statement.

And while US and North Korean diplomats were due to attend a six-nation security forum in Beijing on Wednesday – a rare opportunity for contact between the two powers – the State Department has said there were no plans for direct talks.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was quoted by national broadcaster NHK as saying such tests “cannot be tolerated”.

South Korea’s Unification Ministry called the launches a “clear provocation” that violated UN Security Council resolutions banning any ballistic activities by North Korea.

{{Rising tensions
}}

Pyongyang conducted its fourth nuclear test in January, and later that month launched a long-range rocket that some say was a cover for a test of banned missile technology.

The tests in January saw the UN Security Council impose its toughest sanctions to date on the North.

North Korea has claimed a number of technical breakthroughs in recent months in its push to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of delivering a nuclear payload to targets across the continental US. But officials in South Korea say the North does not yet possess such a weapon.

Recently claimed achievements include the creation of a solid-fuel missile engine, the development of a nuclear warhead capable of withstanding atmospheric re-entry, and the miniaturisation of a nuclear warhead.

Experts outside the country have been sceptical of Pyongyang’s claims, but have acknowledged that the North has made significant gains in improving its nuclear arsenal.

The Korean Peninsula has remained in a technical state of war since the end of the Korean War in 1953, when an armistice brought an end to fighting but a peace treaty was never signed.

The US has some 28,000 soldiers stationed in South Korea to deter any potential aggression from North Korea.

{Remain and Leave camps make their cases with economy and immigration high on the agenda before Thursday’s key vote.}

Rival sides in Britain’s referendum on European Union membership clashed in a passionate debate to the roars of an audience of six thousand in a London concert arena.

The debate on Tuesday evening, before Thursday’s referendum, was a final opportunity for the two camps to win over voters, with polls showing a razor-tight race less than 36 hours before a vote that will shape the future of Europe.

Panellists locked horns over immigration, as the pro-EU London Mayor Sadiq Khan tore into his predecessor Boris Johnson, a key campaigner on the “Leave” side.

“You’re telling lies and you’re scaring people,” Khan declared as he brandished a “Leave” leaflet warning that Turkey could join the EU.

“That’s scaremongering, Boris, and you should be ashamed … you are using the ruse of Turkey to scare people to vote Leave,” Khan said to cheers from the audience.

Johnson threw the criticism back at Khan, saying the pro-EU side had run a “Project Fear” by warning that leaving the 28-member bloc would damage Britain’s economy.

“They say we have no choice but to bow down to Brussels. We say they are woefully underestimating this country and what it can do,” Johnson said.

The Conservative MP promised Britain an “independence day” on Thursday if it voted to leave, bringing sections of the audience to their feet in prolonged applause.

The prospect of Britain becoming the first state to defect from the EU in the bloc’s 60-year history has raised fears of a domino-effect collapse of the European project.

European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker earlier warned Britain against “an act of self-harm” he said would endanger everything Europeans had worked together to achieve.

{{‘Very hostile’}}

As the audience filed into the 12,500-seat Wembley Arena, which often hosts global music stars, they were serenaded by pro-Remain demonstrators singing “All You Need is Love”.

Organisers Avaaz said the serenade was an attempt to counter the “fear and division” of the campaign.

But the two sides remained deeply opposed and the audience split among equally vocal Remain and Leave crowds.

“It felt like a football atmosphere … it felt very hostile. You could tell there was almost a mist of blood in the air,” said Michael Flaxington, 21, a student from Kent.

Linda Mayne, 60, also from Kent, who is retired, said that the debate was well-argued on both sides but had not swayed her from her conviction to vote Leave.

“I support Leave because I want the UK to have our own democracy back, to be able to control ourselves,” Mayne said.

But 21-year-old student Anton Georgiou said the Leave side’s “take back control argument” was “an empty slogan with no detailed plan whatsoever”.

As the debate concluded, the Daily Mail newspaper announced that it was endorsing Brexit.

“Lies. Greedy elites. Or a great future outside a broken, dying Europe,” read its front page. “If you believe in Britain vote Leave.”

Two newspapers, the Daily Express and The Sun, carried front-page stories reporting that Queen Elizabeth II was challenging guests to give her “three good reasons” why Britain should stay in the EU.

Earlier this year, Buckingham Palace issued a rare complaint over a previous article by The Sun that claimed the queen favoured Brexit, a challenge to the monarch’s long-held position of political neutrality.

The Times, which has backed Britain remaining in the EU, published a warning from hundreds of business leaders, including Virgin boss Richard Branson and US media mogul Michael Bloomberg, warning that Brexit could cause an “economic shock”.

{{‘Nobody knows’}}

“Nobody knows what is going to happen,” Prime Minister David Cameron told the Financial Times, insisting he did not regret calling the referendum.

“I believe it will, one way or another, be decisive. Britain will not want to go through this again.”

Actor Liam Neeson said that a vote for Brexit could be hugely damaging for his native Northern Ireland, potentially undermining the peace process that quelled decades of violence known as the Troubles.

“A UK exit would have the worst ramifications for the island of Ireland,” Neeson said.

The outcome looked deeply uncertain, as a poll by Survation gave “Remain” 45 percent and “Leave” 44 percent, with 11 percent undecided.

Six major bookmakers showed the odds heavily pointing to a Remain vote, with the likelihood of Britain staying in put at around 80 percent. The latest surveys were mostly conducted after the brutal murder of Jo Cox, a 41-year-old Labour politician who campaigned to remain in the EU, who was shot and stabbed in her northern English constituency on Thursday.

Her alleged killer, 52-year-old Thomas Mair, gave his name as “Death to traitors, freedom for Britain” at his first appearance in court after being charged with her murder.

In an interview with the BBC on Tuesday, Cox’s widower Brendan said she had been “worried” the debate may have been “whipping up hatred”.

{Anti-establishment Five Star movement candidate wins local polls in capital plagued by corruption and poor services.}

Virginia Raggi has been elected as Rome’s first female mayor in a triumph for the populist Five Star Movement (M5S), representing a blow to Matteo Renzi, Italy’s prime minister.

Raggi swept into City Hall on Sunday with two-thirds of the votes cast in a runoff contest with Roberto Giachetti of Renzi’s centre-left Democratic Party (DP).

“A new era is beginning with us,” said Raggi after declaring victory. “We’ll work to bring back legality and transparency to the city’s institutions.”

A lawyer and local councillor, Raggi has leapt from anonymity to become one of the best-known faces in Italian politics in the space of only a few months on the campaign trail.

M5S has emerged as the main opposition to Renzi’s coalition and success in Rome could provide a platform for a tilt at national power in general elections due in 2018.

More than nine million voters were eligible to take part in the second-round election in 126 communes, including Rome, Milan, Naples, Turin and Bologna.

The result is a blow for Renzi’s bloc and makes her the rising star of the M5S, the anti-establishment party founded by comedian-turned politician Beppe Grillo.

Shock defeat

Besides Rome, the PD also suffered a shock defeat in Turin losing to M5S, but held on to power in Italy’s financial capital Milan.

The coalition’s defeat in Rome had been expected after widespread criticism of its management of the city over the past three years, with its mayor forced to resign in 2015 in a scandal over his expenses.

However, the loss in Turin, a centre-left stronghold, was a major shock.

The incumbent, Piero Fassino, a veteran party heavyweight, was swept aside by Chiara Appendino, 31, who overturned an 11-point gap on him.

As a consolation for Renzi, the PD stayed in power in Milan, and in the northern city of Bologna, beating more traditional, centre-right candidates.

The prime minister took office in 2014 promising to revitalise Italy, but he has struggled to boost economic growth and create jobs after years of stagnation. He has also been hurt by repeated scandals in the banking sector.

Renzi has said he would not step down whatever the results on Sunday.

Instead, he has pinned his political future on an October referendum that, he says, will bring stability to Italy and end its tradition of revolving-door governments.

{Senate rejects measures by Republicans and Democrats to stem gun violence after worst shooting in modern US history.}

The Republican-controlled US Senate rejected four competing gun control measures just days after the Orlando nightclub massacre, highlighting the feuding over an issue set to resonate during a heated presidential election year.

With a month to go before Republicans and Democrats formally nominate their White House hopefuls, lawmakers failed on Monday to compromise on one of the most sensitive hot-button issues in America.

Even as they sought to appear keen to take action after the deadliest mass shooting in US history that left 49 dead at a gay nightclub in Orlando a week ago, Republicans and Democrats voted down four amendments – two from each party – that would have limited some gun purchases, including those by suspects on FBI watchlists.

“The recent attacks in Orlando – as much as people are concerned and upset about them – are not going to force members of Congress to fundamentally vote against their own self-interest,” Jason Johnson, political science professor at Hiram College, told Al Jazeera.

“Their own self-interest is that they want to have money from the National Rifle Association (NRA), they want to continue to have that kind of financial support running for office, and despite the fact that an overwhelming proportion of Americans, Republican and Democrats – and gun owners – think that at least some of these four legislative ideas were reasonable policy, Congress is not going to move that way.”

The two Democratic texts sought to bar those on FBI watchlists or no-fly lists from buying firearms, and to strengthen criminal and mental health background checks for those seeking to purchase firearms at gun shows and on the Internet.

Republicans are opposed to those measures. In general, they oppose any effort to limit gun rights, saying they are protected by the US Constitution’s Second Amendment.

They proposed a 72-hour waiting period for those on FBI watchlists seeking to buy weapons, so that the government has time to seek a court order to block the sale if need be.

The second Republican proposal aimed to improve the background check system. Democrats rejected both GOP measures.

Such efforts often struggle to pass the Senate, where 60 of 100 votes are needed for legislation to advance.

“[Gun control] will continued to be talked about because … there will be another shooting,” added Johnson, of Hiram College. “Nothing will change in America about gun policy until we do something about how members of Congress get, and are lobbied against and for, when they’re running for office.”

{{Reform unlikely before vote}}

The Senate voted on similar measures in the wake of the December 2012 Connecticut school massacre and the San Bernardino attacks last year, but to no avail.

“Every single senator wants to deny terrorists access to guns they use to harm innocent civilians, but there’s a right way to do things and a wrong way,” said Republican Senator John Cornyn of Texas.

Number two Senate Democrat Dick Durbin was livid at the failure of lawmakers to come together on such a pressing issue after yet another shooting.

“Tonight, the Senate turned its back on victims of gun violence from Orlando to San Bernardino, from Newtown to the streets of Chicago,” Durbin said in a statement.

There are 46 senators who are Democrats or generally vote with Democrats, and 54 Republicans.

Susan Collins, a moderate Republican senator from Maine, was expected to unveil some kind of compromise legislation, but it also seemed unlikely to pass.

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has spoken out at length about the need to curb gun violence in the week since the Orlando tragedy, but she had a shorter message Monday.

“Enough,” she said in a one-word statement, followed by the names and ages of the 49 Orlando victims.

Democrats know they have only a slim chance of succeeding with gun reform ahead of the November elections. Their goal for now is to push the debate on guns – and turn it into a true campaign issue.

“Ultimately, the only way that you win this issue is by building a political infrastructure around the country that rivals that of the gun lobby,” Democratic Senator Chris Murphy told ABC’s “This Week” show on Sunday.

Last week, Murphy mounted a 15-hour filibuster on the Senate floor that prompted Republican leaders to schedule Monday’s cloture votes.

“Our filibuster helped galvanize an entire country around this issue,” he said.
{{
Trump defends NRA
}}

Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump made waves last week when he suggested he would meet with the National Rifle Association – which has endorsed him – to push a ban on weapons sales to those on watchlists.

On Sunday, Trump said the NRA was seeking to defend “the best interests of our country,” adding: “They want to make the right decision.”

Since the attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Trump controversially said he only wished more of the people in the club had guns to defend themselves.

But the NRA’s executive vice president and chief executive Wayne LaPierre contradicted Trump, saying: “I don’t think you should have firearms where people are drinking.”

Trump has since walked back his comments, tweeting that he was “obviously talking about additional guards or employees.”

{Michael Sandford held for trying to grab a police officer’s gun in alleged shooting attempt at a Las Vegas rally.}

A 19-year-old man has been charged for trying to grab a police officer’s gun at a Donald Trump rally in Las Vegas and use it to kill the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

According to a complaint filed in the US District Court in Nevada on Monday, Michael Sandford tried to disarm the officer at the June 18 rally at the Mystere Theatre in the Treasure Island Casino before being overpowered.

It said the young man, who holds a British driving licence, told a Secret Service agent after his arrest that he had driven from California to Las Vegas “to kill Trump”, and had been to a range a day earlier to learn to shoot as he had never fired a gun before.

“Sandford acknowledged that he would likely only be able to fire one to two rounds and stated he was convinced he would be killed by law enforcement during his attempt on Trump’s life,” the complaint said.

It said Sandford told investigators that he had purchased tickets for a rally in Phoenix where he “would try again to kill Trump” in the event his plan in Las Vegas failed.

{{Nationality unconfirmed}}

Officials would not confirm Sandford’s nationality saying only that he had told investigators he had been in the United States for about 18 months, and had lived in Hoboken, New Jersey, before travelling to California.

A spokeswoman at the Las Vegas prosecutor’s office said the young man was due to appear in court later Monday on a charge of act of violence on restricted grounds.

Earlier on Monday, Corey Lewandowski, the controversial campaign manager who helped Trump win the Republican Party’s presidential nominating contests, was dismissed.

Trump’s campaign issued a statement carried by a number of US media outlets saying Lewandowski “will no longer be working with the campaign” and thanked him for his hard work.

The firing was another shake-up for a campaign already at odds with many senior Republican figures over the presumptive nominee’s policies, with the party’s nominating convention in Cleveland less than a month away.

{Reporters Without Borders representative among three arrested for spreading “terror propaganda”, rights groups say.}

Turkish authorities have arrested three prominent press freedom campaigners, including the local representative of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), on charges of spreading “terrorist propaganda”, according to human rights groups.

In addition to RSF representative Erol Onderoglu, author Ahmet Nesin and Sebnem Korur Fincanci, president of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, were also arrested on Monday.

A court ordered they be held in pre-trial detention after they guest-edited a newspaper on Kurdish issues and campaigned against efforts to censor it, said RSF and another group, EuroMed Rights.

A statement from EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini and Enlargement Commissioner Johannes Hahn said the court decision “goes against Turkey’s commitment to respect fundamental rights, including freedom of media”.

“The EU has repeatedly stressed that Turkey, as a candidate country (for EU membership), must aspire to the highest possible democratic standards and practices,” read her statement.

Onderoglu was arrested for his work on three articles about security operations in Turkey’s largely Kurdish southeast and infighting among security forces which appeared in the May 18 edition of the Ozgur Gundem magazine, said Johann Bihr from RSF.

Bihr described Onderoglu, who had worked for RSF for two decades, as a “victim of the abuses he always denounced”.

It was unclear how long the three would be held in custody or when they would face trial.

Turkish officials contacted declined to comment on the issue or did not get back to Al Jazeera’s calls.

{{Correspondent in custody}}

Separately, top-selling Hurriyet newspaper, said its New York correspondent, Razi Canikligil, was detained on Monday upon his arrival at Istanbul’s Ataturk Airport. It offered no further details, including what charges he might face.

Canikligil has reported on the US prosecution of Turkish-Iranian businessman Reza Zarrab on charges he helped Iran evade American sanctions.

Zarrab’s arrest in Florida in March and the case against him has captured attention in Turkey, where he was detained in 2013 in a corruption probe into individuals with close ties to Erdogan. A U.S. judge in New York on Monday scheduled Zarrab’s trial for Jan. 23.

Last month, Turkey came under fire for sentencing two prominent journalists at the opposition Cumhuriyet newspaper to at least five years in jail for revealing state secrets in a case in which Erdogan was named as a complainant.

Authorities have seized or shut down several newspapers and taken broadcasters off the air in the last year, usually citing security concerns. They deny trying to muzzle free expression.

{Six soldiers killed and others wounded after car bomb explodes near Syrian refugee camp of al-Rukban, officials say.}

At least six Jordanian soldiers were killed after a car bomb exploded near the country’s border with Syria, Jordanian officials said.

The attack early on Tuesday in the al-Rukban district opposite a Syrian refugee camp, which houses about 70,000 people, was part of a coordinated attack involving multiple vehicles.

Officials told Al Jazeera that bombs exploded in the buffer zone between the Jordanian border and the camp, in the desolate desert area.

No group immediately claimed responsibility for the attack.

“Six soldiers have been martyred and 14 others were wounded in the terrorist attack,” an official told the AFP news agency, speaking on condition of anonymity and adding that it was a “preliminary toll”.

Jordan’s state TV described the incident as a “cowardly terrorist attack”.

The army said in a brief statement that “several of the attacking vehicles were destroyed”.

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) controls large areas in neighbouring Syria and Iraq, and Jordan has fortified border defences to prevent attacks and infiltration attempts.

Jordan has also widened a crackdown on ISIL sympathisers at home, jailing hundreds in the past two years for promoting the group’s ideas on social media.

The kingdom is a member of the US-led international military coalition against ISIL.