DUBLIN: Sinn Fein’s Gerry Adams, a pivotal figure in the political life of Ireland for almost 50 years, said on Saturday he will step down as party leader and complete a generational shift in the former political wing of the Irish Republican Army (IRA).
Reviled by many as the face of the IRA during its campaign against British rule in Northern Ireland, Adams reinvented himself as a peacemaker in the troubled region and then as a populist opposition parliamentarian in the Irish Republic.
Adams said he would be replaced as party president, a position he has held since 1983, at a party conference next year. He would also not stand for reelection to the Irish parliament.
“Republicanism has never been stronger... But leadership means knowing when it is time for change. That time is now,” Adams said in an emotional speech to a packed party conference.
Adams stayed on stage as the 2,500-strong crowd, some in tears, gave him a standing ovation and sang a traditional Irish song about the road home, followed by the national anthem.
Adams will almost certainly hand over to a successor with no direct involvement in the decades of conflict in Northern Ireland, a prospect that would make Sinn Fein a more palatable coalition partner in the Irish Republic where it has never been in power.
Deputy leader Mary Lou McDonald, an English literature graduate from Trinity College Dublin who has been at the forefront of a new breed of Sinn Fein politicians transforming the party’s image, is the clear favorite to take over.
That would mean the left-wing party being led on both sides of the Irish border by women in their 40s after Michelle O’Neill succeeded Martin McGuinness as leader in Northern Ireland shortly before the former IRA commander’s death in March.
Adams, who will turn 70 next October, has always denied membership of the IRA but accusations from former IRA fighters that he was involved in its campaign of killings have dogged him throughout his career.
Adams was a key figure in the nationalist movement throughout the three decades of violence between Catholic militants seeking a united Ireland, mainly Protestant militants who wanted to maintain Northern Ireland’s position as a part of Britain, and the British army.
3,600 died in the conflict, many at the hands of the IRA.
As head of the political wing of the IRA during its bombing campaigns in 1980s Britain, Adams was a pariah and banned from speaking on British airwaves, forcing television stations to dub his voice with that of an actor.
He and his party emerged from the political cold in October 1997 when he shook hands with Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair at their first meeting. A year later, he helped win skeptical elements in the IRA to the Good Friday peace deal, which largely ended the violence.
Since the peace deal Adams and McGuinness turned Sinn Fein from a fringe party into the dominant Irish nationalist party in Northern Ireland and the third largest party in south of the border.
While its anti-austerity platform led to a six-fold increase in its number of seats in the Republic — 23 out of 158 — suspicion of Sinn Fein’s role in the Northern Ireland troubles still runs deep and the far larger ruling Fine Gael and or main opposition Fianna Fail have ruled out governing alongside them.
Analysts say a change of leader could help open the way to Sinn Fein entering government in Dublin for the first time.
“Under a new Sinn Fein leader I think anything is possible,” said David Farrell, politics professor at University College Dublin.
A new Sinn Fein leader will also take over responsibility for rescuing power-sharing devolved government in Northern Ireland and avoid a return to full direct rule from London for the first time in decade.
Power-sharing collapsed after Sinn Fein withdrew in January saying the Democratic Unionist Party was not treating it as an equal partner and a series of talks have failed to break the impasse.
Gerry Adams to step down as Sinn Fein leader after 34 years
Gerry Adams to step down as Sinn Fein leader after 34 years
UK civil servants told to quit if they disagree with Gaza policy
- Over 300 Foreign Office staff signed letter to foreign secretary expressing concerns
- Britain facilitating potential ‘violations of international law’ by exporting weapons to Israel
LONDON: UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office staff have been told to quit their jobs if they disagree with government policy on Gaza.
More than 300 civil servants signed a letter sent to Foreign Secretary David Lammy last month, outlining concerns over UK arms sales and “complicity” in “stark … disregard for international law” by the Israeli military in the Palestinian enclave.
In a response to the letter, sent by the department’s two most senior civil servants Nick Dyer and Sir Oliver Robbins, signatories were told: “(If) your disagreement with any aspect of government policy or action is profound your ultimate recourse is to resign from the Civil Service. This is an honourable course.”
One official who signed the initial complaint told the BBC: “(There is) frustration and a deep sense of disappointment that the space for challenge is being further shut down.”
The letter is the fourth such case of civil servants contacting senior officials to air concerns about the UK’s position on the war in Gaza.
Signatories to it, which was sent on May 16, include overseas embassy staff and employees based in London.
Topics raised included potential breaches of international law, the death toll in Gaza, and Israeli settler activities in the occupied West Bank.
“In July 2024, staff expressed concern about Israel’s violations of international humanitarian law and potential UK government complicity. In the intervening period, the reality of Israel’s disregard for international law has become more stark,” the letter said.
It added that Israel’s actions, including its blockade on food aid entering Gaza, have led “many experts and humanitarian organisations to accuse Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war,” and that the UK is facilitating potential “violations of international law” by continuing to export weapons to the country.
The letter also noted that “the Israeli government has made explicit plans for the forcible transfer of Gaza’s population.”
In the response, Dyer and Sir Oliver said it “might be helpful” to “remind” signatories that the FCDO has systems in place to address staff concerns with policy, including the “ultimate recourse” of resignation.
The “bargain at the heart of the British Civil Service is that we sign up to deliver the policies of the Government of the day wholeheartedly, within the limits imposed by the law and the Civil Service Code,” they wrote.
A former FCDO official told the BBC that the rhetorical reply “simply provides the government with supposed ‘plausible deniability’ for enabling breaches of international law.”
The official added on condition of anonymity that the FCDO has not learned the lessons of the 2016 Chilcot Report after the Iraq War, which raised suggestions of “ingrained belief” within the civil service requiring systems to challenge “groupthink” in future.
The FCDO said in a statement: “There are systems in place which allow (staff) to raise concerns if they have them.”
A spokesperson added: “Since day one, this government has rigorously applied international law in relation to the war in Gaza.
“One of our first acts in government was to suspend export licenses that could be used by the Israel Defense Forces in Gaza.
“We have suspended direct exports of F-35 parts for use by Israel, and we categorically do not export any bombs or ammunition which could be used in Gaza.”
The UK government has previously said it believes Israel to be “at risk” of breaking international and humanitarian law in Gaza.
Last September, 30 export licenses for arms were suspended over fears of “clear risk” that they may be used illegally, but over 300 remain in place.
The war in Gaza has killed well over 50,000 Palestinians and left millions displaced and without access to basic resources.
Last year, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.
Ukrainian woman searches for husband lost in action two years ago
- Families of missing soldiers draw hope from prisoner swaps
- Uncertainty on both sides of the war since Russia invaded
Holding up a photograph of Dmytro Pylnyk, lost in action in early 2023, she has many questions. What happened to his unit when it was ambushed by Russian forces? Was he captured by Russia? Could he eventually be released?
The mass prisoner swap last month was an opportunity for people like her to ask troops just out of Russian captivity about missing loved ones who they believe, or simply hope, are prisoners of war. The alternative is unthinkable.
“I hold out great hope that someone has heard something, seen something,” Pylnyk, 29, told Reuters at a recent exchange in May, flanked by other relatives of those missing in action.
“My son and I are waiting for (his) dad to come home. Hope dies last. God willing, it’ll all be okay and dad will come back.”
Precize numbers for soldiers missing in action are not made public.
For Ukrainians, and for Russians on the other side of the conflict, it can be hard to find out even basic information. Pylnyk says she has written to government agencies and Russian authorities and learned almost nothing.
Ukrainian officials say more than 70,000 Ukrainians have been registered missing since 2022, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion. The majority are from the military but the figure also includes civilians.
Another 12,000 have been removed from the list after being identified among the dead or returned in exchanges.
Petro Yatsenko, a spokesman for the Coordination Council that arranges prisoner swaps from the Ukrainian side, said Russia had never notified Kyiv which soldiers it is holding prisoner. Ukraine collects that data by other means as best it can, he said.
Pylnyk and others like her share information in online chat groups and use it to try to piece together what happened.
“Misfortune brought us together,” she said. “After two years of this, we’re like a family.”
LAST PHONE CALL
Dmytro Pylnyk, an electrician by trade, was drafted into the army in late 2022. He phoned home often so that his wife did not worry but last called on their son Artem’s third birthday on Feb. 27, 2023.
He was deployed from Kharkiv region toward Bakhmut, a small city that later fell to Russian forces after fierce fighting.
His unit’s convoy was caught in a Russian ambush, Mariia Pylnyk said she had learned.
“The guys ran any which way,” she said, citing conversations with commanders who told her 41 soldiers were missing in action.
Two were captured and have since been released. One, who was freed in an exchange at Easter and had lost both his arms, was unable to share any valuable information, she said.
The second refused to talk.
The pace of prisoner swaps has increased in the last month.
Ukraine and Russia each released 1,000 prisoners in a three-day exchange last month, the only tangible outcome of direct talks in Istanbul.
A prisoner swap of under-25s on Monday was the first in a series of exchanges also expected to include each side repatriating the remains of thousands.
Mariia Pylnyk has given her son’s DNA to the authorities so that if Dmytro is confirmed killed in action they will be notified.
“We all understand that this is war and anything is possible. But to this day, I don’t believe it and I don’t feel that he is dead. I feel like he’s alive and God willing he’ll return,” she said.
NO SIGNAL TO CALL
She lives with Artem, now five, in Pakul, a village in the northern Chernihiv region that was briefly occupied by Russians. She has not told Artem his father is missing in action.
“He knows that dad is a soldier, dad is a good man, dad is at work and just doesn’t have any signal to call,” she said.
She takes comfort from seeing families reunited and never allows herself to cry in front of her son.
She used to work in a shop, but Artem has often been ill. The angst of the last two years have taken their toll on her health too. She receives state support.
Pylnyk has vowed to find her husband but has often not had time to attend prisoner swaps while looking after their son.
“Only a weakling can give up, you know, throw up their hands and say that’s it, he’s not there,” she said, adding that she was very emotional when she attended last month’s big exchange.
“When I was there, the fighting spirit awoke in me that I needed. I have to do this. Who else will do it but me?”
Los Angeles’ image is scuffed since ICE raids and protests, with World Cup and Olympics on horizon
- Los Angeles is still reeling from January’s deadly wildfires — and with the World Cup soccer championships and the 2028 Olympics on the horizon
- Mayor Karen Bass has been urging residents to come together to revitalize LA’s image. Instead, a less flattering side of Los Angeles has been broadcast to the world in recent days
LOS ANGELES: This isn’t the image Los Angeles wanted projected around the globe.
Clouds of tear gas wafting over a throng of protesters on a blocked freeway. Federal immigration agents in tactical garb raiding businesses in search of immigrants without legal status. A messy war of words between President Donald Trump and Gov. Gavin Newsom. Photos captured several Waymo robotaxis set on fire and graffiti scrawled on a federal detention center building, while videos recorded the sounds of rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades hitting crowds.
In a city still reeling from January’s deadly wildfires — and with the World Cup soccer championships and the 2028 Olympics on the horizon — Mayor Karen Bass has been urging residents to come together to revitalize LA’s image by sprucing up streets, planting trees and painting murals so LA shows its best face to nations near and far.
“It’s about pride,” she’s said. “This is the city of dreams.”
Instead, a less flattering side of Los Angeles has been broadcast to the world in recent days. Protests have mostly taken place in a small swath of downtown in the sprawling city of 4 million people. As Trump has activated nearly 5,000 troops to respond in the city, Bass has staunchly pushed back against his assertions that her city is overrun and in crisis.
Bass, in response to Trump, said she was troubled by depictions that the city has been “invaded and occupied by illegal aliens and criminals, and that now violent, insurrectionist mobs are swarming our federal agents. I don’t know if anybody has seen that happen, but I’ve not seen that happen.”
The series of protests began Friday outside a federal detention center, where demonstrators demanded the release of more than 40 people arrested by federal immigration authorities.
Immigration advocates say the people who were detained do not have criminal histories and are being denied their due process rights.
An international city
Much like New York, Los Angeles is an international city that many immigrants call home. The city’s official seal carries images referencing the region’s time under Spanish and Mexican rule. Over 150 languages are spoken by students in the Los Angeles Unified School District. About half of the city’s residents are Latino and about one-third were born outside the US
Bass faulted the Trump administration for creating “a chaotic escalation” by mobilizing troops to quell protests.
“This is the last thing that our city needs,” Bass said.
Los Angeles resident Adam Lerman, who has attended the protests, warned that protests would continue if the Trump administration pushes more raids in the city.
“We are talking about a new riot every day,” Lerman said. ”Everybody knows they are playing with fire.”
It’s not the publicity LA needs as it looks to welcome the world for international sporting events on a grand scale.
“At this stage in the process, most host cities and countries would be putting the final touches on their mega-event red carpet, demonstrating to the world that they are ready to embrace visitors with open arms,” said Jules Boykoff, a Pacific University professor who has written widely on the political and economic impacts of the Olympic Games. The scenes of conflict are “not exactly the best way to entice the world to plan their next tourist trip to the US to watch a sports mega-event.”
A mayor under pressure
The federal raids and protests have created another dicey political moment for Bass, who has been struggling with a budget crisis while trying to recover from political fallout from the wildfires that ignited when she was out of the country.
She’s been careful not to discourage protests but at the same time has pleaded for residents to remain peaceful. The mayor will likely face backlash for involving the Los Angeles Police.
And she needs to fight the perception that the city is unsafe and disorderly, an image fostered by Trump, who in social media posts has depicted Bass as incompetent and said the city has been “invaded” by people who entered the US illegally. Los Angeles is sprawling — roughly 470 square miles (750 square kilometers) — and the protests were mostly concentrated downtown.
“The most important thing right now is that our city be peaceful,” Bass said. “I don’t want people to fall into the chaos that I believe is being created by the (Trump) administration.”
On Monday, workers were clearing debris and broken glass from sidewalks and power-washing graffiti from buildings — among the structures vandalized was the one-time home of the Los Angeles Times across the street from City Hall. Downtown has yet to bounce back since long-running pandemic lockdowns, which reordered work life and left many office towers with high vacancy rates.
Trump and California officials continued to spar online and off, faulting each other for the fallout. At the White House, Trump criticized California leaders by saying “they were afraid of doing anything” and signaled he would support Newsom’s arrest over his handling of the immigration protests.
If Los Angeles’ image was once defined by its balmy Mediterranean climate and the glamor of Hollywood, it’s now known “primarily for disaster,” said Claremont McKenna College political scientist Jack Pitney.
“A lot of perception depends on images,” Pitney added. Right now, the dominant image “is a burning Waymo.”
US defense department draws up rules on possible use of force by Marines deployed to LA protests
- 700 Marines will augment about 4,100 National Guard members already in LA
- President George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in LA in 1992
WASHINGTON: The US Department of Defense was scrambling Monday to establish rules to guide Marines who could be faced with the rare and difficult prospect of using force against citizens on American soil, now that the Trump administration is deploying active duty troops to the immigration raid protests in Los Angeles.
US Northern Command said it is sending 700 Marines into the Los Angeles area to protect federal property and personnel, including federal immigration agents. The 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines are coming from Twentynine Palms, California, and will augment about 4,100 National Guard members already in LA or authorized to be deployed there to respond to the protests.
The forces have been trained in de-escalation, crowd control and standing rules for the use of force, Northern Command said.
But the use of the active duty forces still raises difficult questions.
The Marines are highly trained in combat and crisis response, with time in conflict zones like Syria and Afghanistan. But that is starkly different from the role they will face now: They could potentially be hit by protesters carrying gas canisters and have to quickly decide how to respond or face decisions about protecting an immigration enforcement agent from crowds.
According to a US official, troops will be armed with their normal service weapons but will not be carrying tear gas. They also will have protective equipment such as helmets, shields and gas masks.
When troops are overseas, how they can respond to threats is outlined by the rules of engagement. At home, they are guided by standing rules for the use of force, which have to be set and agreed to by Northern Command, and then each Marine should receive a card explaining what they can and cannot do, another US official said.
For example, warning shots would be prohibited, according to use-of-force draft documents viewed by The Associated Press. Marines are directed to de-escalate a situation whenever possible but also are authorized to act in self-defense, the documents say.
The AP reviewed documents and interviewed nine US officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss details not yet public, about the guidance being determined for the Marines.
The Pentagon also is working on a memo with clarifying language for the Marines that will lay out the steps they can take to protect federal personnel and property. Those guidelines also will include specifics on the possibility that they could temporarily detain civilians if troops are under assault or to prevent harm, the first US official said.
Those measures could involve detaining civilians until they can be turned over to law enforcement.
Having the Marines deploy to protect federal buildings allows them to be used without invoking the Insurrection Act, one US official said.
The Insurrection Act allows the president to direct federal troops to conduct law enforcement functions in national emergencies. But the use of that act is extremely rare. Officials said that has not yet been done in this case and that it’s not clear it will be done.
President George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King.
If their role expands if the violence escalates, it is not clear under what legal authority they would be able to engage, said Elizabeth Goitein, a senior director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law.
“If in fact those Marines are laying hands on civilians, doing searches, then you have pretty powerful legal concerns,” Goitein said. “No statutory authority Trump has invoked so far permits this.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth tweeted late Saturday that he was considering deploying the Marines to respond to the unrest after getting advice earlier in the day from Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, according to one of the US officials.
Still, the tweet, which was posted to Hegseth’s personal X account and not to his official government account, caught many inside the Pentagon by surprise. As late as Monday, the military’s highest offices were still considering the potential ramifications.
But the Marine Corps were asking broader questions, too: Do they send more senior, experienced personnel so as not to put newer, less experienced troops at risk of potentially making a judgment call on whether to use force against a civilian?
What’s lawful under a domestic deployment — where troops may end up in a policing role — is governed by the Fourth Amendment in the US Constitution, which forbids seizure of persons, including temporarily restraining them, unless it could be considered reasonable under the circumstances.
Troops under federal authorities are in general prohibited from conducting law enforcement on US soil under the Posse Comitatus Act.
US deploys Marines to Los Angeles as police break up fourth day of protests
- Military forces previously deployed domestically for major disasters
- California files lawsuit to block National Guard deployment *
LOS ANGELES/WASHINGTON: The US military will temporarily deploy about 700 Marines to Los Angeles until more National Guard troops can arrive, marking another escalation in President Donald Trump’s response to street protests over his aggressive immigration policies.
Tensions have been rising since Trump activated the National Guard on Saturday after street protests erupted in response to immigration raids in Southern California. It is the biggest flashpoint yet in the Trump administration’s aggressive efforts to deport migrants living in the country illegally.
The announcement that marines would be deployed was made on the fourth straight day of protests. Late on Monday police began to disperse hundreds of demonstrators who gathered outside a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles where immigrants have been held.
National Guard forces had formed a human barricade to keep people out of the building. Then a phalanx of Los Angeles police moved up the street, starting to push people from the scene and firing “less lethal” munitions such as gas canisters. Police had used similar tactics since Friday.
The LAPD said late on Monday afternoon that some protesters had started throwing objects at officers and the use of less lethal munitions had been authorized, adding in an X post: “Less lethal munitions may cause pain and discomfort.”
California sued the Trump administration to block deployment of the National Guard and the Marines on Monday, arguing that it violates federal law and state sovereignty.
US Marines have been deployed domestically for major disasters such as Hurricane Katrina and the September 11, 2001, attacks, but it is extremely rare for US military troops to be used for domestic policing.
For now, the Trump administration was not invoking the Insurrection Act, which would allow troops to directly participate in civilian law enforcement, according to a US official speaking on condition of anonymity.
The Pentagon confirmed on Monday that a contingent of 2,000 National Guard troops would be doubled to 4,000. Trump said on Monday he felt he had no choice but to increase the level of force to prevent violence from spiraling out of control.
Trump also said he supported a suggestion by his border czar Tom Homan that California Governor Gavin Newsom should be arrested over possible obstruction of his administration’s immigration enforcement measures. “I would do it if I were Tom. I think it’s great,” Trump told reporters.
Democrats said Trump’s decision to deploy military force to handle the protests amounts to an abuse of presidential power, and California’s lawsuit claimed it was illegal.
“The level of escalation is completely unwarranted, uncalled for, and unprecedented,” Newsom’s press office said on X.
Four days of protests
The protests so far have resulted in a few dozen arrests and some property damage, including some self-driving Waymo vehicles that were set ablaze on Sunday evening. The Los Angeles Police Department said five officers sustained minor injuries on Saturday and Sunday, as did five police horses used in crowd control.
Before the police intervention on Monday, several hundred protesters chanted “free them all” outside the Los Angeles federal detention facility where immigrants have been held.
“What is happening effects every American, everyone who wants to live free, regardless of how long their family has lived here,” said Marzita Cerrato, 42, a first-generation immigrant whose parents are from Mexico and Honduras.
Some in the crowd punched and tossed eggs at a Trump supporter at the event, while others fired paintballs from a car at the federal building.
Protests also sprang up in at least nine other US cities on Monday, including New York, Philadelphia and San Francisco, according to local news outlets.
The Trump administration has argued that Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration allowed far too many immigrants to enter the country and that Democratic-run cities such as Los Angeles are improperly interfering with efforts to deport them. Trump has pledged to deport record numbers of people who are in the country illegally and to lock down the US-Mexico border, setting a goal of at least 3,000 daily arrests.
Trump can deploy Marines under certain conditions of law or under his authority as commander in chief.
The last time the military was used for direct police action under the Insurrection Act was in 1992, when the California governor at the time asked President George H.W. Bush to help respond to Los Angeles riots over the acquittal of police officers who beat Black motorist Rodney King.
More than 50 people were killed in the 1992 riots, which also caused some $1 billion in damage over six days.
Federal law allows the president to deploy the National Guard if the nation is invaded, if there is “rebellion or danger of rebellion,” or the president is “unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.”
