logo
Syria government says women must wear burkinis at public beaches

Syria government says women must wear burkinis at public beaches

Yahoo11-06-2025
Syria's Islamist-led interim government has decreed that women must wear burkinis - a swimsuit that covers the body except for the face, hands and feet - or other "decent" clothes at public beaches and swimming pools.
The regulations, issued by the tourism ministry, were "aimed at enhancing public safety standards and preserving public decency", Syrian state news channel Al-Ikhbariyah al-Suriyah reported.
Private beaches, clubs and pools, as well as hotels with more than four stars, are exempt, the directive said.
Women often dress modestly on public beaches in Syria, but some women do opt for more Western styles of swimwear. The new government previously pledged to govern inclusively.
Under the new directive, beachgoers and visitors to public pools must wear "more modest swimwear", specifying "the burkini or swimming clothes that cover more of the body".
The decree added that women should wear a cover-up or loose clothing over their swimwear when they move between swimming areas.
"Travelling in swimwear outside the beach without appropriate cover is prohibited," it said.
Men should also wear a shirt when they are not swimming, and are not allowed to be bare-chested outside swimming areas.
The statement said "normal Western swimwear" was generally allowed in exempted places "within the limits of public taste".
More generally, people should wear loose clothing that covers the shoulders and knees and "avoid transparent and tight clothing", the decree added.
The directive did not say whether those who fail to follow the rules would be penalised or how the rules would be enforced. But it did say lifeguards and supervisors would be appointed to monitor compliance on beaches.
It also included other safety regulations around pools and beaches.
Reacting to the new rule, one woman from Idlib in the north-west of the country told the BBC's World Service that, while she could see both sides of the argument, "I do think there is a positive to this, from a moral and respectful point of view".
Celine said: "Some people and families don't feel comfortable seeing or wearing too much exposed skin and I believe that is a valid perspective."
But another woman, Rita, who lives in the capital, Damascus, said she was "not comfortable" with the new rule, "especially as we are not used to such laws".
"In the coastal area, different ladies from different religions all have been going there and until now, we wore what we wanted," she said. "Religious people could avoid those in bikinis. But this law makes us scared of where to go."
She added: "We have no problem with the burkini itself, but it's a problem with the concept that the government are controlling this."
In December last year, Islamist rebel forces led by Ahmed al-Sharaa toppled Bashar al-Assad's regime, bringing years of civil war to an end.
Since then, al-Sharaa, now the country's interim president, has promised to run the country in an inclusive way.
In an interview with the BBC shortly after he took power, he said he believed in education for women and denied that he wanted to turn Syria into a version of Afghanistan - which has severely curtailed women's rights.
In March, Sharaa signed a constitutional declaration covering a five-year transitional period.
The document said Islam was the religion of the president, as the previous constitution did, and Islamic jurisprudence was "the main source of legislation", rather than "a main source".
The declaration also guaranteed women's rights, freedom of expression and media freedom.
Rubio warns Syria could be weeks away from 'full-scale civil war'
Trump expected to meet Syrian leader after announcing he will lift sanctions
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The House is looking into the Epstein investigation. Here's what could happen next
The House is looking into the Epstein investigation. Here's what could happen next

Chicago Tribune

time21 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

The House is looking into the Epstein investigation. Here's what could happen next

WASHINGTON — A key House committee is looking into the investigation of the late Jeffrey Epstein for sex trafficking crimes, working to subpoena President Donald Trump's Department of Justice for files in the case as well as hold a deposition of Epstein's former girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell. The Republican-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee acted just before House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., sent lawmakers home early for a monthlong break from Washington. The committee's moves are evidence of the mounting pressure for disclosure in a case that Trump has unsuccessfully urged his supporters to move past. But they were also just the start of what can be a drawn out process. Here's what could happen next in the House inquiry as lawmakers seek answers in a case that has sparked rampant speculation since Epstein's death in 2019 and more recently caused many in the Trump administration to renege on promises for a complete accounting. Democrats, joined by three Republicans, were able to successfully initiate the subpoena from a subcommittee just as the House was leaving Washington for its August recess. But it was just the start of negotiations over the subpoena. The subcommittee agreed to redact the names and personal information of any victims, but besides that, their demand for information is quite broad, encompassing 'un-redacted Epstein files.' As the parameters of the subpoena are drafted, Democrats are demanding that it be fulfilled within 30 days from when it is served to Attorney General Pam Bondi. They have also proposed a list of document demands, including the prosecutorial decisions surrounding Epstein, documents related to his death, and communication from any president or executive official regarding the matter. Ultimately, Republicans who control the committee will have more power over the scope of the subpoena, but the fact that it was approved with a strong bipartisan vote gives it some heft. The committee chairman, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., said he told the speaker that 'Republicans on the Oversight Committee were going to move to be more aggressive in trying to get transparency with the Epstein files. So, we did that, and I think that's what the American people want.' Comer has said that he is hoping that staff from the committee can interview Maxwell under oath on Aug. 11 at or near the federal prison in Florida where she is serving a lengthy sentence for child sex trafficking. In a congressional deposition, the subject typically has an attorney present to help them answer — or not answer — questions while maintaining their civil rights. Subjects also have the ability to decline to answer questions if it could be used against them in a criminal case, though in this instance that might not matter because Maxwell has already been convicted of many of the things she will likely be asked about. Maxwell has the ability to negotiate some of the terms of the deposition, and she already conducted 1 1/2 days of interviews with Justice Department officials this past week. Democrats, however, warn that Maxwell is not to be trusted. 'We should understand that this is a very complex witness and someone that has caused great harm and not a good person to a lot of people,' Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the oversight committee, told reporters this week. Committee Republicans also initiated a motion to subpoena a host of other people, including former President Bill Clinton, former Sen. Hillary Clinton as well as the former attorneys general dating back to Alberto Gonzales, who served under George W. Bush. It's not clear how this sweeping list of proposed subpoenas will actually play out, but Comer has said, 'We're going to move quickly on that.' Trump is no stranger to fighting against congressional investigations and subpoenas. And as with most subpoenas, the Justice Department can negotiate the terms of how it fulfills the subpoena. It can also make legal arguments against handing over certain information. Joshua A. Levy, who teaches on congressional investigations at Georgetown Law School and is a partner at Levy Firestone Muse, said that the results of the subpoena 'depend on whether the administration wants to work through the traditional accommodation process with the House and reach a resolution or if one or both sides becomes entrenched in its position.' If Congress is not satisfied with Bondi's response — or if she were to refuse to hand over any information — there are several ways lawmakers can try to enforce the subpoena. However, that would require a vote to hold Bondi in contempt of Congress. It's practically unheard of for one political party to vote to hold one of its own members in contempt of Congress, but the Epstein saga has also cut across political lines and driven a wedge in the GOP. Ultimately, the bipartisan vote to subpoena the files showed how political pressure is mounting on the Trump administration to disclose the files. Politics, policy and the law are all bound up together in this case, and many in Congress want to see a full accounting of the sex trafficking investigation. 'We can't allow individuals, especially those at the highest level of our government, to protect child sex traffickers,' said Rep. Summer Lee, D-Pa., a committee member. The Trump administration is already facing the potential for even more political tension. When Congress comes back to Washington in September, a bipartisan group of House lawmakers is working to advance to a full House vote a bill that aims to force the public release of the Epstein files.

No proof Hamas routinely stole UN aid, Israeli military officials say
No proof Hamas routinely stole UN aid, Israeli military officials say

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

No proof Hamas routinely stole UN aid, Israeli military officials say

Now, with hunger at crisis levels in the territory, Israel is coming under increased international pressure over its conduct of the war in Gaza and the humanitarian suffering it has brought. Doctors in the territory say that an increasing number of their patients are suffering from -- and dying of -- starvation. More than 100 aid agencies and rights groups warned this past week of 'mass starvation' and implored Israel to lift restrictions on humanitarian assistance. The European Union and at least 28 governments, including Israeli allies like Britain, France, and Canada, issued a joint statement condemning Israel's 'drip-feeding of aid' to Gaza's 2 million Palestinian residents. Advertisement Israel has largely brushed off the criticism. David Mencer, a government spokesperson, said this past week that there was 'no famine caused by Israel.' Instead, he blamed Hamas and poor coordination by the United Nations for any food shortages. Advertisement Israel moved in May toward replacing the UN-led aid system that had been in place for most of the 21-month war in Gaza, opting instead to back a private, American-run operation guarded by armed US contractors in areas controlled by Israeli military forces. Some aid still comes into Gaza through the United Nations and other organizations. The new system has proved to be much deadlier for Palestinians trying to obtain food handouts. According to the Gaza Health Ministry, almost 1,100 people have been killed by gunfire on their way to get food handouts under the new system, in many cases by Israeli soldiers who opened fire on hungry crowds. Israeli officials have said they fired shots in the air in some instances because the crowds came too close or endangered their forces. The military officials who spoke to The New York Times said that the original UN aid operation was relatively reliable and less vulnerable to Hamas interference than the operations of many of the other groups bringing aid into Gaza. That's largely because the United Nations managed its own supply chain and handled distribution directly inside Gaza. Hamas did steal from some of the smaller organizations that donated aid, as those groups were not always on the ground to oversee distribution, according to the senior Israeli officials and others involved in the matter. But, they say, there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole from the United Nations, which provided the largest chunk of the aid. A Hamas representative did not immediately respond to requests for comment. An internal US government analysis came to a similar conclusion, Reuters reported Friday. It found no evidence of systematic Hamas theft of US-funded humanitarian supplies, the report said. Advertisement 'For months, we and other organizations were dragged through the mud by accusations that Hamas steals from us,' said Georgios Petropoulos, a former UN official in Gaza who oversaw aid coordination with Israel for nearly 13 months of war. The senior military officials and others interviewed by the Times spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly on behalf of the military or government. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a statement, the military said that it has been 'well documented' that Hamas has routinely 'exploited humanitarian aid to fund terrorist activities.' But the military did not dispute the assessment that there was no evidence that Hamas regularly stole aid from the United Nations. The Israeli government and military have often clashed over how to conduct the war in Gaza. Early last year, top commanders urged a cease-fire with Hamas to secure the release of hostages. Netanyahu's government instead expanded the ground operation in southern Gaza. Israel used the rationale that Hamas steals aid when it cut off all food and other supplies to Gaza between March and May. In March, after a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel collapsed, Netanyahu said: 'Hamas is currently taking control of all supplies and goods entering Gaza,' and he declared that Israel would prevent anything from entering the territory. That blockade, and problems with a new aid system that launched in May, brought hunger and starvation in Gaza to the current crisis levels. For most of the war, the UN was the largest single source of aid entering Gaza, according to data from the Israeli military unit that oversees policy in the territory. Advertisement Now, the new aid system is managed instead by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a private American company led by a former CIA agent. It was intended to eventually replace international aid organizations and the UN role. But it has only a few distribution hubs, compared with hundreds under the former UN-run operation. The new system's rollout at the end of May was quickly followed by near-daily episodes of deadly violence near distribution sites. Desperate and hungry Palestinians must go to the few aid distribution sites located in areas controlled by Israeli forces. The hours of operation are limited and supplies run out, so crowds arrive early, with some walking for miles to get there. Since May 19, when Israel allowed emergency supplies to resume entering Gaza after its two-month blockade, half of the aid has been distributed by the United Nations and international organizations, with the other half coming through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, the Israeli military says. Petropoulos welcomed the notion that some Israeli officials had recognized the UN-led aid system as effective during the war. But he said he wished that endorsement had come much sooner. 'If the UN had been taken at face value months ago, we wouldn't have wasted all this time and Gazans wouldn't be starving and being shot at trying to feed their families,' he said. This article originally appeared in

Anti-Trump Protests Hit Scotland Amid Military Lockdown
Anti-Trump Protests Hit Scotland Amid Military Lockdown

Newsweek

time2 hours ago

  • Newsweek

Anti-Trump Protests Hit Scotland Amid Military Lockdown

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A number of anti-Trump protests took place in Scotland on Saturday as the president began a five-day visit centered around visits to his golf courses near Turnberry, in West Ayrshire, and in Aberdeenshire. Meetings with British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen are also planned. Why It Matters President Trump was met with large demonstrations during visits to the U.K. in his first term. He is due to visit Britain again later this year for a state visit during which he will meet King Charles III. What To Know Trump landed at Glasgow's Prestwick airport just before 8:30 p.m. BST on Friday where he was greeted by Ian Murray, Scottish secretary in the British government, and U.S. ambassador to the U.K. Warren Stephens. He made his way to the Trump Turnberry golf course, the BBC reporting he traveled in a motorcade of more than two dozen vehicles, with police closing off a number of roads and British military personnel carrying out a security sweep around the course. On Saturday anti-Trump demonstrations took place in Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Dumfries with photographs shared on X showing protesters holding signs bearing slogans including "Stop Trump, Free Gaza" and "Pipe Down Donald." According to Scottish newspaper The National the demonstrations in Aberdeen and Edinburgh each involved hundreds of people, with Green Party Members of the Scottish Parliament present at the former. Hundreds of protesters gather outside the office of the Consulate General of the United States against a visit to Scotland by the President of the United States, Donald Trump on July 26, 2025 in Edinburgh,... Hundreds of protesters gather outside the office of the Consulate General of the United States against a visit to Scotland by the President of the United States, Donald Trump on July 26, 2025 in Edinburgh, Scotland. More Ian Forsyth/GETTY The publication reacted to Trump's upcoming arrival in Scotland on Friday with the front page headline "Convicted US Felon to Arrive in Scotland." However Trump did receive a positive reception from some, with video shared on social media showing people waving to his motorcade, while two people held up a banner reading "Trump The Legend." Saturday also saw a demonstration in Glasgow, Scotland's most populous city, by the right-wing UK Independence Party, calling for "deportations now" with marchers waving Union Jacks and Scottish Saltires. Immediately after Trump arrived in the UK on Friday he sparked controversy by claiming Europe was facing a "horrible invasion" adding: "You better get your act together or you're not going to have Europe anymore." What People Are Saying Earlier Herald Scotland reporter Josh Pizzuto-Pomaco shared images from Aberdeen on X adding: "Here in Aberdeen, ahead of large anti-Trump protests this afternoon. The city centre is full of police officers." GB News reporter Ben Leo shared a photograph from the Edinburgh demonstration adding: "A few Palestine flags, Extinction Rebellion flags and 'migrants welcome' signs at the Edinburgh Trump protest. It's like an excuse just to protest *something* - if not particularly anything." What Happens Next Trump's Scotland visit is due to head to Aberdeenshire where he is open a new course at his golf club dedicated to his Scottish mother who was born on the Isle of Lewis. He is also due to hold meeting with Starmer and von der Leyen before returning to the U.S. on Tuesday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store